8.4.10 HOME ECONOMICS

in your article ("gone with the wind", worldmag, 7.17.10, p.34) on renewable energy sources i see a disturbing underlying assumption that we should continue to have the same or, possibly, a higher standard of living.

first of all, it seems impossible for every person in the world to 'live in a world like ours' is here in america, doesn't it? this quest, even if possible..is this a quest that is necessary or even helpful to a person? is it sustainable? or do we let those who come behind us shift for themselves after we have possibly over consumed resources in our time?

what about the idea of decreasing our standard of living with the main goal being to not make any net negative impact on the world around us over time? what would the world look like where everyone, whether single or married, focused on 1. obtaining, by their own efforts, adequate food and raiment necessary to sustain their own physical life and 2. giving of the overage of their efforts to help those around them who may be in need of these basics?

what would the world look like where people tended to group themselves in families, either by marriage or by common consent (kind of like a little commune to provide fellowship nd protection for those in the group)...where the father (men) 'sat in the gate', that is, where they were actively helping the local community to live with one another by the golden rule...where the mother (women), after the initial, hard, foundational period was completed, took over the task of developing and sustaining the economy (greek, oidos (house) + nomos (law) ) by modeling hard work, entrepreneurship, charity-to-those-in-any-kind-of-need and character for their family and community (and where the children worked, watched and learned)? this economic model is given in proverbs 31 by solomon.

in such a situation there would there be any need for education outside the home, or neighborhood (home teaching); for insurance (people help each other in trouble); for jobs outside the home (all needs are supplied by the home and/or, possibly, the local economy); for stores (nothing to buy!); for military (we bless and help others in their times of need, we do our best to defend ourselves in times when other human beings feel it necessary to try to hurt or destroy us, at all times we obey God and receive his promised protection from enemies..deuteronomy 29); for government (israel was able to be guided by God pretty well until they chose to put themselves under this bondage in order to be like other people)...fill in the blank...how much of all we have now do we need in order to live?

the above is obviously toward the idealistic end of the spectrum of societal systems..but, even if we may never be able to live in the garden again wouldn't it be great if we believers each worked at mimicking it as much as possible, of being salt and light in lifestyle as well as in gospelizing and truth-speaking? wouldn't it be great to simply trust in God rather than all the God-substitutes we have come to depend on?

wouldn't it be really exciting to expose..but more!..to be a catalyst to the creating of a veritable beehive of ideas about and for everything! you could, by your articles, could create a human, intellectual ferment by inducing everyone to think about and share and experiment with and live out their ideas on every conceivable issue...(in the multitude of counsellors there is wisdom!!!!!) leading toward the realization of the above ideal. imagine, given your position, how many people you could give good, solid, factual information to get this rolling! may God make us all catalysts to this end. God bless you as you write. thank you for all the good you have written.