How Westernized Christianity Is

by Skeptic 16 Replies latest jw friends

Skeptic

It amazes me how Westernized people’s version of Christianity is. Mind you, I have only been exposed to the North American version of Christianity. What made me think of this was how people today find the practice of polygamy to be disgusting. Yet, many righteous men practiced polygamy with Jehovah’s approval.
Here is a sample of differences in modern-day Christian beliefs and the Bible:
Polygamy: The Bible only prohibits overseers from being polygamous.
However, there is no prohibition against your average lay Christian having multiple wives.
I made a page on polygamy a while ago. The URL is http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2260/bible/polygamy.html
Abortion: The Bible says nothing about abortion, Except for Exodus 21:22-24 as rendered in the NIV. Reading it closely...the reference to serious injury is to the MOTHER. If the baby miscarries and the mother is otherwise OK, a fine is levied. That’s it.
The commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” does not apply to all situations. The Jews were allowed to kill in war, to execute people for certain crimes.
1Sam. 15:3 shows where God ordered the killing of infants. Why would he care about the unborn?
Obviously, the Bible is silent on the topic of abortion.
Slavery: Rightfully, Christians are against it. However, the Bible supports slavery and regulates it. Even in the NT, slavery is supported. For example, slaves were not allowed to escape, and if they did, were to return to their owner.
Richard
Rex B13

How are you doing?
I see your point about polygamy and one would not be an adulterer unless I am missing something here. It would be interesting to see how common this type of thing was and when it ended.
Slavery was often as employment is today. 1/4 of the world population were slaves during the Roman era. Christianity in it's purest sense usually leaves the norms of society in place. The primary effort is on soul winning for eternal life and this life is only the means to get to 'glory'.
Was abortion practiced back then? Why would we destroy any life within a woman? Just caling it 'emryonic material' or a 'fetus' does not make it any less murdering babies. Do you know that the feminists claim it is 'not human' right up until it emerges? Yep, babies born premature and able to be saved are killed by the process! Did you see the pic of the operation on a mom who had a six month baby in her belly? The kid had his hand wrapped around a doctor's finger.
Ah, the things that are done for a woman's 'comfort'.
Richard, you are asking questions revolving around different situations, comparing apples to oranges. You also fail to acknowledge that it is God who allows all deaths, but in a physical way only. Not acknowledging the immortal soul gives one a skewed view of judgement against individuals, tribes, nations and a whole world.
Later,
Rex
Skeptic

I am doing OK, Rex...did you get my email?
>I see your point about polygamy and one would not be an adulterer unless I am missing something here. It would be interesting to see how common this type of thing was and when it ended.
I am glad you got my point. I wondered what your view would be.
>Slavery was often as employment is today.
I doubt it. I suspect slavery was pretty much like slavery. It probably would depend on who you had as a master. If you had a nasty master, your rights were limited. With a nasty employer, you can at least leave.
>Was abortion practiced back then?
Abortion has been practiced since the dawn of man.
>Why would we destroy any life within a woman? Just caling it 'emryonic material' or a 'fetus' does not make it any less murdering babies. Do you know that the feminists claim it is 'not human' right up until it emerges? Yep, babies born premature and able to be saved are killed by the process! Did you see the pic of the operation on a mom who had a six month baby in her belly? The kid had his hand wrapped around a doctor's finger.
I wasn't debating the morality of abortion per se. I was just pointing out that the Bible is silent on the topic.
Abortion is a very complex issue. I personally think Canada took the correct approach by removing ALL abortion laws.
I have heard of cases that show the pros and cons of abortion. I know of people who are vegetables but suffer in great pain for decades because their mother did not have an abortion.
But, I digress. I merely wanted to show that the Bible is silent on the topic of abortion.
>Ah, the things that are done for a woman's 'comfort'.
It just isn't that simple.
>Richard, you are asking questions revolving around different situations, comparing apples to oranges.
My intent was only to show that what we sometimes think the Bible teaches is not what it teaches at all. Our religious beliefs can be shaped by our culture as much as by our holy books. This is not necessarily a bad thing.
>You also fail to acknowledge that it is God who allows all deaths, but in a physical way only. Not acknowledging the immortal soul gives one a skewed view of judgement against individuals, tribes, nations and a whole world.
Later,
Rex
Factoring in eternal life can be a good or a bad thing. In Nazi Germany, if you were ordered to kill an innocent person and refused, you could be killed. In that case, believing you will get eternal life after you refuse to follow the order can do good.
However, if after being ordered to kill an innocent person you decide to carry out the order because you believe that the victum will get eternal life anyway results in bad.
Again, though, I must emphasize that I was not commenting on the morality of slavery, abortion, or polygamy. I am just saying that most Christians believe the Bible is against these things when in reality the Bible is not.
Take Care Rex,
Richard
Rex B13

Hi Richard,
I got your e-mail. Does it seem to you as if this forum is mostly for flaming and not discussion?
"The Holy Spirit will teach you all things". Perhaps the general consensus against those things is a work of the H.S., indwelling those who are saved? It seems as if we picked up a few moral guidelines during the 'Great Awakening' (a revival from the 19th century that swept the world).
What we are dealing with now are the 'unpaid bills' of the various denominations. The deterioration of the moral climate, the increases in cult membership and the number of cults are a direct result of the lack of evangelism during this century.
If committed Christians are busy preaching the gospel it has an effect of increasing the numbers. Education of the Bible doctrines would also keep most persons from joining wacky cults. Churches, particularly the Catholic church have been very lax in evangelism and education but are now awakening.
Revival is ongoing worldwide and we will see it here as other parts of the world have. This may be the last great revival before the millenial advent.
So, am I saying the 'dubs were right? No, not in the least, they have everything pertinent wrong but some of their ideas are close enough. The best lies contain some remnant of truth. They've been able to fog the naive, like other cults have. Satan has been at it a long time and he plays the world like a fiddle.
Rex
LDH

Did you see the pic of the operation on a mom who had a six month baby in her belly? The kid had his hand wrapped around a doctor's finger.

So let me get this right. Someone, somewhere took a picture of a six month baby in utero and the baby's hand was wrapped around the doctor's finger? IN the woman's uterus?!?!??!
Being six months pregnant myself, I find this to be quite an impossibility.
Just another example of Bible thumpers trying to emotionalize a scientific issue.
LDH
Skeptic

Does it seem to you as if this forum is mostly for flaming and not discussion?

Sometimes it does. I am too busy to read flaming posts, so I don't bother. Plus, their boring.
"The Holy Spirit will teach you all things". Perhaps the general consensus against those things is a work of the H.S., indwelling those who are saved? It seems as if we picked up a few moral guidelines during the 'Great Awakening' (a revival from the 19th century that swept the world).
The morality of the human race evolves over time. We are simply seeing what today's moral code is. As we gain more experience, or as technology changes, morality changes.
Divorce is a good example. At one time, divorce was very rare. You were "used goods" if you were a divorced person. The "good moral" thing to do was stay in a marriage for life...to work through the tough times. The only acceptable grounds for divorce was adultery.
Now, after people seeing their parents in misery all their lives, after seeing wives get battered for decades, people are saying, "enough!" There is something immoral about saying a woman cannot divorce a wife-beater. And people have found that previously divorced people make great marriage mates. Plus, most woman are no longer financially dependent on their husbands. So, they don't have to take any crap, and are freeing themselves from bad situations.
Hence, divorce is now generally considered acceptable; some, like me, think it is a great idea. My two oldest sons thanked me when I got a divorce.
What we are dealing with now are the 'unpaid bills' of the various denominations. The deterioration of the moral climate, the increases in cult membership and the number of cults are a direct result of the lack of evangelism during this century.
If committed Christians are busy preaching the gospel it has an effect of increasing the numbers. Education of the Bible doctrines would also keep most persons from joining wacky cults. Churches, particularly the Catholic church have been very lax in evangelism and education but are now awakening.
To a large extent, I agree. I also believe that cult tactics have "improved" since the 70s and cults are better at making members. I agree that if your average person knew more about the Bible, they would not be taken in the the JWs hop-scotch theology.
This may be the last great revival before the millenial advent.
No, the advent is not going to happen.
So, am I saying the 'dubs were right? No, not in the least, they have everything pertinent wrong but some of their ideas are close enough. The best lies contain some remnant of truth. They've been able to fog the naive, like other cults have.
You got that right.
Take Care,
Richard
Rex B13

LDH,
Why didn't you ask me instead of just jumping in with a knee-jerk reaction?
The famous picture was of a woman who had her belly cut open for some kind of surgery, a doctor was tending to the baby and the child had it's hand wrapped around the doctor's finger.
BTW, why is it that all of the pro-abortionists hate to see the films that show the procedures they support? Think about that for a while.
Bye, bye
Rex
P.S. See what I mean, Richard?
Billygoat

LDH,
I actually saw the picture on the net one time...it's been awhile. The mother was only several months pregnant and the baby needed some kind of surgery in order to survive the birth process. (Heart/lung issues???) Anyways, the picture was of the baby half out of the womb, holding tightly to the doctor's finger after the surgery. Heartwrenching! Pretty amazing if I may say so myself!
Billygoat
PS: For some reason I'm thinking it was a neonatal surgeon in Houston???
Skeptic

LDH,
Why didn't you ask me instead of just jumping in with a knee-jerk reaction?

I was surprised at LDH's reaction.
The famous picture was of a woman who had her belly cut open for some kind of surgery, a doctor was tending to the baby and the child had it's hand wrapped around the doctor's finger.
I thought it would be a situation like that. I have seen a picture of the baby holding a needle that was taking a fluid sample.
BTW, why is it that all of the pro-abortionists hate to see the films that show the procedures they support? Think about that for a while.
That is an overgeneralization. For me personally, I find ALL pictures of surgery gross and revolting. I would never make a good doctor. Ironically, though, I have no problems with getting surgery performed on myself.
P.S. See what I mean, Richard?

Rex, I see what you mean about flaming. Unfortunately, you have gained a reputation that results in people flaming you at every turn. Sometimes it is justified, but I don't think you need to get flamed over every statement you make.
You have never said anything to me personally that is worthy of a flame.
Please understand that most people who are pro-abortionist are not advocating abortion as a preferred method of birth control. Responsible sex and using birth control are what most would prefer. Pro-abortionists do want the choice to be available, as some circumstances warrant it.
Rex, did you know that even the JWs are not 100% against abortion? They allow it for tubular pregnacies.
Rex, what is your opinion on:
abortion for tubular pregnacies;
abortion for rape victums;
abortion for rape victums that are 12 years old;
the morning after pill;
IUDs;
culling when fertility pills make the mother pregnant with seven babies?
You might want to email me privately to avoid being flamed. We can discuss it privately.
Richard
LDH

Hey---I wasn't the one who said the woman 'had the baby in her belly.' It read a little funny to me, that's all.
It's my right to be skeptical. Remember to believe half of what you see and none of what you read.
And although I don't support abortion as a means of birth control, if you don't want your kid, by God I don't want you to have it.

How Westernized Christianity Is

Share this