[Mongo]

Jesus a socialist? More like a communist:

Acts 2:42, 44-45 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. [...] And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Acts 4:32-37 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

Matthew 19:21-24 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

 

[urbanboom]

If Jesus was alive he would be a socialist....

There's a lot of truth to that. Notice how the Bible mentions taking care of the poor hundreds of times but abortion a grand total of 0 times.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

mongo, how dare you copy my style?

p.s, we all know how much right wing evangelical types love paying taxes:

Romans 13 (New International Version)
Submission to the Authorities

1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

There's a lot of truth to that. Notice how the Bible mentions taking care of the poor hundreds of times but abortion a grand total of 0 times.

actually, you could use passages in the bible to justify abortion since it places no worth on the fetus or even young children.

 

[urbanboom]

actually, you could use passages in the bible to justify abortion since it places no worth on the fetus or even young children.

I can't really recall any fetus being mentioned in the Bible. But the part about the "no worth on young children" part, take a look at Mark 10:13-14 :

"13 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God."

I'm not really sure where you got the child worthlessness part.

 

[waterloowarrior]

Exodus 21:22-25

If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

 

[Mongo]

2 Kings 2:23-24

And [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

I can't really recall any fetus being mentioned in the Bible. But the part about the "no worth on young children" part, take a look at Mark 10:13-14 :

"13 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God."

I'm not really sure where you got the child worthlessness part.

in the following passage, god places a monetary worth on people based on age, sex, etc.

notice there is no monetary worth for infants less than a month old or for fetuses:


http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus 27;&version=46;


but it does kinda contradict with this:

Exodus 21:22-23 (Contemporary English Version)

Suppose a pregnant woman suffers a miscarriage as the result of an injury caused by someone who is fighting. If she isn't badly hurt, the one who injured her must pay whatever fine her husband demands and the judges approve. But if she is seriously injured, the payment will be life for life, :

so in one passage, there is no monetary value on infants less than one month old and fetuses but in another passage, if you hurt a pregnant woman and she loses her fetus, you have to pay whatever fine her husband wants. this also brings up the question, what if she has no husband? do you still have to pay a fine? also, in that passage, killing a fetus demands only a fine and it is not treated the same way as if killing an adult. if killing a fetus was murder, surely it would carry the same punishment as killing an adult.

the bible doesn't actually come out and directly say abortion and killing infants less than one month old is just fine and dandy. it's kinda like how slavery is addressed in the bible. there's requirements on how you should treat slaves but saying slavery is bad and you shouldn't have slaves is omitted in the same area. this can only mean that slavery is okay or else the passage would have read: free your slaves right now for slavery is wrong and forbidden by the lord. but no, it just goes on and on about how you should treat slaves.

i really wouldn't use the bible to backup or support any pro-life positions. if the pro lifers and the pro choicers sat down and came up with rational reasons supporting each of their views, they could probably meet somewhere half way.

for example, abortion would be permitted until the point the fetus has consciousness, self awareness, able to form memories, etc. and prohibited after that point on with the exception and consideration of the mothers and/or the fetus' health (example, if the fetus was developing with a horrible defect and would die or live in severe agony for its life or if the mother would die or be seriously physically effected).

but even then, i don't know if it would be a good idea to make abortion illegal after the halfway point. it would only drive abortions underground to coat hanger and vacuum clinics and could cause all kinds of harm.

at the end of the day, access to birth control, proper sexual and reproductive education and increased woman's rights and independence do more to prevent abortions than any religious reasons or religiously motivated legal prohibitions. it's not like women go out and get abortions just cause it's legal and they can.

 

[urbanboom]

Well as I'm sure it's been pointed out, many parts of the NT contradict the teachings of the OT. You have to remember - the for Christianity, at least - the OT is simply a base for the coming of Christ. For example the eye for an eye method was cited and rebuked in the teachings of Christ (replaced with "love thy enemies"), as well as the "worthlessness of the children" (Mark 10). Now I can't speak on behalf of the modern Jewish teachings, so I can't say anything there...

Prometheus, you bring up some very good points on abortion. We must remember that abortion is not totally a religious issue. I know some atheist pro-lifers and some devoutly religious pro-choicers. And at the end of the day, no one simply has an abortion because they don't care. Having an abortion is probably the hardest choice a woman could make.

 

[lordmandeep]

Lets forget the best and most popular of Jesus words...

Well o

He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

He did this to protect a adulteress from being stoned by an angry mob.

Today, those people would be happy to stone the women.

 

[wyliepoon]

I'm Protestant evangelical Christian, not an expert on the pro-life argument, but the pro-life argument comes from the principle of "life begins at conception".

for example, abortion would be permitted until the point the fetus has consciousness, self awareness, able to form memories, etc. and prohibited after that point on with the exception and consideration of the mothers and/or the fetus' health

... would fit the pro-life argument, but Christian pro-lifers believe that the fetus is conscious right from the beginning (or at least, since we don't know at what point in their development that they gain consciousness, we should not abort them at any point).

Some biblical stories point to fetuses being conscious in the womb (Genesis 25:22-24 and Luke 1:40-42).

*****

re: Torture Survey

It's really hard to use this survey as a commentary on evangelicalism, Protestantism or Christianity in general. Perhaps we can use it to talk about some "mainstream" version of American evangelicalism or fundamentalism, whatever that is.

The term "evangelical" is very much a unifying term, which covers pretty much any Protestant church that claims to follow the teachings of the Christ (aka. the fundamentals), believe in the Bible as God's word, and has an intent on doing evangelical or missionary work. That criteria covers a huge spectrum in Protestantism, one that covers a whole range of theological and also political views. I would dare say that the average church-going Toronto-area evangelical would be against the use of torture, and not necessarily pro-Bush and politically conservative (although they would have those tendencies).

As someone who identifies himself as "evangelical", I'm very concerned about the sensationalized use of the term in media, especially in the US. It's come to be identified with megachurch-going people who are ultra-patriotic (equating American ambitions with Christian values), ultra-conservative, pro-Israel (believing that supporting Israel would help bring the second coming of Christ), following charismatic, faith-healing popular teachers who always make themselves known in the media. I believe that that is not evangelicalism - evangelicalism is something that is much simpler than that, and many evangelicals would not subscribe to the view above.

 

[lordmandeep]

pro-Israel (believing that supporting Israel would help bring the second coming of Christ)

hmmm

I was wondering why a group that loved the film Passion of The Christ, support Israel more then anyone...

 

[afransen]

Israel needs to exist for the Rapture to occur. Seriously.

 

[Hydrogen]

As I mentioned elsewhere, Rapture occurred by way Debbie Harry.

but Christian pro-lifers believe that the fetus is conscious right from the beginning

Not everyone is Christian, and people who support abortion are not anti-life. Too bad so called pro-lifers have to resort sloganeering in the absence of argument.

Some biblical stories point to fetuses being conscious in the womb

And some biblical stories feature people living in whales, living to 900, the universe being made in six days and so on. It's not a source of facts, but of allegorical stories.

If religious people dislike abortion while proclaiming a 'right to life,' then they ought to be supporting clear, honest and realist sex education that provides children with the accurate, factual knowledge concerning the nature and functioning of their own bodies.

 

[Tewder]

As someone who identifies himself as "evangelical", I'm very concerned about the sensationalized use of the term in media, especially in the US.

Some would go absolutely ape if in this discussion we replaced the term 'evangalist' with 'muslim'. The chorus of cautionary tales about unfair 'racist/discriminatory' blanket statements would be deafening.