Christ Centered Gamer

So in the sermon we heard this morning the pastor was telling a story about another pastor. Something had come up in churches in the past, some practice - he did not specify what it was. And this pastor friend of his searched through the Bible to see if Jesus taught that practice. And he could not find Jesus teaching it. So he checked the disciples and the early church; again they did not teach it. He could find no past reference to that practice or teaching. He prayed about it, and felt God tell him: "You have your answer." Which was if it wasnt there, and it wasn't practiced then don't do it.

I got to thinking about technology. Nothing in the Bible about cars, TVs, radios, movies or computers. Which got me thinking. If we apply that logic, then we should not have things like overhead projectors, or play videos in church, etc. There should not be elevators, and parking lots, etc. From there I pondered if any Christians fully applied that logic, and the Amish popped into my head.

I am not clear on whether the Amish shun technology because of the logic: "if its not in the Bible I won't touch it." For me though it seems to fit. I can see where that idea can be applied to the extreme. And it helped me understand the Amish just a little bit better.

I also wondered why I never questioned this before. I realized I was raised into a certain system/culture. Using technology is a part of my life. Is that right? Is that wrong? I don't know. The best way I can rationalize the use of technology not in the Bible is God calls us to different places, and we are different parts of the body of Christ. Which would lead me to believe some of us are called to technology. And some are not.

You could apply this to other aspects of technology as well, including firearms and weapons, or medical research. Should their be a cut-off point as to when we figure "anything after this Biblical date is not kosher?"

Personally, I think the idea should be dismissed. Certainly new technology can be used for evil purposes... but a lot of it can be used for good as well. Actually, most of it can be used as good. My own church is using technology in various ways to help others learn more about the church and even Christianity in general.

Technology is like a hammer, or a sword, or a gun, or a pillow. In itself, it is neither good nor evil, it simply is. It is the person - the soul - using it that applies the moral aspect to the usage of the objects.

Allow me to begin with a caveat. I'm not Amish and I don't know any personally. All I know is what I've picked up over years of keeping my ears and mind open. That out of the way and first of all, "The Amish" are not a monolith. Apparently each group (village? flock? they have a word for their societal groups but I forget that detail) has its council of elders and those elders are who define whether a 'new thing' is or is not allowed. Regardless of the why and wherefore, this rather directly mirrors the differences between sects of any other religion large enough to divide into more or less distinct branches. As for why certain things are not allowed it seems that at least part of the decision is based on its perceived or conjectured impact on the family unit. In the case of electricity the ruling was apparently that it would act to corrode the cohesion of the family or society in some way(s) that would outweigh any usefulness. However some Amish groups (and remember that they're all different) allow electricity provided it is kept within strict guidelines. Something else that you might not be aware of: the Amish use heavy duty power tools. Yes, table saws and the like. They convert them to operate on compressed air (no, I don't know how electricity-deprived people end up with enough compressed air to make this worthwhile).

The short point is that the Amish in some restricted cases taste of the fruits of electricity while keeping the majority of it at arms length. So no, they aren't practicing what you might call a strictly biblical lifestyle. You might find this audio journalism interesting. Its the most recent and descriptive piece on Amish life that I'm familiar with. Its fascinating.

Straight at the original point though, I don't think you can draw that kind of generalization at all without knowing the context of your pastor's friend's complaint. Were there false doctrinal claims involved? Was someone claiming that, to pull something random out of the air, one must approach The Lord's Supper with bare feet since that's the way it happened? There's clearly some cases where God might say that since a thing was not in the Bible it isn't acceptable without necessitating the corollary that anything not in the Bible is unacceptable; and that without appealing to grace.

/carpenter in

Easy enough if you use a gas powered compressor. Which is still overcomplicating things but meh. Not my fault if people are backwards.


/carpenter out

I always assumed that was the rationale behind Amish beliefs, but I admit I never really looked into it. I have a lot of respect for people who willingly sacrifice so much for their beliefs, but I know very little about their reasons though, so if I do get around to researching it, I'm sure it will be fascinating.

I do find it a little odd that they use technology when away from their communities... Like phones, trains, etc. I've even seen Amish with cell phones, so I gather there is a lot of variance in how individual communities handle things.

Technology isn't bad it just depends on how it is used. Anything can be an idol in our lives but on the flip side technology can be used to spread God's word through the world too. Is the internet completely evil? No! It certainly has it's bad spots but then there's sites like this one. Another thing to consider is religion vs medical treatment. Some religions are against medical intervention there's a family in the news that lost two children because they refused medical treatment and only relied on prayer. Sorry but I don't think doctors are a bad thing. I am also baffled at Jehovah's witnesses and their stance on blood transfusions. :\

From my understanding of the Amish, it's not the shunning of technology, but rather the avoidance of dependencies from those outside their community. Their perceived luddism is a result of the exclusivity.

Luddism aside, look at how church practices have changed over the centruries. When did we start meeting in a building that was not a home? When was the first cathedral built? When were microphones implemented? When were air conditioning units installed? When was the first megachurch?

There's always this debate about how to allow society to influence the church practices. Maybe this is why we are not given specific dimensions for a temple and specific instructions for ceremonies. We are part of the Kingdom of God, a spiritual kingdom, with more freedom than not. We have religious traditions like meet on the first day of the week and the Lord's supper, but that's about the unchanging core of it to my knowledge.

ccgr wrote: I am also baffled at Jehovah's witnesses and their stance on blood transfusions. :\

That's interesting - I didn't know they had that stance. I did a report in college about organ transplants and the only religious / ethnic group that was opposed to it were the gypsies (although some faiths had specific requirements - for example, some Jewish sects require that the organ be completely drained of blood before being placed in the new body).

I looked it up, and it seems that the JW view blood transfusions as a form of cannibalism. In that light, I suppose it could be understood. Perhaps that would also mean that they can choose to donate their organs, but won't be organ recipients.

Sstavix wrote:I looked it up, and it seems that the JW view blood transfusions as a form of cannibalism. In that light, I suppose it could be understood.

The loathing of cannibalism is understandable but likening it to blood transfusion is utterly baffling. Cannibalism is another thing entirely.

delve wrote:

Sstavix wrote:I looked it up, and it seems that the JW view blood transfusions as a form of cannibalism. In that light, I suppose it could be understood.

The loathing of cannibalism is understandable but likening it to blood transfusion is utterly baffling. Cannibalism is another thing entirely.

Not a JW, but grew up around a few who were very obliging in politely answering questions and who knew I would never convert to their point of view.

They take the OT concept that "the life is in the blood" in a literal way, and so won't accept a blood tranfusion from anyone else, as it is considered taking some of that person's life into yourself and consuming it. Hence the parallel to cannibalism.