Author: wchao37

Should we allow Christianity to make penetrating POLITICAL inroads in China?  Close [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2006-2-7 00:29:11 |Display all floors

"sorry to sound like a broken record "

Amen!

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2006-2-7 00:43:12 |Display all floors

wchao37. Christian UK fringe movements

I actually attended one such fringe Christian meeting in a UK country house.
I did this because a business client invited me, I really have no interest in Christianity
but went along with  it.

They are looking for the most easliy influenced people they can find and in
large numbers.The meeting was planned in this way:


A "regular meeting " was conducted which consisted of the usual
simpleton preaching. At around 2200 hours the meeting was closed
"except "for  "those who wish to stay"

Half the meeting left but the other half stayed. I was told by body language and
hints to leave. , so I left.


This of course meant that the idiots who believe this garbage were the
ones who  "wanted to stay" . They would join the expansion of the movement.
being as they clearly were the most easily influenced. It was scary how the
"Preachers" seemed to know the ones they wanted to stay.

This trick will be used in China rest assured. It gains membership from
those who can be conned into joining  anything "Christian".

The "we all love Israel" message comes later.

[ Last edited by christopher_104 at 2006-2-7 12:55 AM ]

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2006-2-7 08:41:59 |Display all floors

I'm not exactly sure what the point of this thread is

The question asks if "we" should allow Christianity to make politicial inroads. Well you don't get to decide, do you? In fact no people anywhere get to decide on such an issue. It is always the choice of governments. And if the State is to be secular, then it can't get involved in such issues either - on a religious level, anyway.

Most faiths, certainly the large ones, have political backers/figures that are involved in them somewhere. Politicians are always out to gain support and religion is a good one. Christianity is not out by itself by any stretch of the imagination. Certainly Islam, Shintoism, Buddhism and Hinduism have strong politicial ties. There is also a certain Chinese "cult" that is accused of being highly political. And that's just of the faiths I have personal knowledge of.

I don't see Christianity being a threat to China any more than any other faith or belief system already present. It's a growing religion but from a low base. Depending on the information used, Christians account for less than perhaps 2-3% of the population? That is very small. The idea that this is a threat is as credible as the idea that Islam is a threat to Britain.

I think the call for more support for "home-grown faiths" seems to highlight the prejudice of the author. His attitudes are not much different from radical Christian or Muslim (or any other) leaders that denounce the spread of religions that aren't their own. So ironically his intolerance is the same as that which he purports to denounce.

[ Last edited by mencius at 2006-2-7 12:43 AM ]
"People are the water, the ruler is the boat; water can carry the boat, but it can also capsize it."

-- Li Shimin (2nd Tang Emperor, "Taizong")

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2006-2-7 10:48:10 |Display all floors

masterkung's masterpiece

When is knowing too much knowing too little?

Illustrating the absurdity of intolerance one recalls the parable of the elephant and the blind men taken from the legends of Buddha. Long ago and far away, an oriental prince conducted an experiment. He assembled the blind men of his village into the palace and paraded before them an elephant. The prince asked each blind man to touch the elephant and envision what the elephant might look like on the basis of his experience. One touched the ear, another the head, and another the tusk. The blind man who felt the floppy ear of the elephant said that the creature was shaped like a fan. The blind man who felt the huge head asserted that the elephant was built like a giant pot. Finally, the blind man who grasped the polished tusk compared the elephant to a smooth plough. As each blind man heard the other one's description, each disputed the other's claim. Each blind man's piece of the elephant was the whole elephant as far as he was concerned: "An elephant is a fan," or "An elephant is a pot," or "An elephant is a plough." But the prince who could see the whole elephant knew that each blind man's piece of the elephant was only a piece of the truth, not the whole truth.

Each blind man is firmly convinced that he understands the true nature of the animal, based on that one part he felt ?that the elephant is like a fan, or a tree, or a rope, or a snake or a spear. But none sees the whole. as soon as you explain one thing, there are seven other possibilities that are somehow negated because you explained it in one way. There was also the issue of finding an explanation for something that doesn't necessarily have an explanation.?/span>

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2006-2-7 10:58:01 |Display all floors

Guess who this is

Pauline Christianity - Here are the basics, but as I go on in the post, I think you'll pick up on it better.  Essentially, it's the message preached by Jesus and expounded on by Paul in the letters of the New Tes$$ent that he wrote.  If a letter doesn't have somebody else's name, the chances are that he wrote it (Acts and Revelation are two exceptions).

Some verses are-

Galatians 2:20- I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Philippians 3:7-11- But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ.  What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.  I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.

Romans 12:1-2- Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God--this is your spiritual act of worship.  Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

Can anyone tell me which of the 160 + religious companies has the best portfolio?

I think Christianity does.

Concerning the Apocrypha and the standard by which the Biblical books were chosen-that was finally chosen to be included in the "Book" was chosen by "men" with an agenda and that is probably why it is so contradictory.?br /> Just because they抮e human doesn't mean that God can't use them to accomplish His will.  What exactly was their agenda and why would that make them bias against the truth (first you抎 have to determine what the truth is, though)?  Please give me just one contradiction.  Truth isn't always easy to understand and I trust that supposed contradictions are merely misunderstandings of what the original text says.

In order to even be considered, though, the texts had to meet three requirements- 1) written by an eyewitness or the close companion of an eyewitness  2) recognized by the entire Christian community as reliable and inspired by God  3) doesn't contradict the rest of Scripture- ie: the Old Tes$$ent and the rest of the New Tes$$ent.

Well, I will agree that Jesus was a revolutionary against the religious establishment, but if you look at the text his aim was to fulfill the Hebrew Laws' demand for perfection and then serve as the perfect sacrifice to atone for the sins of any that would believe in Him.  This was done in accordance with the Law of Moses.  However, Jesus never liked people that were convinced that they were good enough and could somehow earn God's favor or forgiveness.  

Some 30 years after he was murdered, 'some' of his words and 'some' of his actions that could be remembered (colored obviously as is always the case when one is remembering the 'good' things about someone they love) were finally set down to form a religion?

Please back up your claim with historical and/or archeological evidence.  As to date, there hasn't been a single historical or archeological discovery to disprove the NT.  That's a pretty good record.  Also note that several of the letters can be dated to before 60 AD and the narrative accounts claim that Christianity started as soon as Jesus rose from the dead.  People were referenced in these letters that were still living at the time the letters were written inorder to give evidence for the claims of the Resurrection (1 Corinthians 15).  This means that the writer was entirely confident that the account could be verified by eyewitnesses that were both reliable and available.  

He must be rolling over in his grave?

Well, he would be if he were still in it ; ) .  The challenge I'm about to give you is as old as Christianity itself and will immediately expose it as a hoax.  Oddly, though this challenge is very easy, it has never been met.  Find the body of Jesus.  If you can find his bones, it proves he didn't rise from the dead.  Case closed.  Christianity is false.  So where are the bones of Jesus?

?Here he lived, telling everybody that he was only the 'son' of the 'father' and all people had to do was believe in the father and do good to each other and everything would be fine, and a religion is made putting him as also somehow being the father and using that to prostitute his life, his love and his meaning, to kill, control, oppress, scare and intimidate.?

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2006-2-7 11:00:28 |Display all floors

more.....

Calling yourself the Son of God in the monotheistic Hebrew context is saying that you're on the same level as God.  That's a pretty wild claim.  Also, you've gotta give evidence that his followers doctored the original text to create an entirely new religion.  Where do you get the real?text that has Jesus' real teachings?

And the point of Jesus' ministry was that we can't be good.  He set the standard of conduct at perfection- be perfect, as your heavenly father is perfect??Matthew 5:48.  This is impossible except that He did it for us.  If we only accept that he was perfect and died as a sacrifice to take our sins (ie: the evil things we do) away, then he will forgive us and make room in us for himself to live by way of the Holy Spirit.  It is by the power of the Holy Spirit that the Christian is able to be good, desire good, and overcome evil.  

The most succinct comment on religion made by Kong Futze - about 500 years before the birth of the soul in the body of the man known as (insert any of the many names here) and over 800 years before the Council of Nicea set up their dogma was "Do to others as you would have others do to you." Nice and simple and as I said before - no need to pay anyone for it.?

This is from Matthew 22:36-40- "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"  Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.'  This is the first and greatest commandment.  And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Although he did say do unto others as you would have others do to you? it's merely an exposition of the second commandment.  This again points to the incredibly high demands God puts on us.  Can we honestly say that we've loved God with our entire self at all times?  No- that's absurd.  And that's why Jesus is necessary.

There is one way though I feel to decide which "religions" survive. Remove the "tax free" status from religions. Make the monks and nuns and priests and fathers and imams and high mucky-mucks claim income and pay taxes - and most important in the west, remove the provision to use so-called contributions to organized religious groups as tax credits?
There are many millions of Chinese Christians that are doing just that.  In fact, the Christians in China are growing faster than in the west.  It seems that by your standard, Christianity stands on very good grounds here.

All people need to do is good - to themselves and to others?

That's the problem.  We can't do it on our own.  That's like saying all we need is to jump to the moon.?nbsp; We can't do that on our own.  We need a rocket to get there.  In the same way, humans can't be good enough on our own- we need to let Christ forgive us and trust in the perfect life that He lived to justify us.  

All religions claim that there is only one "God" and if that is so (and I believe it is) then we are all related and anyone that kills, maims, hurts, oppresses, steals, rapes etc,. is doing so to a member of their family. But, how convenient that so many religions flourish that say Oh No, that religion company's God is not our God. Our God is the right God. Let's marginalize them from our society and if we can't do that let's kill them to the 'glory' of our god (small g intended).?

Christianity is radically different from any other religion.  First of all, it's not a religion.  Religions consist of humans trying to work their way up to God by being good enough.  Christianity says that it's impossible to be good enough on our own.  Instead, we need to trust that Jesus already accomplished all that was necessary for us to come to God.  Thus, we enter into a loving relationship with our Creator.  Christianity is not a religion- it's a relationship.

That being said, I don't see how you can put all religions into the category of monotheism (what about the Hindus?) and I don't think that you can even put all true monotheists into the same category because they offer radically different concepts of God.  Christianity believes in a 3-part, yet entirely One notion of God called the Trinity.  Judaism and Islam, however, only believe in a monolithic, 1-dimentional God.  

Finally, the point still stands that humans can never be good enough.  To give you an example- we can never build an infinitely long bridge to span the gap between God抯 perfection and our imperfect humanity.  Instead, we must let the omnipotent and perfect God build that bridge for us.  That bridge is Jesus.

He is the only bridge.  I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the father except through me? John 14:6

I like to take your elephant analogy and apply the claims of Christianity to it.  Instead of blind men seeking out the elephant, Christianity claims that the Elephant started speaking and describing himself to the blind men, then healing them so that they could see for themselves.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2006-2-7 11:07:17 |Display all floors

..and we won't stop your "happiness" with your opium..

..but don't "cause" trouble....

don't create another "Taiping" rebellion that kills millions....

...look at the "animal spirits" unleashed by the NUTS....

..look at the "cartoon caper", look at the arming of the "rebel Sudanese christians"...

..look at so many instances...

...Go ABOVE ALL THAT..and be one with the CREATOR....
....BE a friend to the CREATOR....
..and not be one of the low-lifes....

ha ha ha ha ha

"i am just joking" forgive me!
ha ha ha ha ha

fm
Cheeky Green Dragon
Council of Malaya

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.