1

"If a scandal can't be blamed on Bush, did it really happen?"

If a scandal can't be blamed on the UN, did it really happen?

Look, two wrongs don't make a right...although in the case of Anan, the degree of evidence is notably poorer than Bush's in Katrinagate.

Regarding "The Persecuted Church," tell me, why aren't these people working with The Chinese Protestant Church?

What are the relations between the evangelical community and the Chinese Protestant Church?

From what I saw on their website, and around the net they certainly are Christians.

Or is there an issue with folks wanting to get converts themselves?

I've got to be somewhat honest - painfully honest here- the Chinese government wants to ensure that religious practice doesn't create conditions like we have in the United States, with political struggles leading to corrupt officials ascending the presidency while mouthing religious plattitudes, where flim-flam religious preachers swindle the flock out of their money.

2

"...the Chinese government wants to ensure that religious practice doesn't create conditions like we have in the United States..."

Your statement is breathtaking. To posit that the Chinese government has altruistic motives in exerting ultimate control over it's subjects/slaves is naive at best, and self-deluding at the very least. Your trust in government is misplaced.

The issue is freedom v. control. The Home Church movement exists precisely because the Chinese government does not control it, ala the state-run Chinese Protestant Church (as you call it), or (more accurately) the "Three-Self Patriotic Movement" (TSPM) and/or the "Catholic Patriotic Association." Please note the point of commonality in these state recognized religious organizations is proclaimed fealty to the state.

Early Christians had no problem with religious freedom from Rome; rather, the problem arose when they were required to swear allegiance to Caesar (in form of recognizing his "deity") Chinese Christians are required to subject their obedience to Christ to a primary obedience to PRC: You can have your Jesus, as long as he does what we say.

American Christians should take note, as we seem all too willing to pledge our allegiance to political parties - usually GOP - without much thought to Jesus.

Churches were allowed to function in Nazi Germany too, as long as they displayed the swastica and adhered to state direction.

Say what you will, but to infer that the US Government dictates church doctrine is ridiculous. For now, we have freedom to follow Jesus without official persecution. No matter how you try to twist it, our Chinese brothers and sisters do not have the same freedom.

3

Inquiring Minds:

That is an interesting position, and I'm not sure that it represents what really goes on here.

To think that people are "enslaved" or "controlled" in China is rather absurd; anybody who's spent 5 minutes here knows that it is oxymoronic to say otherwise.

One article says:

...house churches have not officially been outlawed, and since the 1990's, there has been increasing official tolerance of house churches. Most observers believe that the harassment of house churches by government officials arises less from an ideological opposition to religion and support of atheism

It's a key point.

"Freedom" in any society is not absolute, I can do anything I want. Experience and history has shown that Christianity, delivered via missionaries sometimes had unpleasant side effects ("We got the bibles and they got the land...")

In the US, manipulating people's prejudices against gays and demagoguing the abortion issue has resulted in the election of a manifestly incompetent president whose cronysim has depleted treasuries of billions (Haliburton, Iraq), and resulted in the deaths of thousands.

Anyone looking on objectively would realize that there are some limits to religious freedom: cults that foster human sacrifice are illegal.

Moreover, the position of the D. James Kennedy and Dobson types mirrors the position of which you critique the Chinese government: were these "Christian" statesmen in power, they would say to any and all that does not share their doctrine "You can have your (agnosticism, athesim, Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Judaism...) just do what we say."

The Chinese government does not view itself as a deity by any means.

But I think you're missing a larger point, so I'll try it here:

Paul and Jan Crouch have promoted some of the sleazier "Christian" evangelists: Benny Hinn and Bob Larson are two that come to mind immediately.

Do you think that freedom of religion is a freedom for hucksters to fleece the desparate and unknowning?

Do you think it's reasonable to expect that a group like Focus on the Family open up its books to all to see if they are in compliance with IRS regulations when they are registered as a 501(c) 3 corporation?

4

Mumon, you've displayed an astounding blend of arrogance and ignorance here. I have friends in China's house churches, some of whom were arrested and tortured, some of whom are in jail now. One friend is 86 and spent 23 years in prison, simply because he would not join the gov't approved church. He spent 3 years in solitary confinement, and was once hung from a wall by his handcuffs until they had cut him to the bone.

That church, the Three Self Patriotic Movement, is often pretty orthodox at the local level, although the gov't requires at least one church leader to be a party member (a bit weird to have an atheist in a pastoral position). But it is highly corrupt and compromised in its hierarchy.

I also have friends in the former USSR whose homes were ransacked and who were beaten and imprisoned, and I had a few encounters with the KGB on my own. There were absolutely no pure motives on the part of the government officials in the USSR, and I can tell you there are none in China either.

Were we to meet face to face I could educate you with first-hand knowledge about the routine corruption and abusive behavior of officials there.

Mumon, I usually am willing to abide your arrogant bluster and snooty tone, and I don't shoot back. For example, you often dismiss whole categories of Christians, e.g., evangelicals or preachers, as money-grubbing or hypocritical. If I were to return the bigotry I'd be making fun of saffron robes and accusing the Dalai Lama of being a philanderer or some such nonsense, or dismissing all Buddhists as crooked, based on the Al Gore fund-raising fiasco back in 1999.

This time, however, I will not abide your bad-ass Buddhist persona, because you're making not merely idiotic, misinformed statements, but insulting a few hundred million people whose sandals neither of us is worthy to unlace.

So shut up.

5

http://www.internetmonk.com/weird.html

This article about "weird" Christians that Joe pointed out is very interesting.

I guess I would include Christians who insist on attacking the science of evolutionary biology as "weird."

6

Speaking of persecuted Christians in China, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently handed down a decision holding that Chinese Christians are not being religiously persecuted even if they are arrested for worshipping in house churches because the Chinese govt provides adequate alternatives in the state run churches. See Xiaodong Li v. Alberto Gonzales, No. 03-60670 (Aug. 9, 2005)

7

"To think that people are "enslaved" or "controlled" in China is rather absurd; anybody who's spent 5 minutes here knows that it is oxymoronic to say otherwise."

"In the US, manipulating people's prejudices against gays and demagoguing the abortion issue has resulted in the election of a manifestly incompetent president whose cronysim has depleted treasuries of billions (Haliburton, Iraq), and resulted in the deaths of thousands."

Your first statement sounds like one of the talking points of the Communist Chinese government officals. No doubt there are about are about a billion Chinese citizens who would strongly disagree with it -- if it weren't for the fact that they would be risking their lives in doing so. It is common knowledge that the Chinese government is one of the most repressive on earth. Where have you been man?

Your second point is almost as ludicrous -- if that were possible. Bush, to the utter dismay of most conservatives, was the 1st president to endorse same sex unions, a.k.a. "let's pretend" marriages. And speaking of "demagogery," are you aware of China's one child per family policy and their well publicized habit of forcing late-term abortions on innocent women who dare to violate that decree? I doubt it. You and most other neo-coms are far too busy focusing on the boogeyman, Haliburton.

8

So, um, why is this dated 9.15.2005 when it went up on the 14th?

And if you want a carnival about stories, you should check out The Storyblogging Carnival, which just turned one.

Okay, that was a bit of a stretch, but I had to get a plug in there somewhere.

9

Mumon: Reread the first few paragraphs of Joe's statement of belief. Then check what the "Three-Self Patriotic Movement" teaches and look for conspicuous absenses.
Just a few verses down the page from that oft quoted "judge not" we find one of many warnings in which we must use our judgement. Mt 7:15 ¶ "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? or 2Pe 2:1 ¶ But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Like the Bereans who went home to check the scriptures to see if what they had just heard from the Apostle Paul could be found there, Christians are called to judge what is being taught. The "Three-Self Patriotic Movement" doesn't pass the test. You can apply the same principle to some of the very public Christians you dislike. If he wants to take the world for Christ by law and government he has lost focus on what is important and while you can legislate behavior or morality you can't legislate hearts. If he's too wound in health or healing ministries listen to his preaching very carefully. If he's too interested in you're money or your wife you're in the wrong place listening to the wrong person.

10

To think that people are "enslaved" or "controlled" in China is rather absurd; anybody who's spent 5 minutes here knows that it is oxymoronic to say otherwise.

Mumon, did Hitler control the Germans? Did Stalin control the Russians?

11

Jim Gilbert:

Put quite simply, the Chinese government wants to avoid the excuse of "religious freedom" to undermine their national government and social stability.

Yes there's human rights abuses, but you don't seem to have addressed my issue raised above: why is it "freedom of religion" to attempt the overthrow of a government? To allow fraudsters to practice a religion?

Matthew:

Did Hitler rule China? Or Stalin?

Have you ever been to New York's Chinatown?

Now imagine what you see there on a crowded Saturday taking place on a scale of billions of people.

12

Ummm.. just what does the "Three Self Patriotic Movement" teach (other than basic Christianity?)

Look, biblical literalism doesn't pass the test either.

13

Mumon: Voice of the Martyrs http://www.vom.org/.
used to have a free book on it. They are way short of what most Christians commenting here would call the gospel of Christ.
By biblical literalism do you mean the idea that everything in the Bible should be taken literaly which is of course false, Jesus never meant for people to actually pluck out an eye, or that the Bible doesn't pass your test for innerrance. It does pass my test in that respect and though the Bible uses every linguistic artifice known to man most of it is simple and strait forward and should be taken literally.

14

Mike O:

You'll forgive my skepticism at "Voice of the Martyrs," as I've seen how faithfully non-Christian and Catholic beliefs are rendered by such groups.

I'd prefer something a bit more authoritative.