• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fast-growing Christian churches crushed in China

Hatuey

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
59,365
Reaction score
27,049
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Towering eight stories over wheat fields, the Golden Lamp Church was built to serve nearly 50,000 worshippers in the gritty heart of China's coal country.

But that was before hundreds of police and hired thugs descended on the mega-church, smashing doors and windows, seizing Bibles and sending dozens of worshippers to hospitals with serious injuries, members and activists say

Today, the church's co-pastors are in jail. The gates to the church complex in the northern province of Shanxi are locked and a police armored personnel vehicle sits outside.

The closure of what may be China's first mega-church is the most visible sign that the communist government is determined to rein in the rapid spread of Christianity, with a crackdown in recent months that church leaders call the harshest in years.
Click to expand...

This is pretty ridiculous. No different than the attacks on Falun Gong members or Buddhists within Chinese territory.
 
Perhaps off topic, but maybe interesting to some, I read an article a few months ago that China has had a resurgence of Confucianism, and is trying to use that to improve their image throughout the world. Confucianism was a pretty decent religion back in the day.;)
 
lizzie said:
Perhaps off topic, but maybe interesting to some, I read an article a few months ago that China has had a resurgence of Confucianism, and is trying to use that to improve their image throughout the world. Confucianism was a pretty decent religion back in the day.;)
Click to expand...

Confucianism isn't a religion. It is a set of values and morality standards.
 
Well it would seem the Godless among us who claim to be Christians but believe it's okay to kill babies and the Association of Communist Lovers United (ACLU) have something to rejoice about.

By the way Christianity is at risk here but it won't be made clear to many for a while yet, but it comes with the territory when Socialism/Marxism takes root.
 
Councilman said:
Well it would seem the Godless among us who claim to be Christians but believe it's okay to kill babies and the Association of Communist Lovers United (ACLU) have something to rejoice about.

By the way Christianity is at risk here but it won't be made clear to many for a while yet, but it comes with the territory when Socialism/Marxism takes root.
Click to expand...

You are wrong. I am not a Christian. I support abortion and support the ACLU. I don't support this.
 
Hatuey said:
You are wrong. I am not a Christian. I support abortion and support the ACLU. I don't support this.
Click to expand...

Don't flatter yourself, I was not referring to you specifically and I find it interesting how often Liberals defend themselves from things they were not accused of. I didn't and don't see your post as supprting the Commies.

Interesting.
 
Confucianism is not a religion. It's a set of moral precepts to guide society. It was the hierarchy that bound dynastic society. There is no such thing as a Confucian person, because it relies upon the framework of the surrounding society to function. It's how Daoists, Buddhists, and Muslims have been able to exist in China for a millennia or more yet still be part of the Confucian order.

To the topic... it would fall under the category of religious persecution I suppose, but you have to understand that China isn't singling out Christianity. Any organization that begins to rally huge support becomes a potential threat to the government. Aside from the Communist uprising that created the PRC, the biggest rebellion in China was the Taiping rebellion in the 1860's, lead by a guy who believed himself to be the brother of Jesus Christ. Millions died and it was one of the fatal turning points that contributed to the downfall of China's final imperial dynasty.

Religion is monitored in China for potential political instability, but it's only one aspect of society that is monitored. Parades can't even happen in the streets unless they are pro-PRC. For example, the Shanghai Pride society could not get permission from the city government to hold a parade for the first gay pride. They called it a security risk.

This is just the way Communism operates. Everyone gets shut down, not just the Christians. And frankly, mega-churches are just financial and fanatical black holes where people can gain social and political power. I'm not saying they shouldn't have the right to exist, just saying that in politics they can be a power centre.
 
Wow...communism really sucks.
 
Confucianism certainly didn't start out as a religion, but then neither did Christianity. The western concept of religion is based primarily on Christianity. Eastern concepts of religion are different. Confucius was at one point deified and statues erected in temples in China. He had followers and disciples much as Jesus is said to have had. For anyone interested in a brief bit of information on Conficianism and it's relation to religion vs culture (pretty much the same thing in many cultures), I'll post a couple of links.

http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Writings/AAR-Still Hazy.pdf

The most important point, especially in regard to Chinese religions, is to have a culture-neutral definition. Yet it is still not unusual to find statements to the effect that "while Confucianism may contain religious dimensions, it is not a religion in the Western (or usual) sense of the word." This, obviously, will not do. With the proviso that we need not think of any single definition as universally appropriate, but rather as a provisional way of shedding light on one or more aspects of the multi-dimensional set of phenomena we call "religious," I will note that many scholars have found Frederick Streng's definition of religion to be especially suitable to Chinese religions. Streng said that religion is "a means to ultimate transformation," where "ultimate" can be understood in whatever terms are appropriate to the tradition.12 This is, therefore, a formal, culture-neutral definition. In the case of Confucianism, the goal of Sagehood is the endpoint of that transformation, and Heaven symbolizes the ultimacy that makes it religious. "Transformation" not only characterizes the process by which human beings become Sages (or fully humane, ren 仁); it is also a characteristic of the Sage, who "transforms where he passes" (Mencius 7A.13).13 The Sage, through his de 德 or "moral power," transforms others and society itself. So by this definition -- one that focuses on what we might call the "spirituality" of the Confucian tradition -- it is not difficult to justify referring to Confucianism as a religious tradition.14
understanding Chinese popular (or local) religion.15 The distinction hinges on the social setting of the practices in question: institutional religion is practiced in a specifically religious social setting, such as a temple or monastery operated by clergy (priests or monks); diffused religion is practiced in a "secular" social setting: one that is not specifically religious, such as the family, community, or state. The case of local community temples is somewhat ambiguous, as Daoist priests usually conduct formal rituals in them, such as the community jiao 醮 ritual, or specific rituals requested and paid for by families or individuals. But these temples are operated by the local, non-clerical community, and so would primarily fall into the "diffused" category. The question for us then becomes, what is the social setting of Confucian practice? What, indeed, are the varieties of Confucian practice? It is customary to identify Confucian practice on the levels of the individual, the family, and the state (the last primarily in imperial times). On the level of the individual there is the work of self-cultivation (gongfu 功夫), such as study, self-reflection, and (for some, especially after the Song dynasty) meditation in the form of "quiet-sitting" (jingzuo 靜坐). In the family and clan, or lineage, there is filial behavior and ancestor worship; these, of course, are practiced as well by people who do not self-identify as Confucians. On the state level, before 1911 there were the imperial rituals at the Confucian temple, which fell into the "middle" category of state sacrifices. The "great" sacrifices were those to Heaven and Earth, which are often loosely put under the Confucian umbrella, although that usage needs to be defended. Corresponding to practice at the level of the community in popular religion is the private Confucian school or academy -- again, especially after the Song. Since Confucianism is a tradition for literati (or, today, intellectuals), the academy is the natural social setting for it. The Confucian academies that flourished from the Song through the Qing periods in China -- not to mention those in Korea and those few that are beginning to reappear in the PRC -- were central to the self-identification of avowed Confucians. In addition to being places of learning -- and Confucian learning, of course, is learning to be a Sage, which, as noted above, is a religious goal -- there were also daily ritual observances, including prayers to Confucius and other sages and worthies.
Click to expand...

An Introduction to Confucianism
Li (social propriety) is the greatest principle of living. When society lives by li it moves smoothly. Confucius saw the embodiment of this society in the idealized form of feudalistic government, illustrated by the Five Relationships: kindness in the father, filial piety in the son; gentility in the eldest brother, humility and respect in the younger; righteousness behavior in the husband, obedience in the wife; humane consideration in elders, deference in juniors; benevolence in rulers, loyalty in ministers and subjects. Li may also refer to the "middle way" in all things.
Just as li is the outward expression of the superior man, jen (goodness, humaneness, love) is the inner ideal. Confucius taught that men should love one another and practice respect and courtesy. If li and jen were operative in a person, the end product would be the Confucian goal: the superior man. Confucius believed in the natural goodness or at least the natural perfectibility of man. He stressed government by virtue (Te) and the arts of peace (Wen). Since filial piety is the root of all virtue this concern for parental respect is seen in the veneration of age and ancestor worship. Confucius was a pragmatic man who thought one should respect the spirits but keep them at a distance.
Confucius regarded himself as a transmitter, not the originator, of social values and wisdom. Although Confucianism does not claim revelatory scriptures, the Five Classics and the Four Books are regarded as the touch-stone of Confucian conduct and wisdom. Mencius and Hsun Tzu were the great expositors of Confucius in the fourth and third centuries B.C. and did much to popularize and spread his teachings. During the Han Dynasty there developed a cult of Confucius himself. By the sixth century A.D. every prefecture in China had a temple to honor Confucius.
The Confucian cult was checked in 1503 when the images of Confucius were ordered removed from the temples and replaced with wooden tablets inscribed with his teachings. All titles were removed and he was spoken of simply as "Master Kung, the perfect teacher of antiquity." In 1906 there was an attempt to revive the Confucian cult but with the birth of the People's Republic of China all sacrifices to Confucius and other religious observances were officially abandoned.
Click to expand...
 
lizzie said:
Confucianism certainly didn't start out as a religion, but then neither did Christianity. The western concept of religion is based primarily on Christianity. Eastern concepts of religion are different. Confucius was at one point deified and statues erected in temples in China. He had followers and disciples much as Jesus is said to have had. For anyone interested in a brief bit of information on Conficianism and it's relation to religion vs culture (pretty much the same thing in many cultures), I'll post a couple of links.

http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Writings/AAR-Still Hazy.pdf

An Introduction to Confucianism
Click to expand...

It is not a religion. Stop trying to justify your ridiculous misconception.
 
Councilman said:
Well it would seem the Godless among us who claim to be Christians but believe it's okay to kill babies
Click to expand...
The Bible says it is:

"...do not spare them, put to death men, women, children, infants..." 1 Samuel 15:3

"Any child that curses his father or mother shall be put to death" - OT

Hosea 13:16 (NLT) - "The people of Samaria must bear the consequences of their guilt because they rebelled against their God. They will be killed by an invading army, their little ones dashed to death against the ground, their pregnant women ripped open by swords."

If you were talking about human embryos/fetuses, then you'll need to research some science if you want to appear credible - the same goes with PETA and the "meat is murder" crowd, just to be fair.

Councilman said:
and the Association of Communist Lovers United (ACLU) have something to rejoice about.
Click to expand...
The ACLU believes that Muslims should have the right to wear veils on IDs, and that Rev. Fred Phelps has the right to protest soldiers' funerals in the name of God, so they're the polar opposite of commies.

(Try using some critical thought instead of repeating what Wingnutdaily tells you.)

Councilman said:
By the way Christianity is at risk here but it won't be made clear to many for a while yet, but it comes with the territory when Socialism/Marxism takes root.
Click to expand...
One less cult to worry about then. Hope the commies take out Islam next. I guess pinkos are actually good for something (not that there much different than these cults). :mrgreen:

You know, your cult wouldn't even be at risk if it didn't try to spread its idiocy into commie lands, so the fault is theirs for trying to recruit members of the commie cult into joining another cult which has proven itself just as destructive throughout history (and still is in many areas of the world).
 
i am a communist and i oppose this, it's all thanks to marx's quote of "religion is the opiate of the people" and this is another reason i believe marx to be outdated


and to the old argument i feel i should throw in "CHINA ISN'T COMMUNIST"
 
Last edited:
spud_meister said:
i am a communist and i oppose this, it's all thanks to marx's quote of "religion is the opiate of the people" and this is another reason i believe marx to be outdated


and to the old argument i feel i should throw in "CHINA ISN'T COMMUNIST"
Click to expand...

Some say Capitalism and Communism are a perfect match for each other.
 
Toothpicvic said:
The Bible says it is:

"...do not spare them, put to death men, women, children, infants..." 1 Samuel 15:3
Click to expand...


You distort the Bible.


"Any child that curses his father or mother shall be put to death"
Click to expand...


Leviticus 20:9 is in the Old Testament, and although it is there for our learning, and to underscore the seriousness of the 5th commandment, it is not a practice. Another distortion to cast dispersion on Christianity no doubt.


Hosea 13:16 (NLT) - "The people of Samaria must bear the consequences of their guilt because they rebelled against their God. They will be killed by an invading army, their little ones dashed to death against the ground, their pregnant women ripped open by swords."
Click to expand...


Again speaking of the Old Testament as if it were applicable today show a severe lack of understanding in terms of using scripture, maybe you should not attempt that?

In any case a good summary of what you are distorting here is found surprisingly on yahoo answers....It says:

Mens' own actions lead to tragedies like those predicted against Samaria, or Northern Isreal. The Prophet is trying to get the people to repent and change. If they do, the prediction will not happen. A similar story is found in Jonah. Jonah is told to go and tell Ninevah they are doomed. The people repent and are spared. Jonah is even upset because of God's mercy.

Today the real tragedy about abortion is not so much the loss of a life as it is people call good evil and evil good. No one is supposed to feel guilt or remorse or seek forgiveness.

Question about Hosea 13:16? - Yahoo! Answers
Click to expand...

If you were talking about human embryos/fetuses, then you'll need to research some science if you want to appear credible - the same goes with PETA and the "meat is murder" crowd, just to be fair.
Click to expand...


Suppose you explain to me what scientific value abortion had at its inception as fiat law? No sir you offer distortions, and extoll others to bone up on topics? That is rich.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
You distort the Bible.





Leviticus 20:9 is in the Old Testament, and although it is there for our learning, and to underscore the seriousness of the 5th commandment, it is not a practice. Another distortion to cast dispersion on Christianity no doubt.





Again speaking of the Old Testament as if it were applicable today show a severe lack of understanding in terms of using scripture, maybe you should not attempt that?

In any case a good summary of what you are distorting here is found surprisingly on yahoo answers....It says:






Suppose you explain to me what scientific value abortion had at its inception as fiat law? No sir you offer distortions, and extoll others to bone up on topics? That is rich.


j-mac
Click to expand...

why shouldnt the bible be taken literally, certain people (i'm not saying it's you, 'cause i am unaware of that fact) take the quaran literally, and use it as a pretence to try and prove islam is a bloodthirsty religion
 
spud_meister said:
why shouldnt the bible be taken literally, certain people (i'm not saying it's you, 'cause i am unaware of that fact) take the quaran literally, and use it as a pretence to try and prove islam is a bloodthirsty religion
Click to expand...


First off, you have to understand the context of the Bible before you can ask a question like this. The Old Testament as it relates to today is good in historical reference. However, to say that you don't understand why that can not be used in literal translation is absurd. Does God smite people today? Did not his son Jesus die so that God could usher in a new era of free choice?

To compare Christian belief to that of the Koran and those who bastardize that religion as well for the purpose of killing non believers, or infidels if you will, shows a pure lack of understanding on your part.



j-mac
 
j-mac said:
First off, you have to understand the context of the Bible before you can ask a question like this. The Old Testament as it relates to today is good in historical reference. However, to say that you don't understand why that can not be used in literal translation is absurd. Does God smite people today? Did not his son Jesus die so that God could usher in a new era of free choice?

To compare Christian belief to that of the Koran and those who bastardize that religion as well for the purpose of killing non believers, or infidels if you will, shows a pure lack of understanding on your part.



j-mac
Click to expand...

the point i was trying to make (just realised it's sorta off topic) was that religious works from however many thousand and a bit years ago cannot be taken literaly, and can't be used as justification for present day actions.

i was comparing the justification of acts based upon religious belief

and as for ignorance, i'm rather well versed in some sects of christianity, and i have knowledge of islam, i think you just may have misinterpreted my point
 
spud_meister said:
the point i was trying to make (just realised it's sorta off topic) was that religious works from however many thousand and a bit years ago cannot be taken literaly, and can't be used as justification for present day actions.

i was comparing the justification of acts based upon religious belief

and as for ignorance, i'm rather well versed in some sects of christianity, and i have knowledge of islam, i think you just may have misinterpreted my point
Click to expand...


Ok, well, then you say in your post to me, that some "use it as a pretence to try and prove islam is a bloodthirsty religion." Did you not?


Tell me Spud, how many Christians are using the Bible to behead captives of theirs today?


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom