Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Rebecca Hagelin :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Suffering of "Secret Believers"
by Rebecca Hagelin
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


 

For many people around the world, religious freedom is an alien concept. No “First Amendment” protects them. No tradition of religious liberty permits them to worship according to their own consciences. If they go to a church that isn’t the “accepted” church, they risk ostracism, assault, torture, jail … even death.

The fact is, Christians are persecuted around the world on a daily basis -- it’s just that their stories are largely unknown. 

But we must know their stories so that we can pray for them and support efforts to help.

Compass Direct is a Christian news service that maintains a network of international sources and reports on horrors you can’t imagine. The brave journalists at Compass do their best to uncover the truth so that some action can be taken against the tormentors. I’ve met with several of their reporters from around the world who risk their own safety and lives to shine the light on the ugly truth of religious persecution. They are trained journalists who write under aliases in order to keep from being arrested, or worse. Their reports are read by those in the highest levels on Capitol Hill, in the State Department and other government offices.

 When I met with them, I felt humbled by their courage and inspired by their commitment to Christians they will never know. I marveled at the depth of their own faith. Sitting in a room with these warriors for truth made me reflect on my own commitment (or lack thereof) to my brothers and sisters in Christ. Reading the disturbing Compass reports has moved my spirit and deepened my understanding – and made me question my own willingness to “risk it all.”

In India, for example, numerous Christians have been beaten and threatened by Hindu extremists. One was tied to a tree and tormented for three hours before being banished from his village. What did he do to merit this treatment? He was handing out Christian tracts. Forcible “conversions” to Hinduism or other religions occur in some places. Other stories report on beatings intended to warn believers to stop attending prayer meetings. In another village, Christian families were banned from all shops and wells.

All of these instances occurred within the last two months, while we’ve wrapped up relaxing summer vacations and shopped for “back to school” clothes. In the business of your life, did you miss the story about Beijing house church leader Cai Zhuohua? Chinese officials recently released him from prison, where he had languished since 2004 for “illegal business practices” -- i.e., distributing Christian literature. His punishment included a firm warning that he must never engage in the activity again.

Thank the Lord there also are other ministries that help the afflicted. Once such group is Open Doors, which tracks persecution and lends a helping hand to embattled believers. Compass recently reported on a horrible incident in Eritrea, a small country along the east coast of Africa:

“Eritrean authorities tortured a woman to death on Wednesday (September 5) for refusing to recant her Christian faith, the fourth such killing in less than a year, according to a Christian support organization. Open Doors said in a statement that it had confirmed the death of 33-year-old Nigisti Haile at the Wi’a Military Training Center; she was one of 10 single Christian women arrested at a church gathering in Keren who have spent 18 months under severe pressure.”

Nigisti Haile was not the first such victim. According to Compass, other Christians in Eritrea have died after suffering torture, including two who had dared to hold a religious service in a private home. What a contrast to our experience here in the United States -- where, praise God, we think nothing of walking into any church we please. (Sometimes, we think so much “nothing” about it that we don’t even go. After all, there’s always next Sunday.) 

In Turkey, police recently arrested a man who set a fire at the entrance to a Protestant church in Izmit and repeatedly fired a gun. The incident was caught on a security camera installed several months earlier -- after three Christians had been stabbed to death. “In the last year, there have been scores of threats or attacks on congregations and church buildings,” according to a report compiled by the country’s Protestant churches.

For those who want to know more about how religious persecution affects real people in our time, I recommend the book “Secret Believers: What Happens When Muslims Believe in Christ.” Written by Brother Andrew and Al Janssen of Open Doors, it’s a compelling look at some Muslims who were drawn to Christ -- despite the danger, in their land, of professing any religion other than Islam.

You’ll meet a father whose son has been arrested and is being tortured for holding “illegal religious meetings.” Two government officials visit the father and question him. One says: “It must hurt you terribly to be the father of an apostate. I have a son, just two years old. If my son turned away from Islam, I don’t know what I’d do.” The other official says, “I’d kill him,” to which the first official replies, “Yes. That is all you really can do with an apostate. If he won’t return to Islam, kill him.”

If these chilling tales outrage you as much as they do me, resolve to do something about it. Educate yourself through groups such as Compass and Open Doors. Make sure that others know what’s going on, too, and do whatever you can to raise awareness and to make a difference, however small.

And, of course, don’t forget to pray -- first and foremost for the relief of those persecuted for their faith. Then consider adding a prayer of thanks for the blessing of living in a nation where you can worship freely.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Rebecca Hagelin is a public speaker on the family and culture and the author of the new best seller, 30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Rebecca Hagelin's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I pray every day for Christian courage
Although it is easiER, it is not easy even here in the USA to be Christian.
Although I pray for those who persecute, sometimes it is difficult to understand the WHY of it all. By and large, Christians hope and pray for others - but some of those others actively persecute and prosecute Christians. Think it "interesting" to humiliate us and degrade our beliefs.
I have NEVER, EVER heard of a forced conversion to Christianity as I have to other religions. I have NEVER, in recent history, heard of a Christian killing someone else BECAUSE they are something different.
All our "tolerance" has come back to haunt us however. Now, instead of just "tolerance", we must "celebrate" - something we simply cannot do.

Are these the last days?
The Bible speaks about persecution at "the end of the age". Not the persecution we experience in the USA; insults and invective or some kind of religious discrimination. But the persecution described in Ms. Hagelin's piece is truly riveting and evocative.

Sometimes we need some perspective. All the anti-religious and irreligious who populate Townhall (for whatever reasons) are the kind of people who would be TRULY persecuting Christians if the society and the laws of the land would allow it. They need to be saved. And we as Christians need to "love our enemies and pray for them who spitefully use" us.

And we need to pray for our fellow believers in the path of persecution across the world in primitive, evil cultures.

Thanks for the reminder, Ms Hagelin.

Maranatha

Unfortunately
same Christians who whine bout persecution of believers in third world countries, openly endorse and praise human rights violations against gays in the same countries and give awards and praise to the torturers and murderers of gays.

And poor Christians
they have to hide in the closet... waawaawaaaa...

But thank God for Christians like archbishop Akionola, that hero ofor American religious tright wing nutjobs that promotes legitlation that would strip all legal rights from gays and would put them in jail for 15 years. Or Ugandan mob rule parised by Concerned Women of American that seeks to ban all political and basic human rights for gays.

Or Bush administration who has joined togtehr with countries like Zimbabawe, Iran, Vattican and Saudi-Arabia in UN to prevent the human rights problems of gays to be addressed.

So sorry, Rebecca hagelin, I have ceased to care of Christians get tortured. But at least I don't encourage and condone it like you do when the victims are gays.

Thank you for the reminder
The mewling and namecalling we Christians (particular we Catholics) are subject to (see above) in this country are as nothing compared to what our brothers and sisters suffer in other places, for sure. We have been warned that the day will come when all of us will face that kind of persecution. My soul is prepared. How is yours? I pray the Rosary on the subway every morning; not only is it exactly the right amount of time to accomplish this duty, I like to think I may make somebody think, however briefly, about God.

Many years ago I received a cross at the end of Cursillo with the reminder carved into the back that *Christ is depending on you*. After reading your account, I went to my treasure box and put it on. Thank you for reminding me I have my duty too.

Persecuted Christianity
How do writers like Van know What this columnist's opinion is on the persecution of homosexuals? Did they ask her?

alicelouise
Van knows exactly what Ms. Hagelin thinks because his life is much easier to manage when he can stereotype based on his own bigotry and not waste any of his valuable time bothering with facts.

Warren Small does the opposite. He finds arcane little facts and then (mis)interprets them through the prism of anti-capitalism and anti-Americanism. The logical gymnastics through which he puts himself are akin to a cat trying to change direction midleap. Amusing as all get out but not very effective.

alicelouise
Do not engage van. He's an anti-Christian bigot who spews lies (no Christian who is truly Christian would want gays jailed, beaten, or murdered and he's never provided evidence of such), and who cannot understand that the human heart and mind is capable of loving a person even though one aspect of that person's life is sinful.

As for his insistence that we support countries that abuse and oppress gays - well, check my blog and tell me how my recent post condemning Iran in any way supports that nation's barbaric execution of gays.

Christian persecution is terrible, and I have no doubt that there are some in this nation who would have no qualms about doing the same to Christians here. Their silence - like feminists silent on the abuse of Muslim women - is support, in my opinion.

All we can do is pray and be faithful. Go to church every opportunity you get, and give thanks to God we still have that freedom.

My husband and I had a theoretical discussion about religion the other day. I asked what we'd do if religion was forbidden or restricted, and he said simply, "We'd go underground." We would.

Because there are some things in this world worth fighting (and, sadly, dying) for - religion and religious freedom being #1 on that list.

And one additional point
I strongly believe that even though the persecution we face in America is minimal compared to other nations, it's IMPERATIVE we nip this problem in the bud before it becomes as tragic - or worse - than what's going on elsewhere.

alicelouise
Van sees everything through the prism of homosexual "rights". If the article is how brown paper is made, Van will find someway to bring homosexual "rights and their persecutions" into it along with his/her/its hatred of everything and everyone in America that doesn't embrace homosexuality like he/she/it does. The content never matters, he/she/it will bring up their homosexuality and how all conservatives and Christians are bigots because Van can't think outside of his/her/its reproductive organs.

Ditto Mr. Right for Warren Small who will always be "small" except in his own mind.

Van
Links please. Without links to back up and validate anything you've written, you're nothing but a bunch of spewing hot air "a wind full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Well, now
It’s tough to be a Christian anywhere because the path is long and narrow. Other than that, Hagelin accurately describes the real persecution of Christians around the world. The much trumpeted persecution of Christians in this country is the same kind of baloney peddled by the likes of Jackson and Sharpton. It’s the gathering of tiniest pebbles and claiming they are an avalanche of boulders.

our brothers
We often forget our brothers and sisters who are risking their lives to follow Christ.

We support a missionary in India. These people are on the front lines, fighting the moslim goal of taking over the world.

Please ignore posters like Van and Warren Small. By discussing them or arguing with them, you are just giving them a forum from which to speak. When no one replies to them it just highlights the ignorance of their posts.

Hagelin is Right
We should all in our own way offer "a prayer of thanks for the blessing of living in a nation where you can worship freely" -- without persecution.

Well, now, take some time to look up about forced conversions of Jews and Muslims in Iberia in the 15th century, of native Americans by Conquistadors, and of Eastern Orthodox Serbs before being murdered by Croatian Ustaše during WWII.

And, AudiR10, "mewling and namecalling" are not persecution. Then ends times are not at hand.

CFUSMC
Well, all of those are facts. You can choose to believe or not to believe, but facts they are nevertheless.

Olasky gave Akinola the daniel of yhe Year award last year, at the same time news for proposed anti-gay law in Nigeria and Akiniola's supoort for it ws well known. Shaw Crouses praise for Ugandan mob rule ("resisting gay agneda") can be found on CWA website. barber's statement how Iranian teens deserved their fate has been removed. Hutcherson hatemongering trip to Eastern Europe while falsely pretending to be represeantative of white house and his endorsement for anti-gay violence of Christians was reported in Seattle area newspapers and in Dan Savage's blog.

FOF and FRC:s support for countries that detain, jail, torture and kill gays have been proven many times on their websites and their veneomous opposition to any attempots to address human rights violatiins against gays.

Warsaw hedl "International Congress of families" and same Shaw Crouse praised the Polish governmentattempt to purge all gays out of public offices... the list is endless.

So no sympathy for Christians that get similar treatment. After all those countries who kill Christians only "defend their traditional values".

Links Van
Provide links. Any idea how many columns Marvin Olasky has written? Where on the CWA website would I look for the supposed "proof" that you claim exists. Last time I checked Uganda wasn't ruled by a mob so how much else of what you claim to be true is in fact a misrepresentation or distortion of what was really reported?

It is written:
Rev 6:9-10
When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held.

And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?


Van
you should be counting your blessings that you live in a nation founded on Christian values that allow you the freedom to have whatever sexuality you were born with instead of executing you like the muslim countries and other cultures do. It shows how crippling militant homosexualtiy is to the soul of a person like you Van that you cannot have any compassion for truly innocent Christians that are persecuted for their faith. It shows a level of warped, selfish egocentrism that I fortunately rarely encounter. I pray, Van, that you can come to know the love of God in your life so you can finally live in peace with yourself and others.

nation founded on Christian values
You mean the common values Christianity was founded on?

CFUSMC
Your description of Van was PERFECT! (Sound and Fury) Apply it to Warren Midget and you have all the bases covered!

lonestarblues
No I mean Christian values. Christianity was not founded on "common values" it was founded on a person, Jesus of Nazereth, the Christ. His followers were "first called Christians at Antioch" as a derisive term meaning "little Christ's. There is no such thing as "common values" among non-believers as each one does what is right in his own eyes.

I knew
I could come in here and find lefties knocking a story about a simple prayer chain to pray for the ones in the world not allowed to. Pretty sad huh? That’s ok God loves you and wants us to pray for you Van and all the rest of your kind. I have always said, I will not stand up and argue against Gays and their lifestyle because that is between them and God. Funny I find most on here steadfast in their commendation of Iran hanging gays and you try to say we don’t care? That is the left's new way of arguing a point, that is to turn it around and make us to seem the villain. Truth is you are the one defending people like ImANutJob and he is a persecutor of gays and non believers. Like I said Sad, but we will try to put in a good word for you and yours!

HUNTER 2008!

CC
Jesus didn't say anything new. Nothing not already said by Hebrews before him as well as other cultures before and since. The Golden Rule, for instance, has in one form or another existed throughout history.

"There is no such thing as "common values" among non-believers as each one does what is right in his own eyes."

That can also be said of Christians of various denominations, sects, and personal beliefs. So common values have nothing to do with what you believe right in your own eyes. Common values are universal, like we are all equal before the law, we all have right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Please write more articles like this
Finally, an article about people outside the United States who are in trouble. Our media is so focused inward, always discussing the relatively small problems in the easy lives of Americans.

We don't think or hear enough about people who are in trouble around the world and how we can help. We need to hear about them more and keep them in mind. We have so much as Americans that we can use to help other people. Not only do we have money and resources to send to help people, but we can export our great heritage of freedom.

If we can learn about and understand our own political heritage well enough, then we can teach people how they can create a free government, with religious freedom. That is one of the great callings of America, to help others have our blessings of liberty.

lonestartblues
I rather think if you caer to read this article it is focused on the NOW and not the 15th century or other moments in history. Historical moments can be plucked to presecute or defend just about anything; our human history is fairly extensive on matters of religious zeal especially.
I don't recall who commented on the Christian Palestinians fleeing the West Bank, but it is not due to the Jews of Israel; it is due to the perpetual violence of their Muslim Palestinian neighbors (some of the violence directed at them and their kids). One should remember that until Islam invaded the "Holy Lands" in the 6th century AD, these lands were mostly populated by Christians and they have been driven away ever since by various means, some short of violent ones....recently it's just been a "mopping up" of the remains.
Lebanon until the 1980s was a majority Christian nation. It's why there is a Lebanon; it was created as an independent Christian enclave, and main home of the Druze, when Trans-Syria was carved up after WW1. It is just about lost to the Muslims now through their perpetual violence though. Many have fled, and more have been killed off.
Bigotry is very ugly when it defines you...Christian, Gay, Black, White, disabled, tatooed...........it's just ugly, Van, and it makes you just as ugly.

Melstrom
RgR that, sometimes we do forget how good we have it, and how hard the fight is gonna be to keep it from being taken away by the lefties and the ACLU.

charlie
I agree with you but my comment was to oh, well, who claimed "I have NEVER, EVER heard of a forced conversion to Christianity as I have to other religions." Then again WWII is not 15th century and Hagelin's examples are moments in history as well.

lonestarblues you said...
"Jesus didn't say anything new."
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you there even though it is true that Jesus was born a Jew and had exposure to Greek teachers in his early years after his parents had fled to Egypt, Jesus had many "new" things to say as he was the "Son of God" as well as a "son of man". The rabbis were astounded at his depth of understanding of the writings of the Hebrew law and prophets even at the age of 12. His claims that He was "the Way the Truth and the Life and noone comes to the Father except by me." were certainly new and he ended up being tried by the Jewish leaders for blashphemy because of his "new ideas". Even more than that what he DID was even more astounding than what he said...because he went about preaching, teaching and healing all that were oppressed by the devil...he was sinless and crucified for the sins of humanity... and rose again as he SAID he would. All that was definitely something new in the chain of human events we call history, don't you think?

But lonestarblues if as you said:
"Common values are universal, like we are all equal before the law, we all have right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness."
Tell me why is it the these "common rights" that you list and that are expressed in the Declaration of Independence and codified in our Constitution are evidently NOT universal. They are not evident in the peoples of Communist China or North Korea, not in Syria, Iran, Yeman, not in Africa or South America and not even universal in our oun country where right to life only applies to persons outside the womb and strong and vigorous enough to defend themselves from euthanasia?

CC
"How has Christianity evolved?"

"Jesus had many "new" things to say as he was the "Son of God" as well as a "son of man"...."the Way the Truth and the Life and noone comes to the Father except by me....preaching, teaching and healing...crucified...rose again..." etc etc.

Many people have claimed similar before, during and after Jesus. The question is what did he say that was unique. Not even the Golden Rule.

I am not, btw, denigrating your faith, for if it promotes these common virtues and values and morals then that is good.

As I initially posted, we should all in our own way offer "a prayer of thanks for the blessing of living in a nation where you can worship freely" -- without persecution -- and that is true whether we are believers or not.


"Tell me why is it the these "common rights" that you list and that are expressed in the Declaration of Independence and codified [sic, protected] in our Constitution are evidently NOT universal."

Do you not agree that there are universal moral absolutes? Then are you arguing that the fact no one follows them perfectly means they do not exist? Man is limited and corrupt. But these universal moral absolutes like life, liberty and property still exist. Is it the people of China, N Korea, Syria, Iran etc who reject these absolutes, or their leaders?

More Education
Check out Voice of the Martyrs

CC
I don't want to engage in a useless dialog, but the mission of Jesus Christ was known by THE ANCIENT prophets long before His birth. It will take to much time and space to get into great detail; however, if you study Luke Chapter 1 and pay attention to Zacharias message after the birth of John, you will note that he emphasizes that the coming of the Messiah was known and taught by ALL the prophets from the beginning. (Luke 1:67-80, especially verse 70.)

Remember also, that the angel told Zacharias that John would prepare the way for the Lord. Was this "new" news to the angel, or did the angel know at least one year before, or maybe two years before or maybe the angel knew it "long" before the birth of John or Jesus.

Also, you might want to consider Paul's words in Hebrew 3:14-19 and 4:1-2. Paul tells the Hebrews that the Gospel of Christ was taught to the Israelites after leaving Egypt, but they did not have sufficient faith to accept it. Verse 4:2 is very clear; the GOSPEL was taught; how many Gospels are there? One, is the correct answer.

There are numerous passages in both the Old and New Testaments that verify that the Gospel was NOT new, but was taught to Abraham, Enoch, (See Jude), Noah etal.

I hope you will give this serious thought and not jump at the conclusion that Paul or Zacharias were misled, or misspoke; they knew what they were saying.

Finally, remember that the Mission of the Savior was taught from the "scriptures." What scriptures did Philip, or Stephen, Paul or Christ have? They did NOT HAVE the New Testament, they only had the Old Testament; yet the spoke of Christ by the scriptures, or The Old Testament.

If you would like to continue this discussion, please let me know.

God speed.


'Gays'
'gays' have no rights to their sinful lifestyle. It's more than disgusting to watch their militant behavior when fighting for the 'right' to perversion. No matter how one may twist the verses in the Bible to suit their dispicable lifestyle, it is still overwhelmingly clear to anyone who wants to know the truth that homosexuality (sodomy) is an abomination to a Holy God.

Persecution in the US???
englishqueen01 writes: Thursday, September, 27, 2007 8:38 AM
And one additional point I strongly believe that even though the persecution we face in America is minimal compared to other nations, it's IMPERATIVE we nip this problem in the bud before it becomes as tragic - or worse - than what's going on elsewhere. "

As a Christian in the United States of America, I must sincerely ask, where do you live that you feel you are persecuted for your Christian beliefs? I have always been a Christian, have lived and traveled in many parts of this country, attended church in many places, and have NEVER felt threatened. I can attend my church every day, if that is what I choose. I just cannot understand such statements. Truly, there are those Christians in other parts of the world who are persecuted. They practice their Christian belief as great risk to their lives. But, I don't believe they are afraid of dying for Christ, because as true Christians we are not afraid of death.
Exactly what are we nipping in the bud in this country regarding our Christianity? Let us be real here. Not one of us has ever been threatened, jailed, beaten, or persecuted because we believe and follow Christ. But do remember, that since Christ declared that he was the son of God, those who followed Him (and Christ himself) have been persecuted.
Yes, we do need to remember to pray for do God's work in dangerous countries and support those who spread Christianity in the world, some in very hostile environments. Those who become missionaries know that when they go into such countries, they put their lives at risk. But they know that God is always with them, regardless of what happens. But please, stop the martyrdom of being a Christian in the US. It just isn't so and to do so lessens the value of those who actually do risk their lives to worship as Christians and spreak the word or God.

US Christians
We fight the "pebbles" to avoid the avalanche. Although, I am told that Chinese Christians have a prayer on behalf of US Christians -- "Let them be persecuted" -- because of the depth and breadth of faith that grows under persecution. Prayer is a mighty shield. May the name of Christ continue to "seek and to save the lost" (Lk 19:10) as we fulfill His Commission (Matt. 28:19-20).

lonestarblue
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." John 14:6

That's just ONE of the unique and new things Jesus said. The contention you make is clearly from one who has never read the Bible with anything more than cursory attention.

tenore
I don't disagree with anything you have said in your post. My post was responding to lonestarblues statement that nothing Jesus said was new. Jesus did say he came not to abolish the law and the prophets but to fullfill it. That was a NEW statement and NEWS to the religious leaders of the day. Jesus's claim to be the Messiah was a fullfillment of the ancient prophecies of the messiah but his own did not even recognize Him for who he is and as I said they nailed Him to a tree for blasphemy. I agree that Jesus was not new to God (since He was the one who spoke to the prophets in the first place) but the arrival of Jesus not as a conquering king who would kick out the Romans out of Judea, but as a suffering servant that was the redeemer kinsmen was new to mankind.

aurorawatcher
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." John 14:6

you "That's just ONE of the unique and new things Jesus said. The contention you make is clearly from one who has never read the Bible with anything more than cursory attention."

Read it. Now, do you seriously think Jesus was the only one to claim he was the way, the truth, the life and the son of God to boot? Many religions claim that.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-14.

lonestarblues said to aurorawatcher
"Now, do you seriously think Jesus was the only one to claim he was the way, the truth, the life and the son of God to boot? Many religions claim that."
Yes I do actually. That's why I am called a Christian...I believe the gospel message. No other religion has as it's cornerstone a person who claimed to be the Son of God and backed it up by going willingly to the cross to die for the sins of humanity and rose from the dead as he claimed he would. If you have many other religions in mind that also claim this for their foundation why not name a few for us?

sunny writes:
"As a Christian in the United States of America, I must sincerely ask, where do you live that you feel you are persecuted for your Christian beliefs?"
You really directed this to englishqueen01...but I felt compelled to put my 2 cents in on this point. Jesus addressed the type of perscecution U.S. Christians are receiving in today's anti-Christian era that has been going on ever since Christ's arrival over 2,000 years ago. In his sermon on the Mountin the Beatitudes he said this..."Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall SAY all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. Matthew 5:11-12. He then went on to instruct the people to be the salt of the earth and not to hide their light under a bushel. Christians are different from the world. If we conform to the world mindset then we have lost our savor and as Jesus put it we are not good for anything except to be trampled underfoot. The persecution of Christians in the U.S. is in it's infancy. It only costs Christian's a little now (mocking and reviling for our belief in Christ), but that often progresses to beatings, inprisonment and even death (see examples in the life of Paul the Apostle. But even if it progresses to that point we are reminded by Peter that the "same sufferings are experienced by the brotherhood in the world" and we shouldn't be a bit surprised when it happens to us "a servant is not better than his master."

lonestarblues asked
"How has Christianity evolved?"
Since Jesus Christ has not changed, He is.." the same yesterday, today and forever" then faith in the person of Christ cannot "evolve" it just "is". The only thing that changes for the Christian is maturing in the faith from "babes" in Christ to mature believers that results from a deepening our our relationship to Jesus, Our Heavenly Father though the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
You also asked, "Do you not agree that there are universal moral absolutes?" I most certainly do believe in moral absolutes but I believe they come from God not man. Jesus said , "there is none that do good, only God" (paraphrased). Mankind has no authority to set moral absolutes because none can claim to be "good" or to be a moral authority because,.."all have sinned and come short of the glory of God". The other reason is that mankind has yet to agree on "universal moral principles" what is taboo in one society is OK with another, or what is OK for one individual is an anathema to another. Do you see why I said, what the bible says "every way of a man is right in his own eyes"

CC
Seems to me you're looking to win an argument, any argument, so you keep changing the goal posts. You claimed to begin with ths nation was founded on Christian values, to which I responded those are common values. You then change your argument from Christian values to Jesus, to which I responded he didn't say anything new. Nw you change your argument to crucifixion being unique, to which I'll say, nothing unique there, common ancient method of execution.

Now to my question "How has Christianity evolved?" you reply with something else altogether about Christ not changing but Christians changing in the sense of maturing. Christianity, though, has undergone a great deal of speciation: Jewish Christians, Pauline Christians, and Gnostic Christians, the second surviving as Catholic, dividing into Roman Catholic and Eastern orthodox, the first of those schisming into Protestant, Mennonites, Amish, Anabaptist, and the first of those into dozens of denominations and thousands of sects, right on down to individuals of no affiliation--all claiming to be the one true followers of Christ. Such is religious freedom.

"I most certainly do believe in moral absolutes but I believe they come from God not man."

I disagree with both, they derive not from God or any one man, for both lead to moral relativism. No, morals came from mankind. Man must employ reason to discover and understand them as natural law. Divine law from an unlimited and perfect Lawmaker, we, limited and corrupt, cannot know. Now if you want to believe natural law came from God, as you personally conceive Him, that's fine, it's your religious freedom, no one will persecute you for it--to get back to the topic.

Attack on Christianity
After the fall of the Soviets, the Regime has taken up the world leadership behind the scenes of the struggle against the last bastions of Christianity on the planet led by the U.S.A. ...

The Apocalypse said that the stealth beast would use cheating, killing, spying, coercion and bribery, and economic deprivation to subjugate all nations. This appears perfectly descriptive of the Regime.

Above is a quote from “Behold, 666 is here”. For more details, please click
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/chow051007.htm

The "Cotton Mather Syndrome..."
...has spread even to the "Last Days" believers, it seems. They see the Book of Revelation unfolding in everything around them. I think that they're overdoing it, and that it cheapens the value of real Scriptural study and debate.

Even So, Come Quickly
Many times, mental persecution is far worse than physical persecution.

Although it may not seem like it at the time, persecution is good for the Church. It's easy for us to fall in love with the things of this world. But Christ's kingdom is "not of this world." John 18:36. The purpose of persecution is to keep us looking heavenward. Death is nothing more than an entrance into that kingdom that is not of this world.

The Church is in most peril when she is not under any persecution. Then she grows fat with false doctrine and false teachers like she has in this country. But tribulation is a fire that burns off the dross real fast. "Even so, come (quickly-GG), Lord Jesus." Revelation 22:20.


Isaiah 51:
12 I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die, and of the son of man which shall be made as grass;
13 And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?

Gary Gordon


lonestarblues
"It is accomplished" Jesus (Jn. 19:30)


lonestarblues
so we agree to disagree. So be it, my posts were designed not to win an arguement but to simply give my opinion based on my Christian worldview, concepts that are unfamiliar to your humanistic worldview, but I'm glad we had the discussion. God bless you.

CC, lonestar, etal
Part 1

It was interesting to follow your comments. I can honestly say that I find some elements in each post that I can agree to. It is a phenomenal fact that there are so many similarities if you compare Christ's teachings with Zarathrustra, Guru Nanek, Buddha and many other great world religion leaders.

Why are there so many parallels?

Consider the following chain of events with me.

For the benefit of those who may not have faith in Biblical teachings, please bear with me and just for the sake of clarity, let's assume that the story of the flood and Noah's salvation are true. I believe it is true, but I recognize that not everyone does. So be it.

Now let's assume that one of Noah's sons, Shem, was a forefather of Abraham and that Abraham was a chosen prophet and that he had received the gospel from Shem, who received it from Noah. Noah received it from his fathers, including the great prophet Enoch.

Now Enoch was a very favored man of The Lord; he was so righteous that the Lord took him from the earth, and as Paul says, Enoch did not taste death, but was "translated." It seems obvious that Enoch knew of Christ.

Next we have Abraham, with whom the Lord makes a very important covenant. But there was another very great prophet, a contemporary of Abraham, to whom Abraham went and paid tithes. His name was Melchizedek. And, as Paul says in Hebrews, Abraham received a blessing from him.

cc. etal
Part 2.

The people of Abraham's time, in other areas, were drifting into idolatry and other sinful practices, and even Abraham's father, Terah was an idolater.

So what happened within a period of two hundred years after the flood?

The truth of the gospel was, in many cases, distorted by those who did not obey God's commandments. But as they started to fall away, they kept some of the teachings of the gospel, but lost the prophetic power to commune with God. And, in so doing, they drifted away from the full truth, but retained some of the ideas of the gospel. This, I summit, was the origin of many of the other religions. Yes, they did teach some truths, but lost many others.

When those of you who argued that moral absolutes were found in non-Israelite religions, It makes perfect sense to attribute these moral truths as a by-product of the true teachings of Shem and his descendants, including Abraham and later, Moses.


cc, etal
Part 3

This does not address the other two sons of Noah, but there are many "traditions" of a secular nature that relate to these two branches of the House of Noah.

A careful study of both the Old and New Testaments will shed light on just how knowledgeable Moses was; remember Moses was a direct descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel).

I know this is long, and I am breaking it up in three segments. If this puts you to sleep, then I may have been of SOME benefit.

God bless this great country.

Why the Romans fed them to the lions
Believer writes:
"'gays' have no rights to their sinful lifestyle. It's more than disgusting to watch their militant behavior when fighting for the 'right' to perversion. No matter how one may twist the verses in the Bible to suit their dispicable lifestyle, it is still overwhelmingly clear to anyone who wants to know the truth that homosexuality (sodomy) is an abomination to a Holy God."
-----------
Perhaps this attitude is why the Christians are less than welcome in other lands (just substitute "Muslim," "Hindu," "Jew" or whatever for "Gay.")

I am sick and tired of Christians mewling on about some vast conspiracy about the world being out to get them, especially since they never tire of trying to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.

Mary C.

WTF are you talking about here?
Please translate this (if possible) into normal peoples' English. It appears to be Crazy Talk.

Mary C.

______

Charles writes: Attack on Christianity
After the fall of the Soviets, the Regime has taken up the world leadership behind the scenes of the struggle against the last bastions of Christianity on the planet led by the U.S.A. ...

The Apocalypse said that the stealth beast would use cheating, killing, spying, coercion and bribery, and economic deprivation to subjugate all nations. This appears perfectly descriptive of the Regime.

Above is a quote from “Behold, 666 is here”. For more details, please click
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/chow051007.htm


Well
the countries that hunt down and persecute Christians only defend their traditional values and way of life. Hagelin uses precusely the same arguments when endorsing persecution of gays.

Christians expert anti-gay hatred, support human rights violations against gays in thisrd world countries, defend them openly in UN and remain silent when gays get tortured or killed in hands of extremist muslims.

Several columnists of Townhall have endorsed human rights violations abroad and openly praised them. hagelin and others are just hypoctites who whine about human rights violatioons against their people but openly advocate for dteainment, killing and tortture of gays in Africa and Asia or former socialist countries where Christians have actively experted anti-gay hatred (people like Scott Lively and Ken Hutcherson) who have gone there to encourage neonazis and extremist Christians to violence against gays.

There isn't such atrocity against gays that wouldn't please Hagelin. the more gay teens tey hang in Iran happier Chrisan extremists are.

Van
You never provided any proof to your previous duplicious claims. Provide links to back up your absurd claims. This column has nothing to do with gays. They weren't even mentioned in this article.

Links to the endorsement of human right violations? Provide them.
Links to the open endorsement of detainment, killing and torture of gays? Provide them.

You can't provide links because they don't exist except in your warped mind. The fact of the matter remains that you hate Christians with as much hatred as the Islamists, communists, Hindus and other extremists that murder them.

CFUSC
I did

Janice Shaw Crouses bleating and cheering for mobs attacking gay organization in Uganda can be found on their website. Olasky rewarding Akinola with title "Daniel of the Year" can be found on his magazine's website. Lively's attachment to Russian neonazi groups in Latvia can be found in OneNews and his own website. Hutcherson has removed from his website all mentions about his tour as "special envoy of family matters" in Baltic countries just before Christians attacked Gay Prides... he lied about his status but he encouraged "fighting gays agenda with all means necessary". The Christian in audience chose hammers. You can dig up that stuff from Dan Savage's website.

Concerned women of America, Focus on White Families and Family Research Council have in sevaral occasions boasted how they have blocked attempts to address human right violations agansit gays in UN. Shaw Crouse has stated in many times how countries should deal with gays as they see fit (i.e. even torturing or killing them) according to their "tradition". Matt Barber saw no probellm with Iran executing gay teens (after all he fantasizes about doing the same ething here in his wet dreams).

The demigod of American evengelicals, archbishop Akinola of Nigeria supports law that would put gays in jail for 15 years and woul make befriending and bheping openbly gay person a crime punishable with prison sentence up thó five years.

Crouse has cherished stifling political rights of gays and imprisonment of gay activists in Uganda.... read and find out yourself.

Ohm and I donä't hate Christians. I LOOOOOOVE them precisely in the same manner than Christians "love" gays. With one exception though: Christians lie, I tell the truth.

CC
"so we agree to disagree. So be it, my posts were designed not to win an arguement but to simply give my opinion based on my Christian worldview, concepts that are unfamiliar to your humanistic worldview, but I'm glad we had the discussion. God bless you."

Humanist view? Sorry but I clearly stated I disagree with that view as I do yours. I clearly stated, or thought I did, that given the evolution, the speciation of Christianity, from united world view down to individualistic personal belief, that yours is indistinguishable from a humanistic philosophy in terms of moral relativism. You worship God, the humanists the State, but the foundational faith is the same. We more than disagree. May your personal God, whatever that is, bless you, too.

Tenore2
Your theory is interesting, a bit complex, and too Bible-centric. You need to account for the history that took place prior to and during but outside the Bible, and its influences on Judaism, and later Christianity.

I suggest Susan Wise Bauer's recent _The History of the Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome_. Karen Armstrong's _A History of God_ is another.

I say this without at all dismissing or disrespecting the great influence of Judaism on the world, nor Christianity's.

Persecution of Christians...
in the US does exist but it is minimal. Recently a church in New Jersey was cited for violating the state civil rights laws for not allowing a lesbian couple to be married in their sanctuary. In fact the state contends that because they do not keep anyone out it is not a private organization but public and therefore they must allow such a thing. As a result of this action this church is not tax exempt. The tax exemption status is threatened and sometimes used.

Also, recently a man was arrested for trying to spread the word. It was apparent that he was not being aggressive but this municipality had a law agasinst offending others. It was used and he was cited.

A good number of instiuttions of higher learning place restrictions on Chrisitians that they would not dare place on other religions.

Consider that in Sweden a few preachers are doing time for quoting scripture regarding the sinful nature of homosexuality. The homo promo groups want similar hate law legislation in the USA so that one cannot criticize the homo life style. Canada is another example. Quoting scripture regarding homosexuality in Canada is considered a violation of criminal law under the hate speech statutes.

Brujo Balnco
You might want to check the facts before you spread the slanderous lies you've been spoonfed by lying Christian advocacy groups.

1) The Church lost the tax exemption because the basis of tax exemption was that the area was open and available to all public. They lost the tax exemption only for that property. The Church and others want to make it sound like anti_cxhristian discrimination but it's not. They broke the law.

2) NOT ONE PREACHER IS DOING TIME IN SWEDEN OR CANADA for preaching against gays. Not one. You lie and you spread lies. Are you proud of te fact that you're a vicious liar?

3) About that arrest: without details impossible to say but I am willing to bet that the man was harassing and attcking people and behaved in aggressive manner. I've seen people like him and they all deserve to be jailed so that they can learn some manners with their bullhorns.

4) What restrictions apply only to Christians and in which institutions of "higher learning" or are you just spreading AFA talking points and slanderous lies again?

lonestar
I wasn't talking about Judaism; Judeaism came long after Abraham, and Melchizidek was not a member of the Abraham lineage.

I'm discussing the theory of dispersion. That occurs when groups of people who hasve the same faith, but when split off and relocate, there is a definite potential for teachings to be distorted. This is especially true when the life styles change due to loss of knowledge.

A classic example is that of Ishmael, Abraham's son by Hagar. Ishmael's descendants were certainly not Judaists. However, one of Ishmael's descendants turns out to be the father-in-law of Moses.

I'm sorry if this is too complex, it is not possible to go into great detail. If you will logto my blog "Tenore" we could carry this dialog on in greater detail. It's up to you.

Thanks for responding.

Moral relativism
lonestarblues: Your statement that Christians(who believe that God Who is over and above us has given us moral absolutes)espouse moral relativism makes no sense. You believe that morality comes from mankind, but not from man. How can this be?? The term "mankind" denotes all human beings collectively, does it not? Please explain your position. It is you who adhere to moral relativism, not Christians. If "mankind" determines morality, it is still purely subjective, as each individual interprets "natural law" for himself. And what is "natural law" anyway? You assert that mankind is limited and corrupt. Where did you get that from? I agree with you on that, but I base my belief on God's Word. What authority are you appealing to? Without the belief in a transcendant God Who created mankind and therefore has the right to lay down the law to us, discussions of morality cannot emerge beyond the realm of mere opinion. CC's comment that, without God, everyone does what is right in his own eyes, still holds true.
You wrote that Christianity is schismatic. Individual Christians may differ on doctrinal issues, but that in no way negates the validity of Christianity or the veracity of Scripture. If a "Christian" belief contradicts the Bible it is not Christian at all. Biblical Christianity is centered upon one book, the Bible, and nothing else. The real question here is: Is the Bible truly the ispired Word of God?

Tenore
"I'm discussing the theory of dispersion. That occurs when groups of people who hasve the same faith, but when split off and relocate, there is a definite potential for teachings to be distorted. This is especially true when the life styles change due to loss of knowledge."

OK, that clarifies. Thanks. My comment was more related to your examples being all Bible-related, but now I understand better what you meant, yes, over time, as people disperse, and mingle with others, other cultures, there original beliefs change. Distortions from the original, perhaps, enhancements, just as well--certainly the Christian would argue Christianity an enhancement over Judaism.

That was my point as well on the evolution of Christianity and its many divisions (speciations).

SMC
"Your statement that Christians(who believe that God Who is over and above us has given us moral absolutes)espouse moral relativism makes no sense."

Then you did not see my explanation of the evolution of Christianity into 10s of 1000s if not individual personal beliefs, each claiming to be the one true Scotsman.

See also my discussion with Tenore.

"You believe that morality comes from mankind, but not from man. How can this be?? "

I just mean it did not come from a man. That would be moral relativism, just as much as any individual personal belief.

When I say morality came from man, plural, mankind, I mean it in the sense that Adam Smith and David Hume, Mises and Hayek and Rothbard meant it. Moral absolutes transcend any one man as emergent, evolutionary guides to who we should interact with one another. Now, as with anyone of them, neither do I deny the important influence of religion, of, in particular, Judaism or Christianity, but neither do I deny the equally great influence of classical Greek and Roman philosophy, nor that of the renaissance in science and economics and political thought.

No, universal moral absolutes are objective, not subjective. These are what we call natural law. Natural law theory, from Stoics, to Aquinas, to Rothbard, and others, holds these laws to be what man can discover and understand by right reason and rational inquiry, divine law that which we cannot know. As such, your beliefs, which you have every right to hold, even if you are correct, do not add to what we as men know as moral absolutes.

"What authority are you appealing to?"

Common sense.

Appeals to authority are logical fallacies.

"Is the Bible truly the ispired Word of God?"

What is your concept of God?

Tolerance not logical
It's not logical that people who are religious, for whom the most basic, frightening truths of existence are answered by their religion, will be very tolerant of others who profess different beliefs that strike at the very core of their psychological security. The world around us and history tell us different story of continuing intolerance, as in the following joke:

Die, heretic scum!!

I was walking across a bridge one day and I saw a man standing on a ledge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! Don't do it!"

"Why shouldn't I?" he said.

"Well, there's so much to live for."

"Like what?"

"Well, are you religious?" He said yes. I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"

"Christian." "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"

"Protestant." "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"

"Baptist." "Wow, me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?"

"Reformed Baptist Church of God." "Me too. Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1789 or Reformed Baptist Church of God, 1915?"

He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, Reformation of 1915."

I said, "Die, heretic scum!!" And pushed him off the bridge.

-- Emo Phillips.

comon sense?
whose sense? Who defines common? Who defines sense?

LONESTAR, JAYHUB
Again, thanks for your reply.

Jayhub; that is a great example of how things can change over time, just as Lonestar states.

The Christian practices from the time of Paul until the time of the reformation were changed drastically. That was the main reason for a "reform" by Luther and others. They recognized that the church (and please, this is not a criticism of the Catholic Church as it is today)of the 1500 and 1600 periods was not the same as in the time of the Apostles.

And, as Jayhub illustrates, there are so many variations of some of the churches that were part of the reformation that the apostles of old would tear out their hair in despair. (Humm, hair vs. despair, humm.)

So where do we go now? May I invite you both and anyone else who desires to do so, to help me with posts to the "Tenore" blog?

By the way, I am also Tenore2;I have another email at my home, this one is from my office.

I have an excellent doctor, who is treating me for what they thought originally was cancer, but he determined that it was something much less serious. He is one of the most spiritual person I have met. He is also one of only 120,000 followers of Zarathrustra, they are known as Zoroastrians. The parallel between their teachings and Jews and Christians is remarkable.

I hope that we can seriously investigate the variety of religious disciplines, and both of you and "CC" would be welcomed. We will probably not agree on many issues, but mutual understanding is not only beneficial, but it is also "fun!"

Have a great day.

Verbivore
Hiya! Bought that ESV like you recommended. A bit stilted in places, and not sure I understand all the footnotes about Hebrew wording, but easier to read than KJV.

"comon sense? whose sense? Who defines common? Who defines sense?"

Our common sense. We define it, along with those who came before, for those who follow. The kind of common sense that says if you disagree let's hear it--since you didn't say I have to assume from previous discussion...

You may see it coming ultimately from your conception of God, I may see it coming from my conception of our nature and traditions, but yours must come through mine.

Tenore
Thanks for invite but my opine time is limited to brief exchange. Glad to hear your cancer proved less serious!

Zoroastrians are interesting in comparison and contrast, though I know little there.

One question, while the Catholic Church eventually capitulated on some of Luther's concerns, was his reform reform? Or remake? His attitude toward Jews was, after all, abhorrent, and not aligned with Jesus' teaching as I understand it.

lonely star
glad to hear it! Glad you find it easier to read than KJV. That's very true!

Oh, I thought of another book, but for the life of me I can't think of the title right now!

Regarding sense. I guess what I'm thinking is that if we say "we" (mankind) decide collectively what is moral, we run into the problem of whom to follow. Or whose culture is "right." I don't understand how we could even agree on what right is, or even what it means to be "right."

There are so many cultures, some cultures encourage polygamy, others enjoy cannabalism, while others have varying views and penalties for theft, or murder, or lying. So how then do you know?

How does one determine a moral absolute that transcends culture, religion, governments?

Actually, what do you mean when you say moral absolute? Is a moral absolute something that is true for everyone, or just Americans?

(Oh, yet another book...Total Truth: Liberating Christianity From it's Cultural Captivity by Nancy Pearcey...now here's a book you'll have fun with!)

Verbivore
The distortion of my name is not very respectful, it's cheap.

"Regarding sense. I guess what I'm thinking is that if we say "we" (mankind) decide collectively what is moral, we run into the problem of whom to follow. Or whose culture is 'right.'"

Yes, as long as you conceive of mankind as a man. But you know that is not what I am saying. A very simple analogy would be Americans voting for representatives. Not exactly but if you understand that, and, no doubt, support that, you come closer to understanding how mankind decides these things. At least we can go from there.

Polygamy is being discussed in another thread.

Cannibalism. Why do you a believer and I who lacks your belief agree that is morally wrong?

"varying views and penalties for theft, or murder, or lying"

Are you saying there are some who see theft, murder or lying as morally good? Or is all you're saying is that people interpret morals differently? How is that an argument for anything?

"How does one determine a moral absolute that transcends culture, religion, governments?"

By the only means available to man(kind). Right reason and rational inquiry.

"Actually, what do you mean when you say moral absolute? Is a moral absolute something that is true for everyone, or just Americans?"

Declaration says all men. How can I say better?

I remembered!
the other book. The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life by Armand M. Nicholi Jr.

And it's not even written by a Christian. (at least I don't think he professes such) but the author is a professor at Harvard and has taught this class for several years.

He makes no claims. Just presents things both men said regarding God and the existence of. But pieces it toghther into a coherent "conversation."

This is what of my favorite books we've done in the book club.

before I even read
Sorry Lonestar. I wasn't trying to be disrespectful, honest! I just entertain myself by playing with subjects and names. I won't do it again, I swear!

Now to read what you wrote....:(

cannibalism
"Cannibalism. Why do you a believer and I who lacks your belief agree that is morally wrong?"

Exactly. Why? I say it is because we all bear the "image of God" and have in our very being, written upon our hearts, an understanding of what is right and what is wrong.

You say it's natural selection?

Yes, there are cultures who value these things. But when redeemed through faith in Jesus Christ, suddenly these very actions become as abhorrent to them as they are to us in our "civilized" society.

Here's a true story. Some missionaries went to the jungles of New Guinea (I think it has a different name now), but they presented the Gospel. The natives found the story of JUDAS, very compelling. They loved his betrayal!

The missionaries struggled to find a way to explain Jesus sacrifice. And to put the Words of God into their language. No easy task as they also had no written language.

The people had a tradition of sacrificing a baby to make peace between warring villages. Overtime, the missionaries were inspired to use this redemptive analogy to explain Jesus. He was their Peace Child.

It turned the people around. Finding redemption in Jesus Christ, transformed the culture....and saved a lot of babies from sacrifice!

Yes, some cultures, admire lying, theft, and murder.

Oh, the complete story can be found in Peace Child by Don Richardson.




declaration
regarding the declaration. I assume you mean the declaration of Independence? Yes, it says "all men," but that sentiment is by no means universal.

China for example. Iran for another.

Must their morals align with American morals?

I'm troubled by the idea that you compare it to a vote. That would mean the majority rules. That seems subjective.

In my experience, the majority is often wrong!

Zarathrustra
seriously?

Verbivore, Lonestar, etal
Yes, though I misspelled it. It should be Zarathustra.

You can learn some of the "traditions" about him by googling his name. Or, maybe you know more than you are letting on.

I agree with one aspect of your posts; that is that I believe all "mankind" are born with a certain amount of conscience and can feel guilty even as they may practice that which is against their innate character.

Just so that there is no misunderstanding, I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. As such, I am thoroughly comfortable with subjects dealing with the reformation. As you may know, we believe in a "restoration", not a reformation, and that such a position can be supported if, and only if, there are prophets who live today.

It is always amazing to me, that Christians and Jews (among others) can accept ancient prophets but not modern day prophets. For a Christian, the words of Christ about the Jews killing their prophets and not accepting them until long after their deaths, is a character flaw in this day.

I know I will be taken to task about my belief that Joseph Smith was a true prophet, but his message was certainly far less unbelievable than that a "man" was killed on a cross but was able to come back to life. I happen to know that Christ's resurrection was in fact, a real event. And, I have no hesitation in declaring that Joesph Smith was who he declared himself to be.

So fire away! And may we all be kind to one another.

lonestar
Luther certainly had some ideas that I cannot accept. But his fight against indulgences for a fee was very much in the best interests of both the Catholics and the multiple "reformed" groups.

I still get a laugh out of Jayhub's story.

Lonestarblues
lonestarblues writes:
Thursday,September, 27, 2007 12:09 PM

Jesus didn't say anything new.

Bipsy Quee writes:
Thursday, September, 27, 2007 9:05 PM


"It is accomplished" Jesus (Jn. 19:30)

excellent point,
Bipsy quee. I was thinking the same thing. What translation are you using? Most translations read, "It is finished."

Verbivore
Interlinear Greek.

And honest reading comprehension skills. ;)

Verbivore
"The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life by Armand M. Nicholi Jr."

Seems to argue a false dichotomy by leaving a third line of thought out of the argument. You have your Christian line of thought in Lewis and your liberal or humanist line of thought in Freud--the latter line begins with Plato and travels through French philosophers like Rousseau and Condorcet and leads to Marx and Freud. The third line of thought I'll simply call the skeptical conservative line that begins with Socrates and Aristotle and travels through English philosophers like Adam Smith and David Hume and leads to founders of the modern conservative movement like Mises and Hayek (whom I should credit with laying out these lines in _Fatal Conceit_ and _Constitution of Liberty_).

As I argued above, both the religious line, ignoring our nature, and the humanist line, ignoring our traditions, lead to moral relativism. The skeptical conservative line follows reason, but grounded in our nature and guided by tradition.

Of course I'm only going by the title, and also knowing Lewis commits the same error in _Mere Christianity_.

Verbivore
You'd raised the issue of cannibalism.

I responded "Cannibalism. Why do you a believer and I who lacks your belief agree that is morally wrong?"

Now you "Exactly. Why? I say it is because we all bear the "image of God" and have in our very being, written upon our hearts, an understanding of what is right and what is wrong. You say it's natural selection?"

No, following Adam Smith, our natural moral sentiments. Our morals must be grounded in our nature to exist and be understood at all. You might argue God created that nature but that adds nothing any explanation of our agreeing cannibalism is wrong, for as you say "there are cultures who value these things", cultures that existed before and outside Christianity.

I don't find the New Guinea story very compelling regarding God as the source of morals. All it really says is that people can use analogy to understand something foreign to them.

"Yes, some cultures, admire lying, theft, and murder."

For example?

Verbivore
"regarding the declaration. I assume you mean the declaration of Independence? Yes, it says "all men," but that sentiment is by no means universal. China for example. Iran for another. Must their morals align with American morals?"

As I said in earlier discussion about this, you need to distinguish government from people. Not even our government lives up to the moral ideal of equality before the law. That says little about whether the people of the US, China and Iran do not hold hope in such a moral standard.

"I'm troubled by the idea that you compare it to a vote. That would mean the majority rules. That seems subjective. In my experience, the majority is often wrong!"

If you recall I said not exactly like voting. No matter what analogy I use it will not be exact bcause the insight of analogy is derived from a juxtaposition of similarities and differences. Voting fits because everyone has a voice, but fails because it imposes a majority rule. Not to say that historically that is not how some traditions have survived. Still, voting in a republic like ours where certain fundamental rights are protected makes for a better analogy.

A better example for the evolution of moral standards is found in the market system. I'll assume you're familiar with Leonard Reed's "I, Pencil". Good example of a complex, dynamical system that simply was not designed by one or a few elites. It is an order evolved and emerged, as Hayek puts it, spontaneously. Just substitute market place of ideas.

Again, you might argue God is the source and again I will argue that adds no explanatory power to how man comes to discover and understand moral absolutes.

Tenore2
That would make an interesting topic: What constitutes a prophet? Was Jesus just another prophet? Was Joseph Smith? Seems to me it boils down to a man declaring himself to be and convincing others to step beyond reason and have faith in him.

"So fire away! And may we all be kind to one another."

Not from me. Not need to denigrate other beliefs to elevate mine. I believe people have an unaleiable liberty of conscience, and so, even lacking any of you all's faith, I accept you all's beliefs for what they are, even respect all for conviction and learning and discussion, so long as they contribute good and do no harm. As Goldwater put it "To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable."

Bipsy Quee
me "Jesus didn't say anything new."

you "'It is accomplished' Jesus (Jn. 19:30)"

Noticed but still await your point.

Keep in mind the context of my statement had to do with ethical virtues and values, man's moral relation to his fellow man. His relation to God is another concept which needs definition before it can be discussed.

lonestarblues said:
"Appeals to authority are logical fallacies"

Then you are guilty of a logical fallacy. The authorities you appeal to are common sense, the theory of evolution, the theories of various philosophers, and "right reason and rational inquiry". These ideas were formulated by other men, whom you acknowledge to be fallible. The authority I appeal to is that of God, Who created the very minds with which we reason. Without recourse to this omniscient Being, we have no hope of ever figuring out what truth is.

You asked, "What is your concept of God?"

God is not a "concept" that I have conjured up within my own mind or an "individual personal belief". If He were, you would be correct in stating that I am a moral relativist. My knowledge of God comes from an external source that has passed every test for being divinely inspired- the Holy Bible. It is objective truth, written down in black and white for all mankind to refer to. It alone transcends culture, time, and place.

lonestarblues said:
"Appeals to authority are logical fallacies"

Then you are guilty of a logical fallacy. The authorities you appeal to are common sense, the theory of evolution, the theories of various philosophers, and "right reason and rational inquiry". These ideas were formulated by men, whom you acknowledge to be fallible. The authority I appeal is that of God, Who created the very minds with which we reason. If there is such an omniscient Being, recourse to Him would be our only hope for figuring out what truth is. Without Him, it is useless - everything inevitably boils down to subjectivity.

You asked, "What is your concept of God?"

God is not a "concept" I conjured up within my own mind or an "individual personal belief". If He were, you would be correct in labeling me a moral relativist. However, my knowledge of God comes from an external source that has passed every test for being divinely inspired - the Holy Bible. It is an objective document, written down for all mankind to refer to. Its truth alone transcends culture, time, and place.

SMC
"Then you are guilty of a logical fallacy.... These ideas were formulated by men, whom you acknowledge to be fallible."

Ideas, and means or methods, like reason, are not authorities. I cite philosophers not as authorities but because their names evoke certain ideas people are familiar with.

"The authority I appeal is that of God, Who created the very minds with which we reason."

I understand that is your belief. I note you accept your belief as a hypothesis: "If there is such an omniscient Being...."

Reason is the means of discovering and understanding universal moral absolutes, however poorly we limited and corrupt creatures manage to arrive at them.

If you want to tack onto the beginning of that the notion God created them, go ahead. But then if they were created they are not universal or absolute.

"God is not a "concept" I conjured up within my own mind or an "individual personal belief". If He were, you would be correct in labeling me a moral relativist. However, my knowledge of God comes from an external source that has passed every test for being divinely inspired - the Holy Bible. It is an objective document, written down for all mankind to refer to. Its truth alone transcends culture, time, and place."

So you have no concept of God? What is it the Bible reveals then? What is it you put faith in?

And, please do not twist my words, I did not label you personally a moral relativist. I said, as a general observation, that, given the myriad of Christian sects and beliefs, on down to individuals, it too leads to moral relativism.

Even the very concept that morals were created leads to moral relativism. IOW, are actions good because God commands them or does your God command them because they are good?

lonestarblues
"Keep in mind the context of my statement had to do with ethical virtues and values, man's moral relation to his fellow man. His relation to God is another concept which needs definition before it can be discussed."

Understood.

But it is the context within which He spoke them that makes them different than anything else anyone else ever said. They cannot be disconnected and still be relevant to anyone's life.

penciled in
“As I said in earlier discussion about this, you need to distinguish government from people.”

I distinguish government from people! Which is why I take issue with your using the American Constitution for what constitutes “Common sense.” Our constitution is just that, ours. It does not transcend cultures or times, the Bible however, the Word of God, does.

I, Pencil…. “Man can no more direct these millions of know-hows to bring me into being than he can put molecules together to create a tree.” And likewise, Man can no more direct or control humanity to follow a system of morals agreeable to all.

The story I gave you, stands as an example of a culture where cannibalism, lying, theft, and murder are revered. Pick any jungle community and you will find similar morality.
Interesting that you say “cultures that existed before and outside Christianity.”

Are you saying Christianity has had a redemptive affect on culture? Why would that be if it is true that “Our morals must be grounded in our nature to exist?”

Too all
Part 1
I don't know how much longer this "thread" will continue. But I find it most interesting.

Lonestar; I recognize that you are not prone to be negative, in fact, each of you in the last few posts make excellent points. (I was going to use the word "arguement" but realize it could be misunderstood."

So I now press my luck a little further. There are three questions that I would like to pose; I'm fairly sure they are not new, but I hope to describe more fully, the concept of "inherrent" values.

1. Where did we come from? (Prior to mortal birth.)

2. What is the purpose of this life? (Is there a higher purpose than merely existing?)

3. What happens to us when we live this mortal and frail life? (I have great faith that there is a plan for the eternities.)

I am now 76 years old; I have been blessed with a wonderful wife, five children and 21 grandchildren. I would hate to think that all of these relationships end just because my mortal body fades in time. So I testify that I know there is a plan that accounts for our existence in the present, the now, and the forever.

It seems to me that each of you must have some feeling that corresponds to my belief, the details may be different, but the desire is similar.

Too all (cont.)
Part 2
The Bible is the written record of some of God's dealings with some of His children. I happen to also believe that He had a relationship with others; not just the House of Israel. That does not negate the truths contained in the Bible. But it seems to me that we need to understand how the Bible came into being, especially the New Testament.

I have some difficulty in accepting the often quoted "The Bible tells me so." Actually, the Bible never speaks; we can read what Peter, Paul and other prophets wrote to the saints of their day. Their teachings now are included in the New Testament. Paul states that it requires that one have the "Spirit" if one is to understand what he wrote.

The problem is, who speaks to us today in the same fashion that the prophets spoke, to wit:

"Thus saith the Lord." Not what did the Bible say. The Bible is a recorded testament of what the prophets were told to say. But it does not, nor could it, address the problems we face in our day.

Too all (final)
Part 3
Again, please do not assume that I must not believe the Bible; I do believe the truths contained therein, both historically and doctrinally. In accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet, I have had to read the Bible several times and also other writing, including The Book of Mormon.

I find no doctrinal dispute between the two, but there are some teachings that are more clearly explained in The Book of Mormon, and other words from a prophet who does say "thus saith the Lord."

This has also given me reason to explore other religions and their doctrines and in the process I have a strong belief that they all have truths I can accept, but are also not complete or are translated improperly.

I know this is long. So I shall stop for now unless anyone wants to express their thoughts pro or con, or just plain different.

May the Lord bless this nation; and all mankind.

tenore, 1 and 2
The things you suggest are not germaine to the discussion. If you've been around TH for long, I'm sure you've witnessed some of the heated discussion pertaining to Mormonism.

I speak for myself, but doubt I am alone, when I say I do not wish to engage in a debate as to the veracity of Joseph Smith and his claims--or to the Mormon reinterpretation of Scripture.

I will say this. If any part of Scripture is false, then it must by necessity negate all of it. For it alone claims to be the inerrant, god-breathed, whole counsel of God.

Galatians 1:8 says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you,let him be accursed."

And this is exactly the claim of Joseph Smith. Another testament, revealed by an angel. God's Word denounces this. Both the Bible and the book of Mormon cannot be true.

I respect you Mr. Tenore. You are the same age as my father. It sounds like you have lived and are living a very good life. Just as my father is.

But as you reflect over the claims of Jesus Christ, I pray that he will reveal his Truth to you.


It is finished
When Jesus said, “It is finished,” it was a cry of completion and fulfillment. He had completed the work he came to do and fulfilled all of the prophecies he came to fulfill. Starting all the way back in Genesis 3:15.

They are momentous, triumphant words. The veil in the temple is torn open and the way open to the holy of holies, the very presence of God.

All of the words and actions of Jesus led up to this moment. If you reduce him to a mere moral leader with wise sayings, you miss his most important message. That God has come to earth and provides away for salvation. That we cannot be “good” on our own, or save ourselves.

In his death, the work of salvation is finished, complete. Accomplished. Salvation is a finished work. All we have to do is believe and receive.

Verbivore
I didn't mean to offend anyone, but I have had the revelation you speak of, and that's my point.

I thought that we were discussing the different concepts, and their origin, of what is moral.

I will also remind you that when Paul wrote in Galatians, there was no New Testament. Paul taught the gospel from the Old Testament.

The letter written to the Galatians was in response to the phenomena of Judaism; insistance that circumcision should be practiced on gentile converts. Paul fought against that; he and Peter had a major disagreement about this issue.

One question: Do you know how many other writings that probably should have been included in the Bible. Look up "The Book of Enoch" or the "Book of Jasher"

I too, pray that you will receive the truth.

I am not going to shy away from my Mormon beliefs, they are my lifeblood. And they are centered in Jesus The Christ.

You are under no obligation to respond; I respect your feelings. I hope your father is in good health.

May God's blessings attend you.

Verbivore
I wasn't going to continue this, but you last post caught my attention.

I believe that Christ's work is still going on.

Salvation included not only His death, but more importantly, "His Resurrection from the dead."

Thus my earlier question; What happens to us after our mortal death and we are laid to rest.

I have hope in the reality of the physical resurrection, just as Christ demonstrated to His Apostles during the forty days He spent with them after His resurrction and prior to His ascention to His Father, both spiritually and physically.

Bipsy Quee
"But it is the context within which He spoke them that makes them different than anything else anyone else ever said. They cannot be disconnected and still be relevant to anyone's life."

I'm not arguing they aren't significant--even to me. I'm only arguing they weren't new.

Attis of Phrygia, Dionysus, Horus of Egypt, Krishna,
Mithra, Zoroaster. One of my favorites is Prometheus.

Verbivore
"Our constitution is just that, ours. It does not transcend cultures or times, the Bible however, the Word of God, does."

First off, the Declaration was by the people, not the government. In it the people declared all men created equal with unalienable rights. All. Not a few chosen elites.

Second, your concept of God is not universal, but, depending on your personal beliefs, for only the chosen.

"And likewise, Man can no more direct or control humanity to follow a system of morals agreeable to all."

Exactly, it cannot be designed, it must be discovered by reason and experiment and failure and success.

You realize, don't you, your arguments are arguments against the existence of universal moral absolutes. You are arguing because not everyone agrees or conforms they do not exist.

They do exist, and man has to discover them. And that, I think, we all agree, is by reason, the same reason we use to decide to make moral choices and take moral actions.

The real argument here is whether they are universal and absolute, meaning they always have existed and always will, or whether God, as you conceive Him, arbitrarily and temporarily--relativistically--created them.

I didn't see examples of lying, theft and murder in your story. That exists here, that has existed as long as man has existed, no doubt. Does man's imperfection argue universal moral absolutes do not exist?

"Are you saying Christianity has had a redemptive affect on culture? Why would that be if it is true that 'Our morals must be grounded in our nature to exist?'"

Christianity has contributed booth good and evil. If morals are not grounded in our human nature why does your faith claim Jesus had to become a man?


Tenore
"Lonestar; I recognize that you are not prone to be negative, in fact, each of you in the last few posts make excellent points."

Yeah, some of us have been going at this for some time now. I think there is a mutual challenge and respect.

As for your three deep and profound questions, ultimately, I must say I don't know. And, like Socrates in his defense said, I don't think you all can or do know either. I'm trying to figure it out the best I can, as you all are. As checks and balances I think whatever we can reason out as answers must be grounded in our nature and guided by our traditions. Limiting yourself to the Bible requires faith, fine for you, but I don't know what that is, and it seems to ignore human nature--if God is infinite, infallible and ineffable then we simply can't know Him, not in this our natural human lives.


As for the Bible, the problem is interpretation.

Verbivore
One other item, addressed to tenore, but
"If any part of Scripture is false, then it must by necessity negate all of it."

Not really, just means that interpretation was incorrect. Maybe that's what Mormonism argues, it's certainly what Christians generally argue about Jews. And, as you know :-), I have my own.

Verbivore


"When Jesus said, “It is finished,” it was a cry of completion and fulfillment....In his death, the work of salvation is finished, complete. Accomplished. Salvation is a finished work. All we have to do is believe and receive."

I understand the story, I do. But here's the thing, that story has to do with man's separation from God in the garden and salvation uniting man with God again, if only you believe.

Morals, as man knows and considers them, have to do with man's relation, in his choices and actions, with his fellow man. This is natural law, as opposed to divine law, which we cannot know anyhow.

If your beliefs contribute to man's moral interaction with his fellow man, good, if not, then not, and if they contribute evil, then not good. Certainly you can look at religions and how they are hijacked for evil purpose, Hitler Christianity, Bin Laden Islam, etc, and understand this. Your understanding, whether your choices and actions follow perfectly, is based on universal moral absolutes.

lonestar
I understood what your point was.

The "newness" you seem determined to deny has to do with the Authority to say them.

That was MY point.

when I die
I shall be present with the Risen Savior, Jesus Christ.

the perfect lamb
"If morals are not grounded in our human nature why does your faith claim Jesus had to become a man?"

Human nature is exactly the problem. Jesus had to become a man, take on the form of man, enter into our physical time and space, that he could become the perfect sacrifice for the sins of Man.

God required a sacrifice of blood for the remission of sin. He required that the sacrifice be perfect and without blemish. Jesus alone was able to be that sacrifice. It is no accident that he was crucified at Passover, thus becoming the Lamb, that the law required. "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the World."


?
What Christians argue about Jews?

No, it doesn't mean the interpretation was incorrect. What Mormons do is add to and change scripture.

When Paul speaks of the Gospel in Galatians, he is not referencing the OT. The Gospel, is just as Paul mentioned in the verses preceding, "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forever and ever."

That is the Gospel in a nutshell. There is no need to add to it.

In 2 Corinthians, Paul also cautions the church at Corinth agains embracing any other Gospel than Christ crucified.

to clarify
Interpretation turn on very fine points. VERY FINE. Changing one word cannot change a whole doctrine, only clarify or confuse. For the Mormon Theology to be true, there would have to be many, many, many points, woven throughtout the Bible that would be simply wrong. The entire thing would lose all authority. Both points cannot be true.

believe
"But here's the thing, that story has to do with man's separation from God in the garden and salvation uniting man with God again, if only you believe."

Well, it is not your belief in God that makes the story true. The story is true regardless. God believes in you, either way.

Verbivore, lonestar, etal
Tell me, Christ prayed that all His followers be one even as He and His Father are one.

Christianity, in all its shades, are certainly not unified. Therefore which version of Christianity is correct?

Gefore you answer, please keep in mind that there are many Christians who have conflicting ideas. As an example:

* Which is the correct method of baptism?
* What is the nature of the Godhead? (Father, Son and Holy Ghost, how are they related?)
* Is the resurrection a physical, or non-physical?
* Why do we refer to ourselves as "children" of God?
* Why did Paul tell the Hebrews that the gospel was taught to the Israelites by Moses?
* Why was Moses given the "schoolmaster" Law of Moses?
* What blessing did Abraham receive from Melchizedek?
* Who was Melchizedek?
* Why is Christ spoken of as "The Only Begotten Son" of God The Father?
* What did Jesus mean when He told Mary to not touch Him because He had not yet ascended to His God and Mary's God and to His Father and to Mary's Father?
* Why did Jesus spend 40 days with the Apostles after He rose from the dead?
* Why was the Gift of the Holy Ghost bestowed on Paul by the "laying on of hands?"
* Who had the authority to bestow the Holy Ghost on newly baptized members?
* Why did it take 300 years for the book we now call the New Testament to prepare?
* Why did Christ (no New Testament available) say, "search the scriptures, they are they which testify of Me?"

It is also important to realize that every epistle written by the Apostles was written to those who had already accepted the gospel, but were wavering in their knowledge of truth. Again, the Jews who accepted the gospel had a hard time abandoning the Law of Moses.

Finally, There is no evidence that a prophet or apostle had to go to a college to get a degree to teach about Christ. Where did the apostles get their authority?

Tenore 2
Have you ever considered the fact that Joseph Smith's claim to prophethood rests on the same evidence as Muhammad's?

lonestarblues
Why do you believe mankind is "limited and corrupt"? How do you know this? We are limited compared to what? Corrupt compared to what?


The apostles
of the NT give a detailed check list as to the qualifications of apostleship. Joseph Smith meets none of the qualifications.

They were trained by Jesus himself and given authority by him. Saul/Paul was added to their number later, and he went through a period of training before he began to preach. His authority too came from Christ alone.