USA President Attends Church in CHINA

I don't know, there was lots of media attention at Tienemen (sp?) square, but that didn't stop the tanks from rolling. Plus, our media has the attention span of a gnat, so as soon as the Pres left, their focus would turn elsewhere. The underground church can go public anytime they decide to, they shouldn't be outed by the American President.

 

You have a point there. I still don't think I would have appeared on the state sponsored show church, giving it the appearance of legitimate freedom of religion (or even that China was opening up). They all look so happy with their freedom of religion, don't they?

On the other hand, the folk in Tienamen Square didn't have the attention of the president of the United States focused on them and China had no accountability for their actions. They still had most favored trade status the same year. I guess the bottom line with China always ends with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Yep.

 

Joseph,

I think the risk to the lives was far too great.

There is also the simple fact that finding the underground churches in China is not easy. How does the State Department go about "finding out" if the Chinese Government can't find out?

I know Christian Chinese Americans who will not give their names in public because they are positive that if their name is linked to Christianity, even here in the states, their family and their neighbors from China will be tortured.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that the underground church in China is generally not an organized entity. There may be some loose underground church networks, but most of them are isolated individual house churches.

This has both advantages and disadvantages, similar to the differences between independent baptists and associated baptists.

 

No, it is not a good quote. Just because a quote is wrong does not mean the opposite is true. 2+2=5 is wrong and the opposite answer of 2+2=-5 is even more wrong. "Outlawing" other faiths is not Christianity and neither is "welcoming" other faiths. Is it better for a society to be made up of true Christians or is it better for a society to be made up of a variety of faiths? The politically correct answer is a variety but the spiritually correct answer is Christianity. Unless you think there is something inherently wrong with Christianity and you would like to see it improved then the only acceptable option is that Christianity is better. I am not talking about how many, many people abuse the practice of Christianity, I am talking about true Christianity. Yes, a society which practices true Christianity and no other is preferrable to any other society.

 

If you "outlaw" other faiths you accomplish absolutely nothing positive.

In fact, I think you make leading people to Christ 10 times as difficult if you try to shove it down their throats as the "national religion".

What the President called for is right. The right for Christians to wittness to others openly. Not the right to restrict people and cause them to feign a faith they don't really hold.

 

Come on Artimaeus - where and when in the history of this world has this society of true Christians existed?? Would society be better if everyone was a true Christian? Of course it would. Will that ever happen prior to the Kingdom coming? No.

The question is not what would we do if we could construct a perfect society. The question is how do we all get along where we are - a world that is far from perfect. And that answer is that Society allows its citizens to worship whoever, whatever, and however they are lead. They have a right to be wrong.

 

Goerge did a good thing.He stood up and spoke up for Christianity.What if he had spoken the same words in a chinese post office or directluy to the president of China.We should not be so concerned about where he spoke ,we should be happy about what he spoke.

 

It hasn't. I agree 100%

That was my point, I am glad you agree.

I agree 100%

Again, I agree 100% Look how much we agree. However, that is not what the quote said. It said a healthy society "welcomes" those of other faiths, as though they are going to be a benefit to us, as though it is a good thing that they are "different", as though we will be improved by having those of a false faith intermingling with us. Tolerate, yes. No persecusion, yes. Neutral, OK, but NOT a positive. My thought is that it is a negative but a negative which is better to live with than the much bigger negative of trying to shape a society with exclusively those who "claim" to be Christian. People who are practicing Christianity as God intended and "lukewarm" Christian are a worse mix than Christians and non-Christians. I am thinking along the lines of Jesus' remark about cold, lukewarm, and hot.

Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

 

I can't believe this ridiculous debate continues to go on. While we're all here glued to an internet bulletin board, our president went and did something meaningful. Did he do everything right? - probably not, but he at least did something.

How many of you can say the same about the risks you take for the cause of Christ? Go ahead...type something good from the comfort of your computer desk.

 

What meaningful risk did he take?

Joseph Botwinick

 

The question is, however, will he make a real statement and connect trade to China with human rights reforms? Will he put the money where his mouth is? Sorry to say this, but I see a lot of symbolism and a good photo op here...but little substance.

Joseph Botwinick

[ November 23, 2005, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: Joseph_Botwinick ]

 

Heheh!!! Actually, that's the choir director

Great move by POTUS.

I guarantee you, however, within 2 weeks, it will be forgotten, and, in the spirit of the Janet Jackson song "What Have You Done for me Lately", the press and critics will look for fresh fodder to toss. Doesn't matter of POTUS is a democrat or republican. It's just human nature, whether we like it or not.

 

I agree that going to a christian church in christian persecuting country is making a very bold statement about his faith and despite what people say about that church God can save people despite the government control. I am not sure what bible they are allowed to use but considering the conditions what ever truth they can get out of it can lead people to salvation and will find other ways to get more info as their relationship with God grows.

I say good going for our President for going to a church in a country that in reality opposes God's sovereign rule over their lives.

 

It is a diplomatic risk, maybe not so much a personal risk. Nevertheless, it's more than many sitting presidents have done. I just can't believe so many would try to pick apart our president's wanting to go to church - and his making a statement in support of freedom to attend church.

I've worshipped in backroom churches in countries were Christians were being persecuted (I brought them Bibles)...I think those folks would see this as a good thing.

 

Back to the original statement.

Been living here in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for 13 years now; no worship services are allowed here openly. Bibles and gospel tracks are confiscated; Christians are in constant fear while holding prayer meetings and services, internet accesses are being reviewed to check which sites one had visited, and other more religious limitations. Name it!

Should one day, your president (I’m a Filipino) comes to Saudi Arabia and be given permission to visit any of the so-called “Christian” gatherings --- whether it be Lutheran, Methodist, Protestant, Pentecostal, Baptist, WHATEVER! --- I will wholeheartedly thank Mr. Bush for doing such in here.

Sometimes people are quick to comment on things while looking from afar.

 

Amen.The attitude does'nt surprize me though.Baptist would complain if you hung em with a new rope.

 

The fact that China even has a state sanctioned church is a miracle in itself.