Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
Parallel universes also provide no explanation for the many 'chicken and egg' situations observed in life where you need the very components that life is producing to produce life!!! For example, you need DNA to produce DNA ... and you need hundreds of proteins already acting in consort to produce each individual protein including the hundreds of individual proteins that are acting in consort ... to produce each individual protein!!!!
There is a paradox in the parallel universe or M theory. If its true, then it has to be false. Why? Because the parallel universe theory states that there are an infinite number of universes i.e. every conceivable type of universe exists. If that's true then there must be a universe which exists that didn't come about in the way that all the others came about, i.e. by the the collision of branes. So if the theory is true then there is such a universe is in existence out there somewhere. If thats true then how did that universe come about if not by the collision of branes or by their ripples? If it doesn't exist then the theory is false, i.e. not every conceivable type of universe exists. If it does exist then how did it come about? In case you're wondering I came up with that on my own.
Plus, if the theory is true then this multiverse will conceivably include a universe that was created by God too.
So God made the evolutionists do all that digging around in the dirt in order to unearth the evidence that would go to prove that their theory was false all along? Cool!!! :pac:0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Hi Jakkass. Actually you can find instances of independent unregistered churches advertising themselves freely in China.I'll need a citation.
Nobody (contrary to the claims of the Communist apologists) has claimed that all Christians, or indeed all underground churches, are cowering in attics like Jews in Nazi Germany.
The Communist authorities have learned since the time of Mao that one of their greatest weapons is uncertainty. So you may get churches in one region (eg Shanghai) being largely left alone, whereas at the same time the members of similar churches elsewhere (eg Henan province) are having their fingernails pullied out with pliers.
Then, after a period, a crackdown will commence in the area that was previously left alone. The whole point of this is that you never quite know when you are safe or when the axe is about to fall.
Btw, referring to the churches as "unregistered" is a bit misleading. It's not that these churches refuse to register with the government, in fact most of them would love a system of registration to be in place, but rather that there is no legal mechanism by which they can register.
To be a "registered" church means that the clergy is appointed and controlled by the Communist Party, that the clergy must act as informers for the Communist Party, that they must preach whatever propaganda the Communist Party tells them (eg - that Mao's revolution of 1949 was the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven as prophesied by Jesus), that they are not permitted to preach from certain parts of the Bible, that they will not permit any instruction of under-18s etc.
The Chinese government also spreads the lie that their State-run churches are sufficient to meet the needs of all the Christians in China and that there is no need for more churches. So no more churches are going to be registered, even if they were willing to abandon their Christian principles and become the mouthpieces of the Communists.
The lie that is propagated by the Communist Party's stooges, that the underground churches get in trouble because of foreign contacts, is equally false. For example, it is true that underground church leaders were arrested and their churches broken up because they were invited to attend the Lausanne Conference in South Africa in October. However, what the Communist apologists forget to tell us is that a delegation from the Three-Self-Patriotic-Movement (the Communist-run 'church') have also been invited to the same Conference in South Africa! Not only that, but the government is paying their fares and hotel accomodation to enable them to attend the same conference!
So, the persecution of underground Christians is justified as preventing undue foreign influence on the grounds that they were invited to the Lausanne Conference, but the government's own religious agents are paid to attend the same foreign event.
Incidentally, I will be at the Lausanne conference myself - so I'm looking forward to some interesting discussions with those TSPM delegates that have been sponsored by the Communist Party.
0 -
I'll need a citation.
Will a photograph do ? Unfortunately I don't have any pictures atm but just for future reference.You're downplaying it I'm afraid. People have been killed, raped, and imprisoned for their beliefs in China. Not just merely told to move along.
Yes they have been killed, raped and imprisoned for many reasons. And yes if you'll bother to look at the very search results that you yourself quoted to me, you'll see that a lot of the time the church is threatened and simply moves.
Also I want to just get this clear right now. They are not been killed, raped or imprisoned because they are Christian. I'm not saying the Chinese government are so nice they wouldn't do this to people just because of their beliefs, I'm saying that the government simply don't care what their beliefs are.
The government cares about their activities, not their faith.
Some christians don't believe they should register themselves to the government. Other christians disagree. So let's put an end to this 'they are been persecuted for their faith' nonsense. They are been persecuted for their political and legal stances against the Chinese authorities.
Out of curiosity Jakkass, aren't churches in Europe and the US required to register themselves for tax-free status ?It is because of their Christian views that they are opposed to abortion or the one-child policy. Quite simple. So yes, it is because of their beliefs.
No it is not. It is because of their particular interpretation of their religion.
Unless you are telling me that if someone accepts abortion or the one-child policy that means they can't be a Christian ?In cases whereby the State doesn't hinder ones faith one should obey it, but if it does God is above the State.
Do you even know how the state are supposedly hindering it ? Why don't you look into the state registered churches and see what parts you disagree with.
How much state interference is too much ? In Ireland doesn't the state interfere with churches ?Actually. I wouldn't see anything wrong with South Korea's law. Perhaps from a liberal European view that this would be wrong, but if adultery is a voiding of a legal contract then South Korea are entitled to legislate against it in any way that they wish.
Yet the Chinese governments requirement for churches to register themselves is wrong ?
As for Saudi Arabia, I think this is wrong and the international community should be putting pressure on Saudi Arabia to change its legal system.
Agreed.
And just in case it needs re-stating, I agree with you that the Chinese should change their rules too. I just refuse to listen to blind mindless propaganda.
China is not the 3rd reich and the Christians are not the new Jews. You my friend have been lied to.0 -
Not true.
So its not true that the theory of evolution says that life evolved from the most primitive of organisms to what we observe today by a process of natural selection acting on random mutations???Darwinian evolution is a general process that applies to any self replicating system that receives feedback based on its current fitness to its environment.
Yeah, that's what I said to which you said: "Not true." ???Darwinian evolution applied to biology is called organic evolution. Life is, at its simplest, a self replicating system.
Yes and I also dealt with that too. Mobert and I agreed that life can be defined as a self replicating system. I.E. RNA and DNA and so on.Darwinian evolution can apply in anything that is self replicating, include chemical molecules.
Chemical molecules i.e DNA or RNA are molecules made up of chemical constituents. But these chemicals and/or chemical compounds need to be configured in a particular way in order as to form the first self replicating molecule. As you say Natural Selection acting on random mutations does not take place before the first self replicating molecule has come about, so what mechanism can we apply to the process of chemicals configuring themselves in this way?Not true.
:rolleyes:Chemicals can and do form self replicating molecules based on simple laws of chemistry. This is not miraculous it is in fact easy to get this to happen.
Did I ever say that chemicals don't go to make up self replicating molecules? I'll say it again: Chemicals are configured in such a specific way that they can form self replicating molecules, after which the principles of natural selection acting on random mutations can be applied. Please give us a similar mechanism that can be applied to the process that goes to bring about these specific configurations?Once they have started to replicate Darwinian evolution applies.
Exactly. So before that happens what mechanism can we apply to explain to how chemicals configure themselves into the first self replicating system?I already have, you ignore it the first time. If taht was a genuine mistake I'm happy to further explain it, but read the original post first.
Address what I've asked above first please.0 -
Yes they have been killed, raped and imprisoned for many reasons. And yes if you'll bother to look at the very search results that you yourself quoted to me, you'll see that a lot of the time the church is threatened and simply moves.
Also I want to just get this clear right now. They are not been killed, raped or imprisoned because they are Christian. I'm not saying the Chinese government are so nice they wouldn't do this to people just because of their beliefs, I'm saying that the government simply don't care what their beliefs are.
There is no convincing monosharp. We're just going to have to agree to disagree on this I reckon.The government cares about their activities, not their faith.
Activities which no doubt lead on from Christian conviction. Therefore the Government does care about their faith.Out of curiosity Jakkass, aren't churches in Europe and the US required to register themselves for tax-free status?
Registering for tax free status != Registering for the right to worship.
You know this and I know this.No it is not. It is because of their particular interpretation of their religion.
What people believe is of no consequence to the State.Unless you are telling me that if someone accepts abortion or the one-child policy that means they can't be a Christian ?
Mainline Christianity would discourage support for either I would think.Do you even know how the state are supposedly hindering it ? Why don't you look into the state registered churches and see what parts you disagree with.
Missing the point again. People should have the right to worship as they wish, not the right to worship as the State would like them to.How much state interference is too much ? In Ireland doesn't the state interfere with churches ?
In Ireland we allow for liberty unless it violates the law. China's laws however deny freedom of religion, as such their laws aren't reasonable.Yet the Chinese governments requirement for churches to register themselves is wrong ?
Criminalising adultery itself isn't wrong IMO. Most people would agree that adultery is an undesirable aspect of our society.And just in case it needs re-stating, I agree with you that the Chinese should change their rules too. I just refuse to listen to blind mindless propaganda.
Just to clarify, you're accusing PDN of being a propagandist then?0 -
-
Soul Winner wrote: »So its not true that the theory of evolution says that life evolved from the most primitive of organisms to what we observe today by a process of natural selection acting on random mutations???
That is what the theory of neo-Darwinian biological evolution says.
Think of it this way.
There is a theories of dynamics, which deals with the physical interaction that cause motion and change.
There is the theories of fluid/gas dynamics which is a sub-set of dynamics which deals with dynamics within non-solid environments.
There is the theories of aero-dynamics which is a sub set of fluid dynamics which deals with motion and change specifically within air (ie the Earth's atmosphere)
Each is a subset of the other.
Darwinian evolution in its basic form is a general theory which deals with the evolution of replicating systems.
Neo-Darwinian biological evolution is the application of this theory to life on Earth, in the same way that aerodynamics is the application of physical dynamics to objects moving through the Earths atmosphere.
It would be as silly to say that Darwinian evolution only deals with living things because that is what neo-Darwinian biological evolution deals with as it would be to say that Dynamics only deals with things moving through the Earth's atmosphere because that is what aerodynamics deals with.
No you said it applies only to life. It doesn't, it applies to anything that is self replicating. Life is not the only self replicating system found in the universe. Non-living chemicals self replicate.Soul Winner wrote: »Yeah, that's what I said to which you said: "Not true." ???Soul Winner wrote: »Yes and I also dealt with that too. Mobert and I agreed that life can be defined as a self replicating system. I.E. RNA and DNA and so on.
Life is a self replicating system. It is not the only one.
Not all of them. Self replicating molecules occur naturally based on laws of chemistry. You can artificially make self replicating molecules but you can also observe them form in naturally occurring environments.Soul Winner wrote: »Chemical molecules i.e DNA or RNA are molecules made up of chemical constituents. But these chemicals and/or chemical compounds need to be configured in a particular way in order as to form the first self replicating molecule.Soul Winner wrote: »As you say Natural Selection acting on random mutations does not take place before the first self replicating molecule has come about, so what mechanism can we apply to the process of chemicals configuring themselves in this way?
Chemistry. Self replicating molecules form naturally. All you need is heat to cause the chemical reaction. And we got enough of that from the sun.Soul Winner wrote: »Chemicals are configured in such a specific way that they can form self replicating molecules, after which the principles of natural selection acting on random mutations can be applied. Please give us a similar mechanism that can be applied to the process that goes to bring about these specific configurations?
Chemistry. The chemical bonding of atoms to form molecules. It is how you get H20 (water), or CO2 (carbon dioxide) and every other molecule in the universe.
Some naturally occurring combinations of molecules self replicate. There is no great mystery to this, it just happens. Not all molecules self replicate, and they don't self replicate in all environments. It is still rare. You need particular atoms and you need a particular level of energy.
But you don't require a process other than simple chemistry to make it happen.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Hi Jakkass. Actually you can find instances of independent unregistered churches advertising themselves freely in China.
Jakkass out of curiosity, are you going to ask him for a citation ? :pac:Nobody (contrary to the claims of the Communist apologists) has claimed that all Christians, or indeed all underground churches, are cowering in attics like Jews in Nazi Germany.
Communist apologist, I like that. I think I'll go and light up one of my Cuban cigars with my Mao Tse-tung lighter.The Communist authorities have learned since the time of Mao that one of their greatest weapons is uncertainty. So you may get churches in one region (eg Shanghai) being largely left alone, whereas at the same time the members of similar churches elsewhere (eg Henan province) are having their fingernails pullied out with pliers.
All of them ? Some of them ? Now ? 5 years ago ?
And most importantly, why ? Because we both know it's not because of their faith.Then, after a period, a crackdown will commence in the area that was previously left alone. The whole point of this is that you never quite know when you are safe or when the axe is about to fall.
And the reasoning behind this ?The Chinese government also spreads the lie that their State-run churches are sufficient to meet the needs of all the Christians in China and that there is no need for more churches. So no more churches are going to be registered, even if they were willing to abandon their Christian principles and become the mouthpieces of the Communists.
uh huh. Care to withdraw that ?
Are Registered Churches growing? Oh my, YES! This does vary by regions. But even in outlying areas, there is substantial growth. In Qinghai Province in 1992, there were 800 members in the major church in the capital city. When I returned in 1997, I discovered that there were now 7,000 baptized members.Btw, referring to the churches as "unregistered" is a bit misleading. It's not that these churches refuse to register with the government, in fact most of them would love a system of registration to be in place, but rather that there is no legal mechanism by which they can register.
Completely untrue. Jakkass I honestly hope you won't just accept that and will actually go and search for yourself and not just accept such propaganda.
http://www.amitynewsservice.org/page.php?page=1150
What are the six requirements for registration?
1-2) The congregation must have a fixed place and name.
3) There must be citizens who are religious believers regularly participating in religious activities.
4) They must have a management organization composed of citizens who are religious believers.
5) They must have persons meeting the requirements of the particular religious group to lead religious services.
6) They must have their own legal source of income.
Any church which meets the above requirements can register themselves with the government.
Why are there still unregistered churches? Some congregations disagree theologically with any kind of civil registration for churches and therefore choose not to seek registration. Others are strongly committed to a narrowly defined set of theological beliefs and are not willing to have fellowship with other Christians who do not fully share their convictions. Additionally there are congregations which have applied for registration and are awaiting approval, and some which have applied and been denied because they do not meet one or more of the requirements above or because local officials have unfairly denied the registration. (There is a process to appeal the denial of an application to register.)To be a "registered" church means that the clergy is appointed and controlled by the Communist Party,
Proof ?that the clergy must act as informers for the Communist Party,
Proof ?that they must preach whatever propaganda the Communist Party tells them (eg - that Mao's revolution of 1949 was the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven as prophesied by Jesus),
Proof ?that they are not permitted to preach from certain parts of the Bible,
Interesting. So if I meet my Chinese friend next week and get a copy of the Bible she brought from China from her state sanctioned church your telling me that there should be bits missing ?that they will not permit any instruction of under-18s etc.
True. So what ? Under 18's aren't allowed to do a lot of things. Where do you draw the line between an organisation brainwashing children and an organisation genuinely preaching religion ?
I see nothing wrong with that at all, in fact I'd love if the same law came into effect everywhere. A child cannot decide at such a young age they will accept anything as truth.The lie that is propagated by the Communist Party's stooges, that the underground churches get in trouble because of foreign contacts, is equally false.
Utter dishonesty.
You and I both know what a xenophobic country China is. How they think of themselves, how they keep their money in their own economy.
The fact your visa was denied proves my point. You are now just disagreeing with me for the sake of disagreeing.
The very reason Mao banned religions including Christianity and Buddhism was that he seen them as tools of foreign imperialists.For example, it is true that underground church leaders were arrested and their churches broken up because they were invited to attend the Lausanne Conference in South Africa in October. However, what the Communist apologists forget to tell us is that a delegation from the Three-Self-Patriotic-Movement (the Communist-run 'church') have also been invited to the same Conference in South Africa! Not only that, but the government is paying their fares and hotel accomodation to enable them to attend the same conference!
And ? A registered church which complies with the law is allowed to attend an international conference whereas representatives of an illegal unregistered church are not and you think that proves what exactly ?
You have just given the state sanctioned churches more credit than you have previously given them in all your other threads on China by admitting that they are allowed to attend an international conference. Why would they want or need to attend an international conference if they are simply communist tools ?
You also know well why the unregistered church was denied permission to go, because of what they would say about religious practice in China.
On a side note I'm curious. Why would this conference invite the official state sanctioned churches if they are only communist mouthpieces ?
on the grounds that they were invited to the Lausanne Conference, but the government's own religious agents are paid to attend the same foreign event.So, the persecution of underground Christians is justified as preventing undue foreign influence
What kind of foreign influence ? There's a hell of a lot of difference between official and registered clergy from China going abroad and independent evangelist clergy from abroad going to China.Incidentally, I will be at the Lausanne conference myself - so I'm looking forward to some interesting discussions with those TSPM delegates that have been sponsored by the Communist Party.
Will you be as insulting to them there as you have been to them here ?0 -
-
-
That is what the theory of neo-Darwinian biological evolution says.
But that's what we were discussing all along, that much should have been blatantly obvious to you, plus even if it wasn't, my definition hardly qualifies as deeply ignorant and inaccurate now does it?Think of it this way.
There is a theories of dynamics, which deals with the physical interaction that cause motion and change.
There is the theories of fluid/gas dynamics which is a sub-set of dynamics which deals with dynamics within non-solid environments.
There is the theories of aero-dynamics which is a sub set of fluid dynamics which deals with motion and change specifically within air (ie the Earth's atmosphere)
Each is a subset of the other.
Darwinian evolution in its basic form is a general theory which deals with the evolution of replicating systems.
Neo-Darwinian biological evolution is the application of this theory to life on Earth, in the same way that aerodynamics is the application of physical dynamics to objects moving through the Earths atmosphere.
It would be as silly to say that Darwinian evolution only deals with living things because that is what neo-Darwinian biological evolution deals with as it would be to say that Dynamics only deals with things moving through the Earth's atmosphere because that is what aerodynamics deals with.
These have nothing to do with what we are talking about. We were specifically talking about applying Darwinian principles to self replicating systems. That much was obvious, so there is no need to bring all this crap into the discussion in order to make it sound like you thought I was referring to anything other than biological evolution. An admission to being incorrect in your assessment to my definition and an apology to me would have sufficed and saved a lot of time.No you said it applies only to life. It doesn't, it applies to anything that is self replicating. Life is not the only self replicating system found in the universe. Non-living chemicals self replicate.
I said that Mobert and I agreed to define life as any self replicating system. If non-living chemicals self replicate, then we must define them as life also, are we willing to do this? Are self replicating chemicals living systems?Life is a self replicating system. It is not the only one.
So we cannot define life as a self replicating system, correct? If that is so then how can we define what a living system is?Not all of them. Self replicating molecules occur naturally based on laws of chemistry. You can artificially make self replicating molecules but you can also observe them form in naturally occurring environments.
I wasn't aware that chemicals can make replicates of themselves. Can you give us an example of this please? Too lazy to Google
Chemistry. Self replicating molecules form naturally. All you need is heat to cause the chemical reaction. And we got enough of that from the sun.
So the specific sequencing of nucleotide bases in the DNA of the most basic living system can naturally configured itself into that specific sequence? You do know that these sequences are part of the genetic code which has to be decoded and executed throughout other parts of the organism don't you? So even if the chemicals could naturally come together to form the physical structure of the molecule, from whence comes the information that tells the various other parts of the cell what they need to do in order to decode, transport and execute their instructions etc in order to get proper function for the cell as a whole? Are you seriously suggesting that this process just occurs by necessity given the laws that govern the formation of chemicals?Chemistry. The chemical bonding of atoms to form molecules. It is how you get H20 (water), or CO2 (carbon dioxide) and every other molecule in the universe.
Yes but these are formed by necessity given the way the universe happened to get to its present state. We know that the universe didn't start out having all the heavy elements that go to make up life, that we needed a certain amount of time for stars and galaxies to eventually form and produce the heavier elements in the cores later on, elements that go to make up life eventually, and that part of these basic elements include amino acids, proteins and so forth, which are themselves a combination of various other basic elements. But the question remains, how can they all have come together in the correct sequence which go to make up livings systems when we consider the unimaginable number of other possible combinations that they could have combined into which don't make up living systems?But you don't require a process other than simple chemistry to make it happen.
So basically what your saying is that life came about as a result of the basic laws of chemistry?0 -
So let me get this straight.
If I believe that my next door neighbour is a vampire and I go and put a stake through his heart one night then I am been sent to prison for my beliefs ?
Or what if our good friend Fred Phelps gets put in prison because he killed someone for whatever he thinks gods hates at this particular time of the month. He is been sent to prison because he is a Christian ?
What individual Christians believe is so diverse that it's meaningless to say that most of it is because they are Christian.
One needs to nip this in the bud. You're not comparing like with like here. Are you claiming that disagreement with abortion, and the one child policy in China is the same thing as murdering someone?Some Christians believe god punishes us with natural disasters or that homosexuals are evil. If they are punished for those beliefs is that because they are Christian ?
IMO, they shouldn't be punished for holding either belief. The State isn't here to police peoples views.Heres another one. A Korean pastor is currently in prison for forcing sexual favours out of his congregation apparently because god told him. Is he in prison because he's a christian?
Again, not comparing like with like.So can I go to Ireland tomorrow and set up my own church and start collecting donations without any problem from the state ? (assuming I pay my taxes etc)
I'm not exactly sure of the legal situation, but it is certainly legal to set up a house church. It is the donations part that I am not sure of. Perhaps one of the other posters will help me out.Alright, then call it 'mainstream Christianity' and not 'Christians'.
Most Christians. That's the best way to put it. PDN's post gives a lot of suspicions as to whether or not the state churches are mainstream, encouraging preachers to praise Mao for example.Jakkass I have given you links which state the state doesn't interfere with the churches at all. I've heard the same from friends, the only thing I've heard which could be considered wrong is that the authorities monitor said churches. You have yet to even show me one source which says otherwise. In fact you have yet to state what kind of interference you think the authorities commit.
See above. As Fanny Craddock has pointed out you have a clear agenda to downplay the reality.Kind of off-topic but regardless of your religion I'd hope you understand how much of a problem over population in china is and that this policy is not a bad thing. Korea and Japan are trying to cut down their populations as well, though it's not the law.
This isn't a sufficient reason to discourage freedom of speech & conscience.How do they deny freedom of religion ? Specifics ?
You're being royally obtuse now. I've demonstrated in my posts how this happens, PDN has demonstrated this in his posts with more sufficient knowledge.Might I also point out that you were among others who argued against me when I brought up a similar issue where private Universities denied freedom of religion to their students. Is it OK for a private organisation to do so but not a government ?
As far as I'm aware they didn't. You could go to the mosque on Friday, the only difference was that you had to attend church to go to the university. Forcing a private Christian institution to be secular is radically different from this situation.Yet what if someone believes they should be allowed to sleep with as many women/men as they want. Aren't their rights been violated ? Isn't this a breach of their freedom ?
The answer is as simple as this. If you want to sleep with as many people as you wish, don't enter into a marriage contract with another individual. Also do not violate someone else's marriage.Depending on my answer, I could get banned from here as you well know.
So you're saying that PDN is a propagandist in a safe-to-the-charter manner? 0 -
-
-
One needs to nip this in the bud. You're not comparing like with like here. Are you claiming that disagreement with abortion, and the one child policy in China is the same thing as murdering someone?
No. I should have stated more relevant examples, I apologise.IMO, they shouldn't be punished for holding either belief. The State isn't here to police peoples views.
I should have expanded on that. I meant to say if they were punished for acting out on those views. Say for example there was a law which banned public displays of hatred for homosexuals. If Fred Phelps and his gang broke this law and were punished, are they been punished for been Christian ?Again, not comparing like with like.
Why not ?
And again, I think your missing my point. Abortion is legal in China. Speaking out against the government is (wrongly) illegal in China. Hence, speaking out against abortion is a crime.
This is not anti-religious, this is not anti-Christianity. You have atheists, Buddhists etc who believe abortion is right and abortion is wrong. When they get punished for speaking out against the government is it because of their religion ?
Just because a government policy X also happens to be against religious belief Y does not mean that the government is against that religion. It doesn't mean the people are been persecuted for that religion. It means people are been persecuted for that particular stance.I'm not exactly sure of the legal situation, but it is certainly legal to set up a house church. It is the donations part that I am not sure of. Perhaps one of the other posters will help me out.
Just curious about the legal red tape.
For example, do you think it's right that the Church of Scientology are denied tax-free status in many countries ? Is that persecution of religion ?Most Christians. That's the best way to put it. PDN's post gives a lot of suspicions as to whether or not the state churches are mainstream, encouraging preachers to praise Mao for example.
Jakkass, this is an issue in every aspect of Chinese society, not just the Church. China has strict propaganda regarding it's place in the world. This is not a religious issue, it is a political one.
Chinese people are fed this propaganda everywhere. I also noticed you used the word encouraged, not forced.See above. As Fanny Craddock has pointed out you have a clear agenda to downplay the reality.
Then answer my question and prove me wrong and give me links.This isn't a sufficient reason to discourage freedom of speech & conscience.
Two points;
1. I didn't say it was. I simply explained their reasoning behind it.
2. How drastic of a problem would over-population have to become before you'd accept that a level of control would have to be forced on a population regarding the number of children ? Say that the worlds population tripled or more and we simply couldn't produce enough food.You're being royally obtuse now. I've demonstrated in my posts how this happens, PDN has demonstrated this in his posts with more sufficient knowledge.
You haven't demonstrated in your posts what exactly the difference is between the registered and non-registered churches. I have also corrected a lot of PDN's post and provided links to prove such corrections. He provided none, yet you still believe him ?As far as I'm aware they didn't. You could go to the mosque on Friday, the only difference was that you had to attend church to go to the university. Forcing a private Christian institution to be secular is radically different from this situation.
Oh ? And what about the daily prayers ? "Excuse me teacher I have to go bow to mecca a few times because it's that time".So you're saying that PDN is a propagandist in a safe-to-the-charter manner?
There's a safe-to-the-charter manner ?0 -
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7SDrj4Tjvk
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement