Evangelicals and the Olympics

I’m just catching wind of an interesting item at Huffington Post about the potential role of Christian missionaries during the Olympics.

The item goes into detail about the position of Rev. Franklin Graham, son of legendary evangelist Billy Graham, who was just in China a few weeks ago. This is an issue to watch, in part because of sensitivities in China about religion but also due to freedom of religion issues for athletes. Graham caught heat for suggesting that evangelists should respect Chinese laws.

Click here to see the post.

Comments

[A B]

I wonder how the US would react if Al-Qaeda, Hamas, etc. announced that they are sending missionaries to defy the ban on their activities in the United States and start actively recruiting members and volunteers.

From their perspective, it is very clear that infidels in the US need to be saved and converted into believers.

[Just another Laowai]

The F-Visa community is already under the microscope. They don't need these jokers making life more difficult.

I do appreciate Graham's stressing that evangelical visitors need to respect Chinese law.

[Wilbur Varela]

for why is China so sensitive about religion? Is it because of communism?

China gave the world the great early religions, like taoism, and allowed the spread of buddhism, and later, confucianism which even today is being revived. So what is it about christians that they fear? Is it because as christians, we have a lord greater than the state?
The peoples of China thirst for more than just water.

senor A B, we have lots of muslims here in LA also. now Hamas and Al-qaeda coming over here is a little, tiny bit different. For example, Protestant missionaries don't wear suicide vests packed with nails.

[A B]

Christians, they drink blood.

Every Sunday. Blood of Christ.

Have to be regulated to be sure they don't spread diseases.

[Wilbur Varela]

okay, that part always gave me the creeps too. turns out it's just wine.

perhaps you should try some, it might relieve the bitterness.

[CW]

Wilbur, perhaps the government of a country that has seen a number of religion-related rebellions (White Lotus circa 1800, Taiping in the mid-19th century, Boxer circa 1900) in "recent" years (relatively, when speaking of China) may feel a tad nervous regarding religion's potential in being used to challenge the government?

[CW]

And perhaps, Christianity’s well-recorded tangling with politics over the years (the various Crusades, la Reconquista, Bloody Mary, the Glorious Revolution, various papal interdicts on the people of offending monarchs, excommunications of said monarchs…) might make the Chinese government a teensy bit more nervous than usual. It’s not as if the Vatican’s hasn’t had tussles with other countries (A Man for All Seasons, anyone?) over papal versus state supremacy. This in addition to the fact that Taoism and Buddhism are polytheistic, while Christianity is decidedly monotheistic. Religious scholars out there would be much better suited to debating monotheism versus polytheism, but I have a suspicion that the “no higher authority” issue might be a bit sticky with the government – especially an officially atheist one.

[Junhui]

For some reason, Christians love to mingle in politics. I have yet to research in the reason why.

Evangelicals are the worst form of Christianity. They aren't even highly looked upon here in California. People tend to avoid evangelicals like the plague.

Please do not make an argument using Confucianism. It is not a religion, there are no "gods". Confucianism is a philosophy. Either you except it or you don't. You won't go to hell.

I think China is doing the right thing. The only way to keep religion out of politics is to ban all religion. Which in a way, is treating all religion equally. Is that religious persecution when your law states that there should be no religions and yet some people defy them?