NationStates Jolt Archive

This topic interested me somewhat. With the constant talking about religion and the decline of Christianity in Europe, the fact that China is exploding in Christian faith declarations is certainly an interesting anomaly.
Take for example that in the year 1800 there were only an estimated 250,000 Chinese Christians. However as of 2007 the estimates run from an absolute minority count of 15million (government/considering their history of severely undercounting particularly in the Tibet affairs one should take their estimate with a pinch of salt) to a high count of up to 130 million Chinese Christians by independent sources. The latest two studies by the University of Shanghaii estimated somewhere upwards of 54million Christians. Estimates of Christians in China are difficult to obtain because of the numbers of Christians unwilling to reveal their beliefs, the hostility of the national government towards some Christian sects, and difficulties in obtaining accurate statistics on house churches.
Couple this with the fact Christianity is the fastest growing religion in China. If present conversion rates hold, roughly 200,000+ a year. Christianity will form a majority in China around the year 2070.

Now about the title. Hong Xiuquan was the leader of the Taiping Rebellion with himself as the "Heavenly King" and self-proclaimed brother of Jesus Christ.
He formed the first communist state in China. To be truthful it was closer to Christian anarcho-communism, taking platitudes of Christ of helping the poor, not allowing the rich, etc.. to heart. By 1850 Hong had between 10,000 and 30,000 followers. The authorities were alarmed at the growing size of the sect and ordered them to disperse. A local force was sent to attack them when they refused, but imperial troops were routed and a deputy magistrate killed. A full-scale attack was launched by the government forces in the first month of 1851. In what came to be known as the Jintian Uprising, after the town of Jintian (now Guiping where the sect was based. Hong's followers emerged victorious and beheaded the Manchu commander of the government troops.
Hong declared the foundation of the "Heavenly Kingdom of Transcendent Peace" on January 11, 1851. Hong Xiuquan ruled by making frequent proclamations from his Heavenly Palace, demanding strict compliance with various moral and religious rules. Most trade was suppressed and property socialized. Polygamy was forbidden and men and women were separated. Following a failed attempt by the Taiping to take Shanghai in 1860, the Qing forces, aided by Western officers, slowly gained ground.

Christianity first entered China in the 1st century A.D. And has been a shadow presence ever since. Until now, where it seems to have caught a national trend. With some provinces now already having a majority Christian population (notably Hebei). Christianity has already outstripped the Communist Party's population of 70 million people.

Of course some not too positive side effects are also appearing already. Fanaticism is also existent already. Even during peak eras of imperial power central government institutions had very limited reach into the local domain of rural village society. Rural communities were free (indeed compelled) to organize themselves around locally rooted social and cultural institutions. Alongside family, clan, and lineage organizations, devotional traditions were ubiquitous matrices for the structuring of village life. Because these traditions picked up at the point where the ordering energies of the imperial state ebbed away (and because the imperial state itself was conceptualized as a grand spirit-cult), their "political" and "religious" functions could never be practically disaggregated.
Which in short means the PRC is concerned about the rising turbulence and christian fanaticism in the rural districts. However historically no central government has so far been able to force or sway the rural population against it's will. This led to the former justice minister in Beijing to voice concerns that if something decisive was not done soon, it could become a reality that a Christian uprising in the rural territories could overthrow the central government (mirroring Mao's own rise to power through the use of the rural population).
This in short could lead for better or worse to the 2nd Christian God State of China. With some fanatic Christian cults such as Eastern Lightning and Three Grades of Servants Church already having declared the establishment of a Christian God State as their endgoal.

How widespread are these cults? A recent survey in Jiangsu showed that there are over 900,000 Protestant Christians, but also some 15,000 followers of the 'Lingling cult'. If other cults such as 'Shouters' are taken into consideration, then perhaps we might estimate that 5-10% of the 'Christians' in jiangsu are involved in dubious groups of some kind.





But in short. What are your views on the events happening in China? With the rural population (the historical powerhouse of any political movement in China) converting to Christianity en masse, with some aspirations for a God State rising? With China already having a higher Christian population than any European country has regardless of faith? With China at the end of the century perhaps becoming the most populous Christian nation on this earth? The widespread rejection of Taoism/Buddhism/Daoism/Atheism in favor of various trends of Christianity?




PS: For those interested. Some Chinese Christian artefacts:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/76/Lords_Prayer_in_Chinese.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Kir1_1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Jesuites_en_chine.jpg

Could you give some links to the sources for the estimates?

If memory serves, Islam is growing faster than Christianity in China.

Fun times ahead then....

Couple this with the fact Christianity is the fastest growing religion in China. If present conversion rates hold, roughly 200,000+ a year. Christianity will form a majority in China around the year 2070.

Im not great at math but 200,000 a year for 63 years is like 12 million people. In a nation of 1.3 BILLION people how the heck are you figuring Catholics will be a majority of anything? Ill be willing to bet 12 million people in China believe in Lepricons too.

Interestingly enough, it should be noted that a great many Chinese don't view religion quite in the same light that we Westerners do. For example, the Chinese usually don't see believing in more than one religion, or practicing more than one as problematic. Historically speaking, Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. have all cohabited there without really clashing.

So it's likely that even a mainly Christian or Muslim China will not ever reach the same level of fundamentalist stupidity that the Christian or Muslim radicals elsewhere in the world reach. Because most of them might have beliefs and behaviors pertaining to more than just a single religion, and as such are less likely to see a point in trying to convert everyone or try to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat.

Sometimes I wish religion in the Western world wasn't such a source of conflict and clashes of ideologies.

Interestingly enough, it should be noted that a great many Chinese don't view religion quite in the same light that we Westerners do. For example, the Chinese usually don't see believing in more than one religion, or practicing more than one as problematic. Historically speaking, Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. have all cohabited there without really clashing.

So it's likely that even a mainly Christian or Muslim China will not ever reach the same level of fundamentalist stupidity that the Christian or Muslim radicals elsewhere in the world reach. Because most of them might have beliefs and behaviors pertaining to more than just a single religion, and as such are less likely to see a point in trying to convert everyone or try to shove their beliefs down everyone's throat.

Sometimes I wish religion in the Western world wasn't such a source of conflict and clashes of ideologies.

Only sometimes?

Keep in mind that china actualkly passed a law ordering buddhists not to reincarnate without the government's permission. Five rupees says that China passes a law declaring "Jesus never existed!" or "Jesus existed but was only as human being!" within a decade.

Only sometimes?

Fine, fine. Most of the times I wish religion in the Western world wasn't such a source of conflict and clashes of ideologies. :p

no i dont think we are in for a second taiping rebellion.

a big reason for the success of the taipings was the crippled central government at the time. they didnt have the strength to crush the rebellion in its early stages.

today's china has more than enough strength to deal with any such movement.

Could you give some links to the sources for the estimates?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_china

vs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_china#Ethnic_Groups


Whereas Islam has a presence in China, the issue is more that Islam is set to specific ethnic minorities (mainly Hui, Kazak, Uyghur, etc..). Whereas the Christian religion seems to be spreading wholly throughout the rural district regardless of ethnicity.


As for actual growth. Christianity is growing faster. Islam is not truly spreading through prosleytizing, but through natural growth (i.e the muslim population having offspring).

It is the same as to why which religion is the fastest growing is such a matter of debate. Some news sources claim Islam, others claim Christianity. The big debate is does one use percentage increase (Islam wins in this) or sheer number increase (Christianity wins in this).
Also interesting is in the twentieth century, the Christian population in Africa exploded from an estimated eight or nine million in 1900 (8 to 9%) to some 335 million in 2000 (45%), marking a shift in the “center of gravity of Christianity” from the West to Latin America, parts of Asia and Africa.
Same with Asia. Vietnam's Christian population increased 600% since the 1970's. Soon Christianity will replace Islam as the main religion in Africa, and perhaps depending on how trends play out become the majority religion in Asia as well. (considering the growth of Christianity in the Korea's/China/Vietnam/Mongolia will probably win).

In contrast it seems that Europe will in the future have a majority muslim population.

If memory serves, Islam is growing faster than Christianity in China.

Fun times ahead then....

I doubt that considering China is embracing Western Culture. Christianity is much more flexible then Islam. I suspect it would have a better appeal then Islam in the cities specifically. Countryside it may be a bit different.

Pity, that.

Christianity will form a majority in China around the year 2070.

UNdoubtedly, the Chinese government will have fed them to the salt mines before such a travesty could happen.

Pity, that.

How so? Christianity which originally was an oriental religion is returning to it's roots, albeit another Eastern culture. Christianity is set to become the most dominant religion in Africa (replacing Islam), and in Asia (due to growth in India/China along with other Asian nations).

How so? Christianity which originally was an oriental religion is returning to it's roots, albeit another Eastern culture. Christianity is set to become the most dominant religion in Africa (replacing Islam), and in Asia (due to growth in India/China along with other Asian nations).

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.

QFT

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.


Well the Chinese have had forced state atheism on them the last half century. The State still follows and chases down faith-based organizations that stray from it's strict regulations. So you're disappointed that people are choosing Christianity over atheism en masse in China?

I also have a slightly different theory as to the insane popularity of Christianity in China at the moment. As we know Christianity in particular has in history often to always been the "last hurrah" for the poor, disenchanted and humble. It's very roots a fringe Jewish (Who were pretty much the n*ggers of Rome) sect who was oppressed and persecuted through much of it's early history. If we know one thing oddly enough unlike many other things, Christianity seems to blossom in the face of persecution. For example in North Africa where more and more people are converting from Islam to Christianity despite the threat of apostasy. Leading to the results of two brothers in Somalia being tortured for 18 hours but refusing to return to Islam or refute their new won faith. Same as in Nigeria where the once 3% Christian population is now 49%. Despite frequent attacks by muslim extremists who burn down churches and villages (The "Only the meek,.." and "turn the other cheek" mantra's seem to be a big thing there, as there are countless reports of African Christians being killed without offering resistance).
As for who is turning Christian in China. It is mostly the rural population who seem to embrace it. Possibly seeing something in it that the State cannot provide them. In the future the center of Christianity will doubtlessly be Asia/Africa. A return to its roots you might as well say,..

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8916982/

Then I fear for science if the majority of them don't use their brains,...

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.

Agreed. Very, very sad. Such is humanity, though. If the majority actually did think, as a species we would be so much better off, but... oh well.

Pity that a large number of people are still clutching at superstitions and religions, rather than using their brains.
I can't say I'm surprised, really, but it's still disappointing.

Lolwhut?

As if the two are mutually exclusive?

Lolwhut?

As if the two are mutually exclusive?

They are unrelated. Much as it shows that most scientists from Newton to Copernicus to Lemaître possessed deeply held beliefs. Lemaître in particular, he was a priest, but that didn't stop him from creating the Big Bang theory.

To claim secularism has a monopoly on science is ludicrous and misleading. Science not a belief system, it is a tool for advancement of society. For faith-based scientists science is the tool to bring us closer to whichever respective deity they worship. For secular-based scientists science is the tool to further society as well or perhaps depending on their convictions of agnostics or atheists, a tool to dispell their deeply held conviction on the lack of basis for faith.

They are unrelated. Much as it shows that most scientists from Newton to Copernicus to Lemaître possessed deeply held beliefs. Lemaître in particular, he was a priest, but that didn't stop him from creating the Big Bang theory.

To claim secularism has a monopoly on science is ludicrous and misleading. Science not a belief system, it is a tool for advancement of society. For faith-based scientists science is the tool to bring us closer to whichever respective deity they worship. For secular-based scientists science is the tool to further society as well or perhaps depending on their convictions of agnostics or atheists, a tool to dispell their deeply held conviction on the lack of basis for faith.

That is exactly what I meant by "lolwhut?".
If only you could be as articulate as I.
Tsk. Tsk. :p

They are unrelated. Much as it shows that most scientists from Newton to Copernicus to Lemaître possessed deeply held beliefs. Lemaître in particular, he was a priest, but that didn't stop him from creating the Big Bang theory.

To claim secularism has a monopoly on science is ludicrous and misleading. Science not a belief system, it is a tool for advancement of society. For faith-based scientists science is the tool to bring us closer to whichever respective deity they worship. For secular-based scientists science is the tool to further society as well or perhaps depending on their convictions of agnostics or atheists, a tool to dispell their deeply held conviction on the lack of basis for faith.

Very well said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8916982/

Then I fear for science if the majority of them don't use their brains,...

The most brilliant doctor or engineer might still only use his/her brain where his or her particular subject is concerned, and not make much use of it in other aspects of life.
Way to miss my point.

They are unrelated. Much as it shows that most scientists from Newton to Copernicus to Lemaître possessed deeply held beliefs. Lemaître in particular, he was a priest, but that didn't stop him from creating the Big Bang theory.

To claim secularism has a monopoly on science is ludicrous and misleading. Science not a belief system, it is a tool for advancement of society. For faith-based scientists science is the tool to bring us closer to whichever respective deity they worship. For secular-based scientists science is the tool to further society as well or perhaps depending on their convictions of agnostics or atheists, a tool to dispell their deeply held conviction on the lack of basis for faith.

Nobody ever claimed they were related. But that's a very nice strawman you built yourself there.

The most brilliant doctor or engineer might still only use his/her brain where his or her particular subject is concerned, and not make much use of it in other aspects of life.
Way to miss my point.

Not only that but statistics, statistics, damn lies and statistics.

We should ask ourselves a couple of questions.

What is the statistical trend?

Belief in personal God 1914 1933 1998

Personal belief 27.7 15 7.0
Personal disbelief 52.7 68 72.2
Doubt or agnosticism 20.9 17 20.8

Link since I can't align the numbers (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html)

This is from the National Academy of Science, which brings me to my second point. Most of the leading scientists express a lack of belief nowadays - the MSNBC poll takes in social sciences and probably polls a number from a broad range of places.

This ties into the fact that it's patently irrelevant to cite scientists from a time when practically everyone in the Western world believed in God because it was simply an accepted state of affairs that He did. The rise of science as a model for the world over religion, caused by scientists has led to a decline of belief....in scientists!

Finally, and this is uncited and unproven but I'm sure I could dig around for evidence if pressed, there are scientists who claim belief in God because if they didn't, they would lose funding.

Cybach - To claim secularism has a monopoly on science is ludicrous and misleading. Science not a belief system, it is a tool for advancement of society. For faith-based scientists science is the tool to bring us closer to whichever respective deity they worship.

Perhaps...

For secular-based scientists science is the tool to further society as well or perhaps depending on their convictions of agnostics or atheists, a tool to dispell their deeply held conviction on the lack of basis for faith.

I'm not sure as to this sentence - first I would say that scientists are more interested in discovering how things work over a 'tool to further society' and I'm not sure as to the meaning of your second part.

Chinese govenment should fight against aggressive faith. If such FRIENDLY (to each other) religions like Christianity and Islam gain a solid foothold in China then destabilization and religious wars would occur. It happened in the past and it would happen for the second time and so on. If China wants to play major role in world, then China cannot be dettered by religion and intolerance (and these religions are just famous for it).

Sorry for bad English (not fluent in it)

Not only that but statistics, statistics, damn lies and statistics.

We should ask ourselves a couple of questions.

What is the statistical trend?

Belief in personal God 1914 1933 1998

Personal belief 27.7 15 7.0
Personal disbelief 52.7 68 72.2
Doubt or agnosticism 20.9 17 20.8

Link since I can't align the numbers (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html)

This is from the National Academy of Science, which brings me to my second point. Most of the leading scientists express a lack of belief nowadays - the MSNBC poll takes in social sciences and probably polls a number from a broad range of places.

This ties into the fact that it's patently irrelevant to cite scientists from a time when practically everyone in the Western world believed in God because it was simply an accepted state of affairs that He did. The rise of science as a model for the world over religion, caused by scientists has led to a decline of belief....in scientists!

Finally, and this is uncited and unproven but I'm sure I could dig around for evidence if pressed, there are scientists who claim belief in God because if they didn't, they would lose funding.



Perhaps...



I'm not sure as to this sentence - first I would say that scientists are more interested in discovering how things work over a 'tool to further society' and I'm not sure as to the meaning of your second part.


That is however only the trend for Western Europe? The world tends to be a bit bigger than Western Europe. And since the fall of Communism, particularly in the East there has been a blossom in religious conviction.

Also your claim that "everyone" was believing in God when these scientists lived is misleading and attempting a strawman. Lemaître was only in the last century, so much later than Darwin for example. Or let us take Newton. True the time he was alive in there was an almost uniform belief in God. Yet Newton was a Puritan, taking it one step further. So as a scientist he could have excused himself to much more liberal Churches such as the Anglican, yet he chose to belong to the most conservative and rigid of perhaps all Christian Churches at the time...so conservative that the State of England even persecuted them.


first I would say that scientists are more interested in discovering how things work over a 'tool to further society'

If one finds out the workings of something and documents it, doesn't that further the knowledge of society as a whole?


I'm not sure as to the meaning of your second part.

That for an agnostic scientist the question of faith is irrelevant. There may or may not be a God, they simply don't care. Whereas atheism requires you to take the position that there is no God or higher deity.



Chinese govenment should fight against aggressive faith. If such FRIENDLY (to each other) religions like Christianity and Islam gain a solid foothold in China then destabilization and religious wars would occur. It happened in the past and it would happen for the second time and so on. If China wants to play major role in world, then China cannot be dettered by religion and intolerance (and these religions are just famous for it).

The Chinese government is being careful and not overly harsh for simple reasons. All Chinese dynasties so far have crumbled when they awoke the ire of the rural population. One sure way to piss off the rural population is to forbid them a religion and crack down on them in systematic purges.
Now one could argue you could excise only the rural Christian population and leave the rest intact. However the Chinese government doesn't want to risk the non-christian rural population uprising in support of it's christian brethren. An uprising which would doom the state to a collapse. Tough to explain, I hope I am doing an adequate job at it.
Many villages in the hei province aren't even visited anymore by communist government officials. This is due to extremist Christian cults rioting against them. Eastern Lightning is infamous for gouging out the eyes and crucifying census takers and officials alive. Meaning a lot of the villages are now without government oversight. With the government just trying to take out the leaders in crackdown arrests, which is easier said than done.

As for the population growth. The bible says "go forth and be fruitful" leading many of the Christian Chinese in the rural villages to break the one child policy. Couple this with the fact that the government is slowly being pushed out of the villages, well...you can see the end result.

The Chinese government is being careful and not overly harsh for simple reasons. All Chinese dynasties so far have crumbled when they awoke the ire of the rural population. One sure way to piss off the rural population is to forbid them a religion and crack down on them in systematic purges.
Now one could argue you could excise only the rural Christian population and leave the rest intact. However the Chinese government doesn't want to risk the non-christian rural population uprising in support of it's christian brethren. An uprising which would doom the state to a collapse. Tough to explain, I hope I am doing an adequate job at it.
Many villages in the hei province aren't even visited anymore by communist government officials. This is due to extremist Christian cults rioting against them. Eastern Lightning is infamous for gouging out the eyes and crucifying census takers and officials alive. Meaning a lot of the villages are now without government oversight. With the government just trying to take out the leaders in crackdown arrests, which is easier said than done.

You're contradicting yourself there. If the Chinese government was so fearful of peasant revolts, why did it "crack down" on religion so harshly in the past?

And curcifying officials... yes, I can see that the rise of christianty is surely beneficial to Chinese society and will further neighbourly love and respect...

As for the population growth. The bible says "go forth and be fruitful" leading many of the Christian Chinese in the rural villages to break the one child policy. Couple this with the fact that the government is slowly being pushed out of the villages, well...you can see the end result.

Well, and here I was believing that the rural population has long since been exempt from the one-child policy. Silly me...

That is however only the trend for Western Europe? The world tends to be a bit bigger than Western Europe. And since the fall of Communism, particularly in the East there has been a blossom in religious conviction.

No, it's simply in response to your MSNBC link - and it's the NAS, which is American - I suspect Western Europe would be worse for you.

Also your claim that "everyone" was believing in God when these scientists lived is misleading and attempting a strawman. Lemaître was only in the last century, so much later than Darwin for example. Or let us take Newton. True the time he was alive in there was an almost uniform belief in God. Yet Newton was a Puritan, taking it one step further. So as a scientist he could have excused himself to much more liberal Churches such as the Anglican, yet he chose to belong to the most conservative and rigid of perhaps all Christian Churches at the time...so conservative that the State of England even persecuted them.

This still doesn't make it relevant that religious people have also been scientists. I'm sure 90% of scientists were male 100 years ago, doesn't mean that being male and being scientific have much relation to each other either.

Are we agreeing that religion and science have little to do with each other?

If one finds out the workings of something and documents it, doesn't that further the knowledge of society as a whole?

I'm not debating that, I'm questioning first cause.

That for an agnostic scientist the question of faith is irrelevant. There may or may not be a God, they simply don't care. Whereas atheism requires you to take the position that there is no God or higher deity.

Thanks.

The Chinese government is being careful and not overly harsh for simple reasons. All Chinese dynasties so far have crumbled when they awoke the ire of the rural population. One sure way to piss off the rural population is to forbid them a religion and crack down on them in systematic purges.
Now one could argue you could excise only the rural Christian population and leave the rest intact. However the Chinese government doesn't want to risk the non-christian rural population uprising in support of it's christian brethren. An uprising which would doom the state to a collapse. Tough to explain, I hope I am doing an adequate job at it.
Many villages in the hei province aren't even visited anymore by communist government officials. This is due to extremist Christian cults rioting against them. Eastern Lightning is infamous for gouging out the eyes and crucifying census takers and officials alive. Meaning a lot of the villages are now without government oversight. With the government just trying to take out the leaders in crackdown arrests, which is easier said than done.
As for the population growth. The bible says "go forth and be fruitful" leading many of the Christian Chinese in the rural villages to break the one child policy. Couple this with the fact that the government is slowly being pushed out of the villages, well...you can see the end result.

It will certainly be interesting, Christianity is a compelling religion but I'm not sure I see it becoming dominant in China. I could certainly be wrong, there's definitely a vacuum to be filled and Christianity is well-placed to take advantage of that.

I wonder how much of their own slant they'll put on it if so, I just can't see the Chinese accepting a foreign God outright, perhaps they'll add Chinese characteristics as they do with everything else.

You're contradicting yourself there. If the Chinese government was so fearful of peasant revolts, why did it "crack down" on religion so harshly in the past?

And curcifying officials... yes, I can see that the rise of christianty is surely beneficial to Chinese society and will further neighbourly love and respect...



Well, and here I was believing that the rural population has long since been exempt from the one-child policy. Silly me...

It still cracks down hard on illegal Christian groups. No denying that. However it was in response to the person who posted that the Chinese government should step up it's actions to completely eradicate it.
This sets up the difficulties. First off, the underground Churches are underground. It is people meeting at houses marked with secret signs, with password entry. Also it's not as if rural peasants who are Christian have an aura around them immediately setting them apart from their Confuscian brothers,..... This makes it hard on the Chinese Government to:

a) Keep track of them (as they always switch location)
b) Crack down on them

So far the Chinese reaction has been taking down the leaders of the cults and attempting damage control. The damage control comes in the form of promoting the two State financed and supported Christian Churches which require registration to the government. They have over 20million members combined, so by no means a failed initiative. However the non-denominational/illegal Churches in the rural districts are still growing.

A nice quote to it:

The Chinese church entered the communist era having made significant progress toward self-support and self-government. Though Chinese rulers had traditionally sought to regulate organized religion and the CCP would continue the practice, Chinese Christians had gained experience in the art of accommodation in order to protect its members. Independent churches and a variety of evangelical sects broadened the appeal of Protestantism, especially in rural China. More than was realized at the time, Christianity in all its variety had taken root in China and possessed the strength and techniques to survive decades of hostility and persecution.

AND

Because house churches operate outside government regulations and restrictions, their members and leaders are sometimes harassed by local government officials. This persecution may take the form of a prison sentence or, more commonly, reeducation through labour. Heavy fines also are not uncommon, with personal effects being confiscated in lieu of payment if this is refused or unavailable. Unlike Falungong, however, house churches have not officially been outlawed, and since the 1990s, there has been increasing official tolerance of house churches. Most observers believe that the harassment of house churches by government officials arises less from an ideological opposition to religion and support of atheism than out of fears of a center of popular mobilization outside the control of the Communist Party of China.


I never stated that the rise of Christianity in China was a good or bad thing. I am merely showing that it is rising, for better or worse.

My bad about the one child policy mix-up. I re-checked it. Officially though the rural districts are required to follow it, but again it shows when they resisted the central government was unwilling to force it upon them. Sort of keying in with what I was saying before.



Are we agreeing that religion and science have little to do with each other?

Absolutely nothing. My point was that the two cannot even be considered opposites since they are truly said not even in the same category. Religion is a personal decision of faith. Science is a tool for understanding and learning. The two do not overlap.
Likewise I stated that secularism has nothing to do with science, you agree on that with me?



It will certainly be interesting, Christianity is a compelling religion but I'm not sure I see it becoming dominant in China. I could certainly be wrong, there's definitely a vacuum to be filled and Christianity is well-placed to take advantage of that.

I wonder how much of their own slant they'll put on it if so, I just can't see the Chinese accepting a foreign God outright, perhaps they'll add Chinese characteristics as they do with everything else.

Certainly no one can know. But it looks compellingly so at the moment.

Also the Christianity they follow there will probably feel alien to you as a Western Protestant. Perhaps the Chinese Catholic and Western Catholic share a stronger similarity, but there is quite a bit of difference.
Note for example that all the texts are written in Chinese. Christianity, Nestorian based, has a long history in China (starting 1st century a.d). This means there is no shortage of Chinese Saints, prayers and customs.

Take for example this Roman Catholic Church belonging to the official state sanctioned one:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Catholic_Church_Cizhong_Yunnan_China.jpg

And here is a nice list of people they venerate as martyrs;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyr_Saints_of_China


Also what makes it even more Asian based is that today, most missionaries are South Koreans. South Korea will soon be the nation that sends out the most Christian missionaries every year, soon to overtake the US.
But more interesting the Koreans are also flooding the middle east and muslim areas with missionaries, which is dangerous. Leading to Saudi Arabia already threatening the South Korean embassy to put a halt to the influx.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3690259.stm

Korean churches have identified Muslim countries as a new frontier.

They see it as their divine duty to spread the Christian faith
Several preachers who had gone to Iraq to set up a Christian mission were kidnapped by militiamen, but later released.

Now back with his small congregation in southern Seoul - preacher Huh Min-yong says he has no regrets.

"We must go to Iraq and the Middle East even if we become martyrs," he says.

What is a tad bit disturbing about this, is that "fervor and dedication" are seen as higher virtues in the Korean Church than in any Western Churches. Meaning if it is almost only Korean missionaries in China, obviously they will pass on the emphasis on religious fervor and dedication. Which I view as a not too good omen for the future, it certainly won't help when they collide with other religions,..

I can think of few things more horrifying than another uneducated Christian fascist world power.

I can think of few things more horrifying than another uneducated Christian fascist world power.

I fail to see the "fascist" in it? Christianity at it's basis is strongly socialist bordering anarcho-communist.

I fail to see the "fascist" in it? Christianity at it's basis is strongly socialist bordering anarcho-communist.

Few people will take up Christianity at its basis, though, will they? What they will pick up are 2000 years of obscure and mainstream traditions and theories, promoting everything from censorship and creationism to rape rather than masturbate and burning witches.
The fact that some have taken up crucifying officials speaks volumes.

Few people will take up Christianity at its basis, though, will they? What they will pick up are 2000 years of obscure and mainstream traditions and theories, promoting everything from censorship and creationism to rape rather than masturbate and burning witches.
The fact that some have taken up crucifying officials speaks volumes.

With over 2 billion people from hundreds of different cultures one is bound to find different interpretations no? There is a reason Christianity spreads like a wildfire among the poor, disenchanted and oppressed. With it's message of the virtue of poverty, helping eachother and it's emphasis on forgiveness, charity and the afterlife. What did Christ once say:

"it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven." ~ Jesus

But I think what you are getting at is something Napoleon put into a nice phrase of respectful insight;

Well then, I will tell you. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne and I myself have founded great empires; but upon what did these creations of our genius depend? Upon force. Jesus alone founded His empire upon love, and to this very day millions will die for Him.... I think I understand something of human nature; and I tell you, all these were men, and I am a man: none else is like Him; Jesus Christ was more than man.... I have inspired multitudes with such an enthusiastic devotion that they would have died for me.... but to do this it was necessary that I should be visibly present with the electric influence of my looks, my words, of my voice. When I saw men and spoke to them, I lighted up the flame of self-devotion in their hearts.... Christ alone has succeeded in so raising the mind of man toward the unseen, that it becomes insensible to the barriers of time and space. Across a chasm of eighteen hundred years, Jesus Christ makes a demand which is beyond all others to satisfy; He asks for that which a philosopher may seek in vain at the hands of his friends, or a father of his children, or a bride of her spouse, or a man of his brother. He asks for the human heart; He will have it entirely to Himself. He demands it unconditionally; and forthwith His demand is granted. Wonderful! In defiance of time and space, the soul of man, with all its powers and faculties, becomes an annexation to the empire of Christ. All who sincerely believe in Him, experience that remarkable, supernatural love toward Him. This phenomenon is accountable; it is altogether beyond the scope of man's creative powers. Time, the great destroyer, is powerless to extinguish this sacred flame; time can neither exhaust its strength nor put a limit to its range. This is it, which strikes me most; I have often thought of it." ~ Napoleon Bonaparte


Of course such devotion is something to fear for the rational. But then again fundamentalism and extremism don't necessarily dominate religion either.

With over 2 billion people from hundreds of different cultures one is bound to find different interpretations no? There is a reason Christianity spreads like a wildfire among the poor, disenchanted and oppressed. With it's message of the virtue of poverty, helping eachother and it's emphasis on forgiveness, charity and the afterlife. What did Christ once say:



But I think what you are getting at is something Napoleon put into a nice phrase of respectful insight;




Of course such devotion is something to fear for the rational. But then again fundamentalism and extremism don't necessarily dominate religion either.

Not quite. ;)
What I was trying to get at is that the Chinese today are not being handed a "new" religion. It's not exaclty a religion that only recently came about and is still in the progress of forming.
What they get is a religion that's been around for 2 millenia, and in that time has been shaped and molded numerous times to accomodate basically anything and everything. Those missionaries won't come bringing new ideas, but ideas that have been considered, thought about, meditated on, dismissed, twisted, corrected and restored for centuries. It comes with a history of having endorsed some of the worst crimes ever comitted and some of the worst cruelties ever invented (although, given that we're talking about China here, that might not impress people there very much ;)). Basically, it comes with a culture, you could say. And I personally have my doubts if Christian culture will do much to improve Chinese society.

But we'll just have to wait and see.

Not quite. ;)
What I was trying to get at is that the Chinese today are not being handed a "new" religion. It's not exaclty a religion that only recently came about and is still in the progress of forming.
What they get is a religion that's been around for 2 millenia, and in that time has been shaped and molded numerous times to accomodate basically anything and everything. Those missionaries won't come bringing new ideas, but ideas that have been considered, thought about, meditated on, dismissed, twisted, corrected and restored for centuries. It comes with a history of having endorsed some of the worst crimes ever comitted and some of the worst cruelties ever invented (although, given that we're talking about China here, that might not impress people there very much ;)). Basically, it comes with a culture, you could say. And I personally have my doubts if Christian culture will do much to improve Chinese society.

But we'll just have to wait and see.


Yet democracy is older than Christianity, and we still follow that antiquated system. The fact that Christianity managed to thrive for over 2 millenia speaks more for it than against it no?

As for Asia and trying to scare them off Christianity by mentioning ancient atrocities. Well this is the same Asia where the common attitude is that Adolf Hitler was a political genius on par with Napoleon with no real difference between the two. One only needs to go to New Delhi or Seoul and see bars and fashion stores dedicated to Hitler and the Third Reich. If a slaughter on par with the holocaust makes them merely shrug and tell you that's war, well good luck trying to sell them the horrors of the inquistition...

Yet democracy is older than Christianity, and we still follow that antiquated system. The fact that Christianity managed to thrive for over 2 millenia speaks more for it than against it no?

Yes and no. The basic idea of democracy is still alive, yet an Athenean from Ancient Greece visiting today's "democracies" would not recognise them.
First of all, we've extended the idea to include people the Athenians would not even have thought of as humans.
Secondly, we have created a form of distant democracy, which in essence means we are picking our rulers, and that's all. Athenians had a far more direct form of democracy, decisions of the state were usually put up for vote, including judical decisions, decisions on finances and decisions on warfare.
Really the only democratic idea we've maintained over the years is that people ought to be allowed to vote for something every now and then.

But in that, you are right, it is a lot like Christianity ;)



As for Asia and trying to scare them off Christianity by mentioning ancient atrocities. Well this is the same Asia where the common attitude is that Adolf Hitler was a political genius on par with Napoleon with no real difference between the two. One only needs to go to New Delhi or Seoul and see bars and fashion stores dedicated to Hitler and the Third Reich. If a slaughter on par with the holocaust makes them merely shrug and tell you that's war, well good luck trying to sell them the horrors of the inquistition...

I'm willing to bet with you that, in time, he'll be regarded in much the same way in Europe.
Once events and personalities move into history, it's easy to forget the death and destruction they caused, and easy to remember their "genius".

But you misunderstand me again. I'm most certainly not going to Asia to preach about Christianity's history there. The point I was making is that there will most certainly be people there who will feel inspired by these events. Christianity as it is handed to populations in Asia today is not fresh and new, but rather worn and bloody by now. That won't scare them off, rather I'm worried that it might be attracting some....

Interestingly enough, it should be noted that a great many Chinese don't view religion quite in the same light that we Westerners do. For example, the Chinese usually don't see believing in more than one religion, or practicing more than one as problematic. Historically speaking, Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. have all cohabited there without really clashing.

So it's likely that even a mainly Christian or Muslim China will not ever reach the same level of fundamentalist stupidity that the Christian or Muslim radicals elsewhere in the world reach....

Well, eastern religions (Sinic and Indic) are inclusive...it is common to have multiple identities making up one person. Both Islam and Xtianity are missionary exclusivist religions. Converts to these typically diss former beliefs and conflicts are bound to occur.

Another interesting thing that I have observed is the conflict between "pure" muslims and xtians (from KSA for muslims and USA for xtians) against local muslims and xtians who practice localised/indianised islam or christianity.

Science is a tool for understanding and learning. The two do not overlap.
Likewise I stated that secularism has nothing to do with science, you agree on that with me?

No, science is utterly secular - even if you are of the Christian faith you have to dispel any religious thought from your mind to conduct any experiment,

Yet democracy is older than Christianity, and we still follow that antiquated system. The fact that Christianity managed to thrive for over 2 millenia speaks more for it than against it no?

Likewise, I don't think democracy has anything to do with Christianity as a comparison. You talk elsewhere of Christianity being taken up quickly by the poor and oppressed - I'd say it's less the message of peace than a refuge for blighted lives. Are these people being taken advantage by the soft face of religion, do they truly believe in the message or are they taking a bit of charity?

I'd also like evidence for bars celebrating Hitler - there was a case in Korea but it was slapped down as quickly as a bar in the West called The Nanjing Massacre would be slapped down.

Again, Christianity in China is rising but from a very low base, I'd say partly from rejection of communism and partly because of the evangelical nature of Christianity. There's a reaction against this in India already and there'll be one against Christianity in China given time and publicity.

Christianity is very subtle in that it doesn't ask you to do much aside from turn up to a centre of prayer, whatever that may be and 'believing'. the social nature is often more attractive than the belief.

I doubt Christianity in China will gain any more than 20-25% of the population although, as per many marketers dream, 20-25% of the Chinese population is a huge amount of actual people.

That Christianity will also be more social in nature than actual worship.

It frightens me as to how people lick their lips over China becoming Christian, it speaks to the 'follow my creed' nature of religion.

Yes and no. The basic idea of democracy is still alive, yet an Athenean from Ancient Greece visiting today's "democracies" would not recognise them.
First of all, we've extended the idea to include people the Athenians would not even have thought of as humans.
Secondly, we have created a form of distant democracy, which in essence means we are picking our rulers, and that's all. Athenians had a far more direct form of democracy, decisions of the state were usually put up for vote, including judical decisions, decisions on finances and decisions on warfare.
Really the only democratic idea we've maintained over the years is that people ought to be allowed to vote for something every now and then.

But in that, you are right, it is a lot like Christianity ;)

Perhaps like whiskey it will get a stronger and more pleasant flavor with age. One can always hope.





I'm willing to bet with you that, in time, he'll be regarded in much the same way in Europe.
Once events and personalities move into history, it's easy to forget the death and destruction they caused, and easy to remember their "genius".

Possibly. I mean compared to the other great men in the war who were:

1) A bitter cripple who had polio
2) A fat drunk who had a habit of passing out and having to retire to bed early
3) A shy recluse with a killer mustache

He seems to be the most shining figure of World War II. Considering he was in my view also the most interesting. I mean he only was a poor boy born in a backwater village in the middle of nowhere, was a mediocre artist who wanted to become an artist professionally. Was a vegetarian, never drank and never smoked (considering this was 1930's and not 1980's California that is rather an oddity). Also the fact that from what one reads most people close to him actually found him a pleasant personality who spoke with a shadow of an austrian accent, with a healthy sense of humor and the ability to make everyone laugh. Also the fact that he loved animals and children, doting presents to the children of his officers and affectionatly being called uncle Adolf. This whole image makes him even more disturbing in my eyes. It shows him to even be a greater monster in my eyes.
But yes, in the future once the last survivors and their children are a memory he will probably be seen in the same light as Genghis Khan (killed over 20million+, which in those times would have been equivalent to over 100million or more today in terms of population percentage) or Napoleon.


But you misunderstand me again. I'm most certainly not going to Asia to preach about Christianity's history there. The point I was making is that there will most certainly be people there who will feel inspired by these events. Christianity as it is handed to populations in Asia today is not fresh and new, but rather worn and bloody by now. That won't scare them off, rather I'm worried that it might be attracting some....

True. But as an odd piece of trivia. The largest Asian army to ever be mobilized in the old days, was raised by who? ,......a Christian.

In 1255, Hulagu Khan, the child of Tolui and Sorghaghtani Beki, a Christian woman, was sent by his brother Mongke (who was Great Khan from 1251-1258) to conquer or destroy the remaining Muslim states in southwestern Asia. His mother was a passionate Nestorian Christian, as was his wife, Dokuz Khatun, and his closest friend and general, Kitbuqa. Their influence was said to have instilled in him a deep animosity against Muslims[citation needed] — unusual for the generally tolerant Mongol Empire — along with a contrasting desire to assist Christians.
Hulagu told the Dominican missionary at his court David of Ashby that he had strong sympathies towards Christianity, through the influence of his Nestorian mother Sorghaghtani Beki, and that he was a Christian at heart. He also told the Armenian historian Vartan Arewelc'i in 1264 that he had been a Christian since birth.
Hulagu marched out with perhaps the largest Mongol army ever assembled. Among his subsidiary generals was Kitbuqa, a Christian. Hulagu easily destroyed the Lurs, and his reputation so frightened the Assassins (also known as the Hashshashin) that they surrendered their impregnable fortress of Alamut to him without a fight.
The Mongols proceded to sack Baghdad. The Grand Library of Baghdad, containing countless precious historical documents and books on subjects ranging from medicine to astronomy, was destroyed. Survivors said that the waters of the Tigris ran black with ink from the enormous quantities of books flung into the river. Citizens attempted to flee, but were intercepted by Mongol soldiers who raped and killed with abandon.
Thus was the caliphate destroyed, and Mesopotamia ravaged; it has never again been such a major center of culture and influence. The smaller states in the region hastened to reassure Hulagu of their loyalty, and the Mongols turned to Syria in 1259, conquering the Ayyubids and sending advance patrols as far ahead as Gaza.
After Baghdad, in 1260, Mongol forces combined with Christians ones (the army of Cilician Armenia under Hetoum I, and the Franks of Bohemond VI) then conquered Muslim Syria, domain of the Ayyubid dynasty. They took together the city of Aleppo, and on March 1, 1260, the Mongols with the Armenians and the Franks of Antioch took Damascus,[4][5] under the Christian Mongol general Kitbuqa.[6] The three Christian rulers entered the city of Damascus together in triumph, and great Christian celebrations were made. [7][6] Mass was celebrated in the Grand Mosque of the Umayyads (the former cathedral of Saint John the Baptist),[8], and numerous mosques were profanated:

"The king of Armenia and the Prince of Antioch went to the army of the Tatars, and they all went off to take Damascus. When Damascus was taken, the Prince, to the shame of the Sarasins, established a beautiful church, which at the time of the Greeks used to belong to the Christians, and where since then the Sarasins had prayed Mahomet. The Prince had mass held for the Franks and the bells rung. In the other mosques of Mahomet, where the Sarazins were, shrubs were placed, wine was sprayed on the walls, and fresh pork grease was smeared. And if he commanded his people to do some dirt, they would do tenfold."
—Gestes des Chiprois, Le Templier de Tyr, quoted in "Histoire des Croisades III", René Grousset[9]

This invasion effectively destroyed the Ayyubid Dynasty, theretofore powerful ruler of large parts of the Levant, Egypt and Arabia. The last Ayyubid king An-Nasir Yusuf was killed by Hulagu in 1260.[10] With the Islamic power centers of Baghdad and Damascus gone, the center of Islamic power transferred to the Egyptian Mamluks in Cairo.


In short it was a Christian Mongol Khan with his fellow Mongol Christian General who raised the largest Mongol army, and out of a feeling of loyalty assisted the European nations in their Crusade. Raping, looting and borderline ethnically cleansing every Muslim city from India to Egypt/Modern day Turkey. Causing whole Caliphate's to crumble, and causing such damage to Islamic culture that even today it has not fully recovered from it (particularly the sack of Baghdad).


So I think Christian history in Asia already has a violent enough past that one does not need to try and mention European Christian issues if one wants to bring up the topic of war and destruction ;)

Perhaps like whiskey it will get a stronger and more pleasant flavor with age. One can always hope.


Considering that other ancient religions, like the Egyptian religion for example, had been around for more than twice as long as Christianity now, I think it has a lot of catching up to do ;)
2000 years isn't bad, but it's not exaclty impressive, either, were religions are concerned.



Possibly. I mean compared to the other great men in the war who were:

1) A bitter cripple who had polio
2) A fat drunk who had a habit of passing out and having to retire to bed early
3) A shy recluse with a killer mustache

He seems to be the most shining figure of World War II. Considering he was in my view also the most interesting. I mean he only was a poor boy born in a backwater village in the middle of nowhere, was a mediocre artist who wanted to become an artist professionally. Was a vegetarian, never drank and never smoked (considering this was 1930's and not 1980's California that is rather an oddity). Also the fact that from what one reads most people close to him actually found him a pleasant personality who spoke with a shadow of an austrian accent, with a healthy sense of humor and the ability to make everyone laugh. Also the fact that he loved animals and children, doting presents to the children of his officers and affectionatly being called uncle Adolf. This whole image makes him even more disturbing in my eyes. It shows him to even be a greater monster in my eyes.
But yes, in the future once the last survivors and their children are a memory he will probably be seen in the same light as Genghis Khan (killed over 20million+, which in those times would have been equivalent to over 100million or more today in terms of population percentage) or Napoleon.

I think your description of Hitler there sums up pretty well why I for one are very, VERY sceptical of everybody who believes in any one ideology too strongly, or who believes in some form of higher purpose.
True, some of them will do good. But looking at history, personalities like these coupled with believes like that brought so much death and destruction that you can sometimes only wonder how humanity keeps reviving itself.






True. But as an odd piece of trivia. The largest Asian army to ever be mobilized in the old days, was raised by who? ,......a Christian.

In short it was a Christian Mongol Khan with his fellow Mongol Christian General who raised the largest Mongol army, and out of a feeling of loyalty assisted the European nations in their Crusade. Raping, looting and borderline ethnically cleansing every Muslim city from India to Egypt/Modern day Turkey. Causing whole Caliphate's to crumble, and causing such damage to Islamic culture that even today it has not fully recovered from it (particularly the sack of Baghdad).


So I think Christian history in Asia already has a violent enough past that one does not need to try and mention European Christian issues if one wants to bring up the topic of war and destruction ;)

Oh, no doubts there. Christianity has a bloody history no matter where you look. That's why I'm not exactly rejoicing at its revival.
Rationality and moderation would be preferable in my eyes.

As for Asia and trying to scare them off Christianity by mentioning ancient atrocities. Well this is the same Asia where the common attitude is that Adolf Hitler was a political genius on par with Napoleon with no real difference between the two. One only needs to go to New Delhi or Seoul and see bars and fashion stores dedicated to Hitler and the Third Reich. If a slaughter on par with the holocaust makes them merely shrug and tell you that's war, well good luck trying to sell them the horrors of the inquistition...

People tend to care more about things that affect them.

Reason why Nanking massacre and Bengal famines don't register with Europeans and Americans.

People tend to care more about things that affect them.

Reason why Nanking massacre and Bengal famines don't register with Europeans and Americans.

Distance makes indifferent. And that can be physical distance as well as temporal distance, really...