BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
News

Eritrea Arrests 30 Evangelical Christian Women

sermonindex Dec 9, 2009


[b]Eritrea Arrests 30 Evangelical Christian Women[/b]

The Eritrean government arrested 30 elderly, Christian women this past weekend, a Christian persecution watchdog reported Monday.

Security forces on Dec. 5 rounded up a group of mostly elderly women praying together at a house and took them to a police station in Asmara, the capital city, according to International Christian Concern.

The women are mostly members of the Faith Mission Church, an evangelical church with a Methodist background. The church has an over 50-year history in Eritrea but became a target of government crackdown after a law requiring churches to register with officials was adopted in 2002. ...

read more: www.christianpost.com

G
GeorgeFox Dec 9, 2009

Does that mean that if they had registered with officials they would not have been arrested? They weren't arrested for praying, they were arrested for not registering?

M
Miccah Dec 9, 2009

GeorgeFox wrote:



Does that mean that if they had registered with officials they would not have been arrested? They weren't arrested for praying, they were arrested for not registering?


This gets into the issue of if these people [i]should[/i] have registered or not.

I believe that in persecuted nations, you do not follow the rule of law when it comes to worshiping God. If you do, you will only set yourself up for more persecution, or for governmental interference dictating how you are able to worship and how you are not able to worship.

G
GeorgeFox Dec 9, 2009

What about getting a permit to preach? I know that John Bunyan went to jail because he refused to get a permit to preach the Gospel.

M
Miccah Dec 9, 2009

GeorgeFox wrote:


What about getting a permit to preach? I know that John Bunyan went to jail because he refused to get a permit to preach the Gospel.


I will repost what I said before since I believe it answers this question already. :-)


"I believe that in [b]persecuted[/b] nations, you do not follow the rule of law when it comes to worshiping God. If you do, you will only set yourself up for more persecution, or for governmental interference dictating how you are able to worship and how you are not able to worship."

C
ccchhhrrriiisss Dec 9, 2009

Hi GeorgeFox...


GeorgeFox wrote:
What about getting a permit to preach? I know that John Bunyan went to jail because he refused to get a permit to preach the Gospel.

Actually, this is not entirely accurate. John Bunyan was NEVER arrested for merely [i]preaching[/i]...nor was he required to get "a permit to preach the Gospel." Bunyan was free to preach the Gospel, but not in certain "non-sanctioned" places. However, John Bunyan was arrested (twice) for preaching in areas that were legally reserved to "licensed" ministers of the authorized by the state church.

Was this law correct? Of course not. However, John Bunyan did knowingly break the law. He decided to preach in an area where he was required to have a national license that he refused to get. Some biographers have pointed out that this was part of his motivation to preach there...as a point to preach to people in an area that was limited to a denomination that was authorized by the government.

The difference between this and, say, an open air preacher who travels from campus to campus is that the open air preacher HAS the right to preach on the campus (without restriction) if he simply registers as a visitor. He doesn't need a "license" by the school. He simply needs to state that he is a visitor there. At this point, he can preach to his heart's content. John Bunyan did not enjoy such a right. He had no legal "constitutional" rights to preach there and didn't invoke any. He didn't "sue" to obtain such a "right." Now, he could legally preach his particular views in England, but under particular restrictions about what he said and where he said it.

I suppose that the major difference in this analogy would be that open air preachers in the United States aren't prohibited assembly based upon the [i]content[/i] of what they are saying. There are simply some local jurisdiction rules for such organizations that impede ANYONE from speaking without telling the school that they are there. This includes open air preachers of the Gospel...or salesmen, Muslims, Satanists, or activist individuals or organizations (like environmental protesters or PETA).

Do you understand the difference? I cannot claim a Constitutional right to walk onto the grounds of a local elementary school and claim that I have a "Constitutional right" to be there just so that I can preach to a captive audience of school children. The same legal principle applies to colleges and universities.

Some historians have argued that John Bunyan could have found a different method in which to petition for a "right" to preach in such restricted locations. However, Bunyan chose his method. However, I think that it is difficult to draw a fair comparison with what Bunyan did and what some open air preacher in the United States is often trying to do. Bunyan was arrested for the content of what he preached (mingled with the fact that he had no authorized national license to preach his views). There was no "constitutional question." Open air preachers are [u]free[/u] to preach if they simply register as a visitor. Once they register as a visitor, the school has no right to tell them what they can or cannot say.

L
Lysa Dec 9, 2009

Miccah wrote:
GeorgeFox wrote:

What about getting a permit to preach? I know that John Bunyan went to jail because he refused to get a permit to preach the Gospel.

I will repost what I said before since I believe it answers this question already. :-)

"I believe that in [b]persecuted[/b] nations, you do not follow the rule of law when it comes to worshiping God. If you do, you will only set yourself up for more persecution, or for governmental interference dictating how you are able to worship and how you are not able to worship."


You are correct Miccah. I looked up Eritrea and found that those who attended registered churches are persecuted [b]MORE[/b] than than non-registered churches. They allow only four registered churches and they are persecuted more than the others. I believe I'd take my chances.

FYI: The majority of churches in America are already registered through the (brother, I need to save a dime greedy status!); the charity/tax-exempt type status! Probably 99% of the churches in America fell for that one!

The only ones that don't have that status are the home churces. But I know, I could be wrong! Home church people, let me know!

K
Koheleth Dec 9, 2009

This is a question of jurisdiction or right to control. Not government or individual or organization has a right to control what an individual believes. Government has no authority over religion or belief, only over conduct and questions of morality and relationships. Therefore, it is always wrong for government to interfere with religious or spiritual practices, or even to consider whether it should be involved.


Miccah wrote:
GeorgeFox wrote:


Does that mean that if they had registered with officials they would not have been arrested? They weren't arrested for praying, they were arrested for not registering?


This gets into the issue of if these people [i]should[/i] have registered or not.

I believe that in persecuted nations, you do not follow the rule of law when it comes to worshiping God. If you do, you will only set yourself up for more persecution, or for governmental interference dictating how you are able to worship and how you are not able to worship.

M
Miccah Dec 9, 2009


Lysa wrote:



The only ones that don't have that status are the home churces. But I know, I could be wrong! Home church people, let me know!


No 501c3 in our HC.

A church can have a non-501c3 status, but then they would have to pay taxes and may (I am not certain, hence the may) be subject to the laws pertaining to business,ie. equal job opportunities (woman pastors), what can be said and not said (homosexuality is wrong), etc...

A
ADisciple Dec 9, 2009


Miccah wrote:
"I believe that in [b]persecuted[/b] nations, you do not follow the rule of law when it comes to worshiping God. If you do, you will only set yourself up for more persecution, or for governmental interference dictating how you are able to worship and how you are not able to worship."

Why do you limit this to nations where Christians are persecuted?

M
Miccah Dec 9, 2009


ADisciple wrote:



Why do you limit this to nations where Christians are persecuted?


Great question. I will try to explain it better then my last one.

I limit to these nations because in non-persecuted nations, preaching the gospel (for the most part) is not hindered. If the laws of the nation state do not contradict or compromise God's, then we are to obey those nation state's laws.

For example, if universities in America wants someone to registar in order to be able to preach, then register. If this registry was being used to create a list of Christians to persecute them or harm them, then do not register.

We are always called to obey the laws of the land as long as those laws are not against the Lord and His will.

sermonindex Dec 11, 2009

John Bunyan did knowingly break the law. He decided to preach in an area where he was required to have a national license that he refused to get.
So, he was someone like Jesse Morrell!

C
ccchhhrrriiisss Dec 11, 2009

Hi DeepThinker...


DeepThinker wrote:
John Bunyan did knowingly break the law. He decided to preach in an area where he was required to have a national license that he refused to get.
So, he was someone like Jesse Morrell!

Actually, I was trying to contrast this. John Bunyan was arrested for not carrying a national license [i]to preach[/i]. Jesse was arrested for not registering as [i]a visitor[/i] on a university campus. It didn't matter to the university if he was a Christian open air preacher, a Muslim cleric, a political activist, or an entertainer -- he simply didn't register as a visitor. If he had registered as a visitor, the school would not only have allowed him to share -- but those same officers who were sent to [i]arrest[/i] him would have been present to [i]protect[/i] him.

sermonindex Dec 11, 2009


Chris, your explanation still sounds like Jesse did the same thing Bunyan did. Refused to get registered or get a license to preach. Sorry to stretch this further. I'll stop.

E
elected Dec 11, 2009

John Bunyan was arrested for not carrying a national license to preach.

I'm not sure in the case of John Bunyan what were conditions for carrying a licence to preach.If that meant conformity to the Anglican church of that time, he could not have done that with a good conscience. Even the idea of having a national licence is ridiculous. The authority to preach comes from God not the government.

L
Leo_Grace Dec 11, 2009

Bunyan was fighting against suppression of his authority to preach given by God. Morrell was fighting for the right to trespass someone else's property without permission. Big difference. It wasn't his preaching that was in question, it was his unpermitted presence.

BTW, GeorgeFox was one of those IDs used to propagate Jesse Morrell's doctrines here. It could actually be Jesse's account (again).

C
ccchhhrrriiisss Dec 11, 2009

Hi DeepThinker...


DeepThinker wrote:

Chris, your explanation still sounds like Jesse did the same thing Bunyan did. Refused to get registered or get a license to preach. Sorry to stretch this further. I'll stop.


John Bunyan was arrested because he wasn't licensed by the state to preach. His arrest had to do with the content of his words.

Jesse Morrell was arrested because he neglected to register as a visitor. It had NOTHING to do with the Word of God, his message, Christianity or needing a "license."

In fact, Jesse went back to that school, registered as a campus visitor, and preached without much incident.

I spoke via telephone with the Director of the Office of Information at Alabama A&M (to make sure of the school's information). The school did not have Jesse arrested based upon the content of his messages, or that he was preaching from a Christian Bible or because he wasn't a "licensed" preacher. Someone called and complained about him and the police said that he never registered as a visitor even though there are large signs throughout the campus that state that visitors must register.

The campus police would have arrested ANYONE for making a scene and having neglected to sign up as a visitor to campus (regardless of who they were or what they were doing). After Jesse returned and signed up as a visitor, he freely preached whatever he wanted (regardless of whether a person complained or not). The campus police were on hand to protect Jesse's right to do so.

John Bunyan did not have such a right. He couldn't sign up as a visitor to that district and preach. Since he wasn't licensed by the authorized State Church, Bunyan was prohibited to preach the Gospel. At that time in England, a person needed a national license (complete with the oath to the King, to the state Church and allegiance to its sectarian doctrinal views) in order to preach about Jesus almost everywhere in the country. There was no such thing as "free speech." A person couldn't sign up as a visitor and preach as he wanted and what he wanted (even with a clear conscience).

I hope this makes the contrast a little more clear.

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 17 posts