S. Korean hostages beaten for Christ

Tom123 wrote:    If you bothered to even read the BBC article I posted, in it you have hopefully found that South Korean missionaries and aid workers operate in both South Korea and parts of Africa, as well as North America, Asia, the Middle East.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: I did read it. It QUOTED the Saemmul Church as saying that they were there to help people, and of course THEY would say that.

   So show me evidence that they were doing otherwise. Until you do, I see no reason not to take their word. Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it. I see no reason why they would want to hide that or be ashamed of it.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: It also said that there were missionaries in Africa and Middle-east, but didnt say they were "helping people" there, but trying to convert.

Actually, this is what was written:

There is no evidence that the Saemmul Church was guilty of such behaviour, but South Korea is certainly known for the zeal of its missionaries, as well as the number of people it sends overseas on mission trips.

Korean evangelical groups have dispatched about 17,000 people to 173 countries, from the Middle East and Africa through to Central and East Asia, and South Korea is the second largest source of Christian missionaries after the US.

   It does not say here that they were only trying to help people, but neither does it say that they were trying to convert. Missionary work can sometimes only involve aid when prosyletizing is not allowed, more often it involves both.

   You will probably point to a segment below which says that the Afghan government in August deported hundreds of South Koreans who were planning to stage a parade in Kabul. There is no evidence that the people who were taken hostage were involved in that, though.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Now allow me to ask the question again. Why did these missionaries go to Afghanistan to "help people" when they could have gone to many other countries where people are suffering?

   Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Well because they were trying to convert people, and of course they would "help" poor people in order to win them over and convert them. (didnt Satan try to trick Jesus in that way according to the Bible?) So they were there just to convert and of course you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials (that's Satan's old trick).

  That is pretty offensive. You are making unproven accusations that these people were somehow trying to 'bribe' Afghans into becoming Christians. You haven't proven anything to back up these claims instead of posting some videos which were about problems in AMERICAN churches. No offense, but this is so absurd that I'm doing my best not to laugh as I'm reading some of the stuff you've written.

   You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

   Granted, there are some jerks who preach a 'prosperity gospel' and dangle money in front of poor people and promise to help them only if they convert, there isn't any evidence to indicate that these people were doing that.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: If they were sincere they would have tried to convert their own people first, the great marority of whom are NOT christians. Why travel all the way to a country in the middle of a war and preach "christianity"?

   Jesus calls on Christians to preach the Gospel to everyone, and to help everyone who is suffering. That includes Afghan Muslims.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: And why was the Korean Government so worried about them and was willing to actually negotiate with the Taliban for them?

   Because they were afraid of getting bad publicity if they didn't do anything.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Because S.Korea has joined America's Crusade and sent troops to Afghanistan (which proves they are part of a Crusade, why else would they send troops to fight the Taliban when the Taliban had never done anything to them and did not even "threaten their interests") and so these hostages were obviously part of the Crusade (actually a very important part of it).

   You are making up a false and unproven allegation. You haven't shown any evidence that these hostages were in support of the 'war on terror'. You are demonizing and slandering people who haven't cheated anyone, lied to anyone or hurt anyone. They went to Afghanistan to help people in need. And they were Christians. And they refused to renounce their faith, even under threats and beatings.

   So you are so angry them and will look for any oppurtunity to slander them and downplay their courage.

Tom123 wrote: Personally I pray that if I was in a situation like that, God would give me the courage not to hate him or try to hurt him or fight him and do exactly what you just said, adding I would hope to be telling him about Jesus and His love and grace as I was being bludgeoned to death or dismemembered.

Israfil wrote: I don't know whether to laugh or take this seriously. I guess cause I'm from Los Angeles we have a different frame of mind here when it comes to defending your household. I know if it was me the intruder would not be in this world anymore. I don't think someone with the intent to harm you would want to hear about Jesus. In my city there have been people who have begged for their life and still was murdered. Jesus was no wimp and neither should you be one IMHO.

   So you think that non-violence is 'wimpy'? Then Martin Luther King and Gandhi must have been wimps. They didn't beg for their lives. They didn't turn to violence either.

   Jesus prayed for the people who were crucifying Him. So did His followers, like Stephen. Have you heard of Archbishop Romero? Or Dirk Willems?

http://salt.claretianpubs.org/romero/romero.html

http://chi.gospelcom.net/DAILYF/2003/05/daily-05-16-2003.sht ml

   These people combatted evil with love and the Truth of the Gospel. They did not beg for their lives. Neither did they turn to violence. They followed Jesus and were witnesses to Him to the end.

    Read their stories. Were they cowards?

Tom123 wrote: If he was going to attack my wife or kids (I'm single so this is a hypothetical scenario) I would try to get between them and him and would gladly take his blows in order that they might escape.

Israfil wrote: How heroic, but you're no good to your family if you're dead. Normally in these times most intruders don't give out "blows" but one shot from a hand gun so how good are you if an intruder pulls out a gun and kills you on the first hit? I'm sure in this scenario your family wouldn't have time to make it out the door.[/QUOTE    I don't know how to shoot a gun and couldn't use one even if I wanted to, so looks like we'd be dead anyways. But even if I died, I know I would go to Heaven. And so would my Christian wife and kids whom I would nurture in the faith. Israfil wrote: Tell me from what I stated about logical thinkin do you disagree with?    'Common sense' to some may mean preserving their lives on earth no matter what the cost. If you are desperate to keep your life, perhaps violence would make sense. For me I know that I have nothing to fear when I die and I will be with God. So why should I disobey Him and turn to violence to save my life?   Tom123 wrote: I don't think any missionary goes abroad for the sole purpose of getting himself/herself killed. I know I didn't. We want to serve Jesus, and He says that we do so by helping the poor and by preaching the Gospel. If we get killed doing this, praise God. If we don't get killed, praise God.    You say that missionary work should be done safely, yet don't soldiers, police officers and firefighters take risks? So are they wrong to do so?    The difference is that when we take risks for Christ, we do it to serve Him instead of doing it to get a paycheck. As a Christian, I have no reason to fear dying. [QUOTE=Israfil]Most Jews, Muslims, and Christians are inherently selfish (not to say its ultimately bad) because we do things for God to get a reward.[/QUOTE[    Speak for yourself. I do not do good to get a reward from God. Jesus already gave me more than I could ever ask for or deserve when He died on the cross for me. I have put my faith in Him, and I know that when I die I will be with Him in Heaven.    I want to serve Him because I am so grateful for what He has done for me, and the Holy Spirit moves me to take action against injustice and to want to serve God. Service is a part of my faith, I serve and am glad to do so because I love God. I do not expect any rewards from Him. He has already given me more than I ever deserve. [QUOTE=Israfil]The idea of matyrdom and obtaining paradise is attractive and especially when scholars indicate to their followers that God will forgive you for your sin if you do this or that. Or, God will reward you because of doing this or that. Religious acts which have no intrinsic value, are done solely for the purpose of self fulfilment.

   Probably to some (among Christians, Muslims and Jews) such an idea may be attractive and some may buy into it.

   Nice exchanging views with you.

   Cristo Vive!

       - Tomasz

Tom123 wrote: Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it.

Yeah right!

Tom123 wrote:  Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Because there are many countries that suffer from poverty and desease more than Afghanistan, and Afghanistan is in the middle of a war between Crusader Christian Zionists and Muslims. It's obvious that they went there to serve the Crusade.

Tom123 wrote:    You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

I was talking about converting MUSLIMS to Christianity, not pagans and atheists.

Tom123 wrote: Had these people been evangelizing, the church would have probably come out and said it.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Yeah right! You just keep saying "there is no evidence", well the truth is we cant prove what they were or werent doing because we werent there (neither me nor you) but the fact that they went all the way to Afghanistan when 70% of their own people are not Christians and dont even believe in Jesus (not even as a Prophet as we Muslims do) is evidence that they did not have the best of intentions and were part of America's Crusade as their Government has proven to be.

Tom123 wrote:  Why should they have not gone to Afghanistan? Are Afghans less worthy of help than other people?

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: Because there are many countries that suffer from poverty and desease more than Afghanistan, and Afghanistan is in the middle of a war between Crusader Christian Zionists and Muslims. It's obvious that they went there to serve the Crusade.

   If you can provide me any evidence whatsoever that these people were there bribing anyone or serving US forces or defending or supporting the 'war on terror' please show it to me. Until then, I have no reason to believe any of your accusations.

Tom123 wrote:    You are claiming that you cant convert many people to "christianity" without offering them worldly materials,  it only shows your ignorance on this matter. The early church spread like a wildfire throughout Ancient Rome and Judea in spite of the fact that the Christian faith was hated by both Roman and Jewish authorities. Becoming a Christian meant losing respect from society, being cast out by your community, and in many cases it meant martyrdom.

Sawtul Khilafah wrote: I was talking about converting MUSLIMS to Christianity, not pagans and atheists.

   So are you saying that Muslims can be bought?...

   I actually know a person who was raised in a Muslim family but became a Christian. She was cast out by her own mother, and many people in her family and community. She lost a lot because of her choice to follow Jesus. She didn't get any money from anyone for her decision; had she wanted to have a life with less financial and family stress, she could have remained a Muslim.

   Cristo Vive!

        - Tomasz