From the Apostle Paul, to the church in Colossae:

Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.

Therefore, as God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity.

And the church in Galatia:

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

And the church in Corinth:

The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

In short – if we, as Christians, happen to believe that Paul had something important on the issue of races and classes, then we ought to recognize that its core is this: In Christ, there is no discrimination between races, classes, sexes or nationalities in the salvation they have received.

In this respect, it is love that ought to lead Christians to both respect and love all men, as loved by God, created in His image, and paid for by Jesus’ blood, if only they will recognize him as Lord.

Unfortunately, as he is wont to do, Satan takes something that God has made good – a love and respect for all men – and has taken that grain of truth and twisted it into a false view of “tolerance”, and then inflicted it upon the people of the world. Even though I’ve not paid incredibly close attention to the news this past week or so, I’ve heard (or been sent) a number of stories that all seem to have this tension as a common thread between them.

Please Don’t Kill Me

Stop Being a PsychopathI find it “interesting” to live in a culture where it’s praised (and now almost passe) to ridicule and demean Christ and Christians in art – whether it’s dousing a crucifix in urine, or displaying his mom covered in elephant feces, or a host of other “artistic” impressions – but at the same time, it is “insensitive” to do the same to “holy” figures in other religions – particularly Islam.

This has come to a bit of a head in the past week, where we had the Times Square Bomber (whose ineptitude eclipsed that of his cousin, Captain Underpants, the Eunuchbomber ) – where (once again) the national media spent more time wishing that the bomber had been a Christian and/or a Tea Partier and hand-wringing over potential “racial profiling” by the TSA (since the white, Jewish grandmother from Poughkeepsie is apparently as big a terrorist threat as the Saudi “student” with a one-way ticket and $80K in cash), than noticing that – yet again – the common thread that binds most potential modern terrorists is a belief in Allah, his pedophilic prophet, and a party with 72 virgins awaiting in the afterlife.

This is Not MohammedSpeaking of which, the Comedy Central R-rated cartoon South Park (a show that’s never shied away from attacking religions, be they Christianity, Scientology or Mormonism) decided to poke fun at the Islamists by including Mohammad in a weekly show (dressed in a bear suit, mind you, so that his image wouldn’t be included) last month. After a potential death-threat was made against the cartoonists (a la the Danish Mohammad cartoon controversy), the brave studio buckled and censored the cartoon. This came less than a year after the Yale University Press refused to reprint the Danish cartoons of Mohammad in a book about the Danish cartoons of Mohammad.

And then we have for today’s “National Day of Prayer” – Franklin Graham (son of Billy Graham) being disinvited from speaking at the Washington event because of his post 9-11 comments about Islam being “evil”.  Apparently he didn’t get the memo that here in the real world, when you point out that the emperor is wearing only his skivvies you don’t get rewarded, you get a fatwah.

Despite the obvious hypocrisy in all of these media/political treatments, it is interesting to note the unspoken recognition about Christianity -It’s OK to abuse Christ and Christians, because (no matter how much we pretend they’re a danger) they’re highly unlikely to fight back.  Muslims, on the other hand, tend to back up their indignation with bombs, booby-traps and beheadings.

Religion of Peace, my glutes.

Now, for those keeping score on the “tolerance” side of things – there’s a desire on part of the Christian church to avoid rocking the boat.  A desire that inevitably manifests when we  point out the flaws and fantasies of Islam, noting that it is a religion that worships false gods and idols whose only true promise is an eternity of hell and death.  This gutless “tolerance” is accomplished via hard or soft universalist teachings that everyone eventually winds up in heaven – whether via their own path (”hard” universalism) or via some extrabiblical post-mortem conversion (”soft” unversalism).  Both “hard” and “soft” universalism are lies of the worst sort and should be reviled with all the fervor we would muster against the worship of any Ba’al.

At the same time, though, we may forget that the follower of Islam is still made in the image of God – just as we are – and is loved by Him.  It is important that we attempt to live peaceably with them, insofar as we do not fail to recognize that Christ is the one and only Lord of the universe.  Coexisting with people of other religions is important, even while we refuse to bow down to their idols.

When the Government Won’t Enforce Its Own Laws

And then there’s Arizona.  The Grand Canyon State is in a bit of a predicament where, because the federal government won’t enforce its own immigration laws, the drug trade, violent crime rate and public debts have piled up beyond the point of breaking.  In recognition of this, the state passed a law which gives its agents the right to enforce the federal immigration laws only when other laws are broken or believed to have been broken.

Los SolsPredictably, the lily-livered feds and their cronies in the MSM have completely misrepresented the law as some sort of nazism (”show me your papers, please”), when they are absolutely nothing of the sort.  Despite the grandstanding of Los Suns (who I’ll never root for again) and the threats of illegal immigrant groups to leave the state (mission accomplished!), the state is supported by 60-70% of the US public as a simple law-and-order issue (what part of “illegal” don’t y’all understand?).

The public rightly favors a policy which says 1) effectively seal the borders and stop all illegal immigration traffic; and 2) fully punish anyone who pays illegal immigrants to work for them; and once #1 and #2 are effectively implemented, then 3) create a path toward honest citizenship for those who remain within our borders – a path whose first step is to the back of the line.

There is nothing “unChristian” about support of this policy – it both respects the rule of law and the treatment of individuals as human beings made in the image of God.  Even so, many Christians are being browbeaten into accepting that any limitations on illegal immigration are somehow human rights violations.  This is not so.  It goes back to the issue of forgiveness versus a lack of consequences.  One may be loved and forgiven, but still have to accept the natural or logical consequences of violating civil or religious authorities.

The Race Card

And of course, we still have the underlying “race card” that is almost exclusively American in its application.  It is not surprising that racism exists in any country where people of all nations, creeds and races freely intermingle.  What is surprising is that only a very narrow band of racist behavior is recognized as Racist, while most racist behavior is applauded or ignored.

Like last week, where only black students from an Ann Arbor elementary school were being given certain privileges and taken on a school field trip, those in charge were treated sympathetically (despite shouting down a young Muslim girl who took offense to the discriminatory practices engendered by the school) rather than as racists.

Or how the Tea Party gathering on Capitol Hill was falsely (and widely by the MSM) accused of shouting racial epithets, despite widely available audio and video evidence to the contrary.

Or how criticism of stupid ideas from the White House is somehow racist (because the occupant is black), even though the opposition to the stupid ideas existed long before its current occupant lived there.

Or how voting against a black man because of his skin color is racist (which it is) but somehow voting for a black man because of his skin color is not racist (which is also is, by definition).

The hooligansOr how Californian kids who chose to wear shirts bearing the US flag to school on May 5th (Cinco de Mayo), and were punished for doing so because it was racially insensitive.

As Jonah Goldberg notes:

Similarly, the nasty racism that infused the progressive eugenics of Margaret Sanger and others has largely melted away.  But liberal fascists are still racist in their own nice way, believing in the inherent numinousness of blacks and the permanence of white guilt.  While I would argue that this is bad and undesirable, I would not dream of saying that today’s liberals are genocidal or vicious in their racial attitudes the way the Nazis were.  Still, it should be noted that on the postmodern left, they do speak in terms Nazis could understand.  Indeed, notions of “white logic” and “permanence of race” were not only understood by Nazis, but in some cases pioneered by them.  The historian Anne Harrington observes that the “key words of the vocabulary of postmodernism (deconstructionism, logocentrism) actually had their origins in antiscience tracts written by Nazi and protofascist writers like Ernst Krieck and Ludwig Klages.”  The first appearance of the word Dekonstrucktion was in a Nazi psychiatry journal edited by Hermann Goring’s cousin.  Many on the left talk of destroying “whiteness” in a way that is more than superficially reminiscent of the National Socialist effort to “de-Judaize” German society.

And so it is, against a backdrop where colorblindness is considered racist and actual racism is considered virtuous, that we the church currently live. Even so, Paul calls us to be colorblind – to see people of all races, nations and sexes as children of God, made in his image – even if the world defines all of the terms and values them differently.

  • Share/Bookmark
This entry was posted on Thursday, May 6th, 2010 at 10:01 pm and is filed under Church and Society, Hypocrisy, Original Articles, Theology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
+/- Collapse/Expand All

38 Comments(+Add)

1   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 6th, 2010 at 10:46 pm

Woe is us. Poor us. We are so abused and persecuted.

If only we had a god we could trust to be our rear guard and our fortress. But until then we can continue to complain about almost anything. At least we have sacrificed rooting for a sports team. That is a bold move.

This post could be placed on the Crosstalk blog and find many friends.

(Excuse me while I harvest the corners of my wheat field. :cool: )

2   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 6th, 2010 at 11:22 pm

Woe is us. Poor us. We are so abused and persecuted.

Perhaps you read a different article, but I don’t see any “woe is me” in this particular bit. I have no problem calling a spade a spade when it comes to the false “religion of peace”, and I find it pretty funny that it’s the non-Christians acting like hothouse flowers when it comes to dancing around the Islamists.

If only we had a god we could trust to be our rear guard and our fortress.

Maybe you don’t, but I certainly do. Even so, he counted Hezekiah righteous when Jerusalem was beset by Sennacherib – Hezekiah both prayed for deliverance and trusted God, but he also did everything in his own power (which is a gift from God, you might want to remember) and dug a water tunnel into the city, repaired the city and prepared to endure a siege. It was not a lack of faith that compelled Hezekiah to act in addition to trusting God – it was trusting God and acting as man was created to do – to work with God, rather than against him.

This post could be placed on the Crosstalk blog and find many friends.

As John H noted a few days ago, even a stopped watch is correct twice a day. I could care less whether or not they agree with me (though I would suggest that their motivation is fear and loathing, rather than a confidence in prayer and action).

The last time I checked, God loved both justice and mercy:

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.

As God notes in all three sections of the Hebrew Scriptures, God abhors unjust weights, as well. “The LORD abhors dishonest scales, but accurate weights are his delight.” Expecting us to act with colorblindness and fairness is simply implementing what God requires.

Excuse me while I harvest the corners of my wheat field.

That’s you prerogative, but it’s irrelevant to this discussion.

3   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 6th, 2010 at 11:58 pm

A well written article.

There was an article posted at ESPN.com which made reference to the new immigration law in the state of Arizona. It has to do with the owner of the Suns making some blah blah about the law and renaming his team Los Suns. Here’s what he said:

“The frustration with the federal government’s failure to deal with the issue of illegal immigration resulted in passage of a flawed state law. However intended, the result of passing this law is that our basic principles of equal rights and protection under the law are being called into question, and Arizona’s already struggling economy will suffer even further setbacks at a time when the state can ill-afford them.”

So, basically, it has nothing to do with equal rights and everything to do with the bottom line. Typical. Follow the money. I don’t believe for a minute that fella cares a lick about the immigrants be them legal or illegal; he cares, clearly, about their money.

But I guess the only way for us to be real Christians is to let anyone do anything. Come on in! And let’s begin your stay in America by breaking the law!

I’d like to know how many countries in this world would go for Americans illegally immigrating to their countries.

4   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 7th, 2010 at 12:03 am

This post could be placed on the Crosstalk blog and find many friends.

And your comments sound strangely like C.H.’s.

I’m gonna go sit on my mountain now and hope to become as enlightened as Father Frueh. :-)

5   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 5:55 am

Those views and the passion behind them mirror millions of unsaved, conservative patriots, which, render your faith as unremarkable in your response to life’s issues.

Case in point: We should, as believers, care more about the plight of the poor, legal and illegal, then we do about certain laws that a fallen government passes. Our country is not of this world and our “laws” are about grace and mercy, even to the unjust and sinners.

But when we pull out our faith in “theological” issues and leave it alone on political/national issues we reveal a serious compartmentalization that, again, does despite to the reality of our faith and Jesus Himself.

Patriotism, nationalism, and conservatism are enemies of the faith.

(Hello, from high atop Mt. Frueh!)

6   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 6:01 am

“I’d like to know how many countries in this world would go for Americans illegally immigrating to their countries.”

Again, we view ourselves in the context of being American and compare ourselves with other countries instead of seeing ourselves as followers of Jesus. I recognize America’s right to set up and enforce borders, however I cannot get involved with that issue at the expense of showing mercy to the poor.

If I only show mercy to the legal and documented poor, what I have I done that Goodwill has not done? Let the government do what it must, but we have a higher calling that separates us from the kingdom of darkness.

7   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 9:35 am

Those views and the passion behind them mirror millions of unsaved, conservative patriots, which, render your faith as unremarkable in your response to life’s issues.

Again, I’d just point you to the example of a blind squirrel finding an acorn. Just because a group of individuals (some Christian, some not) have a particular viewpoint that it not exclusively “Christian” doesn’t render it illegitimate or incorrect. That dog just don’t hunt, as they say.

We should, as believers, care more about the plight of the poor, legal and illegal, then we do about certain laws that a fallen government passes.

I guess you disagree with your idol, Paul, then, who happened to disagree on the laws of government being “optional” when we conveniently declare them so.

This is not a “lack of care” for the plight of the poor. A majority of legal immigrants support enforcement of the (very lax, by the standards of the rest of the world) immigration laws, and the resident poor would all be greatly helped if we actually enforced our immigration laws.

Operationally, what is proposed is quite compassionate – and is the difference between handing a man a fish and teaching him to fish. The American government sends billions of dollars in foreign aid to poor countries every year, and the American church dwarfs that aid in the amount of giving it sends to these nations. The solution to poverty in Country X isn’t to ship its citizens to the US – it is to help Country X alleviate its poor conditions. In the case of Mexico, only by clamping shut the relief valve that sends the very people who would force improvements to its corrupt system will we force it to deal with the problems it has created.

Our country is not of this world and our “laws” are about grace and mercy, even to the unjust and sinners.

And it is graceful and merciful to improve the conditions abroad, rather than prolonging the suffering of many through expedient and faux-”compassionate” means today.

Patriotism, nationalism, and conservatism are enemies of the faith.

blah, blah, blah, II Opinions 3:15

8   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 10:16 am

“Patriotism, nationalism, and conservatism are enemies of the faith.”

As are sedition, anarchy, and liberalism.

9   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
May 7th, 2010 at 10:21 am

Rick, I find it interesting that despite your anti-nationalism, you take the view that this country is actually the best place for people to live. If being a follower of Christ trumps nationality (which I agree that it does), and if God is our fortress (which I agree that He is), why do people need to come to this country to have a better life?

10   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 10:29 am

I do not take the position that this is the best country in which to live. I submit to God’s providence in that issue. However, regardless of why poor people come here I contend we as believers must minister to them as followers of Jesus.

Which is best described as Biblical social justice:

1. Helping the plight of the poor and sienfranchised whereever they may be.

or

2. Rounding up illegal poor people and sending them back to worse conditions.

(The 1st is our calling, Biblical social justice for the poor, while the 2nd is governmental social justice to protect the contented.)

11   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
May 7th, 2010 at 10:39 am

I really don’t understand the arguments based on the premise that the immigration law is not compassionate. Really, it’s not the purpose of any law to really be compassionate. If someone steals food to feed his starving family, it’s still breaking the law. That doesn’t mean we can’t have compassion for people who’ve committed all sorts of wrongs, but compassion doesn’t necessarily mean a minimization or removal of consequences.

In a lot of ways, preventing people from experiencing the consequences of their actions is way of not being compassionate. If, for example, a child never learns that he can’t spend more money than he has, he’ll grow up into a spoiled brat with no money management skills. Consequences are kind of a built-in regulation mechanism of the universe that let’s us know when we’ve gone past certain boundaries. N.T. Wright gives the example in his new book of skiing within a proscribed course on a mountain. The boundaries of the course are not there to limit your enjoyment of skiing, they are there so you don’t kill yourself.

12   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 11:19 am

Which is best described as Biblical social justice:

1. Helping the plight of the poor and sienfranchised whereever they may be.

or

2. Rounding up illegal poor people and sending them back to worse conditions.

Which, in this case, is a false (and highly romanticized) choice.

Enacting true border enforcement and punishing businesses who hire illegal workers (steps #1 and #2) will have a net result in improving the conditions on both sides of the border (including the accompanying crime, unemployment, budgetary drain, etc.). Neither of these is “rounding up illegal poor people and sending them back to worse conditions”. Once these two items are enacted and effectively enforced, those who remain here would have a route to legitimate residency – which would include paying owed back taxes, fines and going to the back of the immigration line.

The AZ law does not “round up illegal poor people and send them back to worse conditions” – the precondition for running a residency check is that the individuals are involved in some other civil/criminal matter with the law.

13   chris    
May 7th, 2010 at 11:28 am

Chris L.,

Far be it from me to argue you with your assertions but given enough history and time I could write an article equally damning of Christianity. Your view of Islam (which is a false religion) as being full of terrorists is false.

While your hyperbolic piece was stirring with it’s passion and verbal expertise it was lacking in balance.

14   Mike    
May 7th, 2010 at 11:29 am

Maybe a little different perspective… sometimes allowing illegal immigrants to stay in a country is not the best thing for them. As a school teacher, I teach children who are illegal immigrants (I suspect) from time to time. Some of them are my brightest students, they graduate from my school and go… nowhere. They are not allowed to go to college, they can’t enrolled in apprentice ship programs, there is literally nothing for them but a laborer’s job or working illegally.

I have to wonder, are we really doing them a favor by allowing them to stay here illegally.

15   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 11:39 am

Your view of Islam (which is a false religion) as being full of terrorists is false.

Chris – I think you got my point backwards:

I do not contend that Islam is full of terrorists. I contend that the current batch of terrorists (at least those targeting the US) are by-and-large overwhelmingly Islamic. While I can point to a couple of sentences where I was (purposely) hyperbolic, by and large my problem is with the public’s schizophrenic “blind eye” toward “profiling” terrorists and “scared sh*tless” eye towards any negative commentary directed at Islam.

This piece could very well have been written about Christianity during the centuries of the Crusades, and rightfully so. Were all Christians ready to go off and kill “infidels” abroad? No. Did they put up a significant fight, though, to rescue Christianity from its terrorist/extremist elements? Not at all – and that is highly shameful.

The same can be said of Islam today – even its “moderate” elements do little to reign in, ostracize and defuse its terrorist/extremist elements.

On the Christian side of the fence, let’s look at Fred Phelps (who’s about the most well-known “extremist” element in US Christianity): There is no doubt that 99+% of the Christian church in America considers Phelps a hateful fruitcake, and that is it unafraid to ostracize him. This is not true of Islam and its MSM sympathizers. If Islam is a “religion of peace”, then it’s doing a really piss poor job of managing its fringe elements…

16   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 11:43 am

“Once these two items are enacted and effectively enforced, those who remain here would have a route to legitimate residency – which would include paying owed back taxes, fines and going to the back of the immigration line.”

Of course. But again, you completely miss my thrust. The responses you suggest are well and good for any government. But I contend that our response is not to confront the government or support the government; our response must be with the hands and feet of Jesus…even to criminals.

Let the government do what pleases them. I have no problem with that. I have a problem with believers aligning themselves with the government as it attempts to deal with illegal poor people.

(I know hundreds of illegals who work, pay taxes, pay SS, and commit no crimes. And most will never receive any of the SS taxes they pay and cannot collect unemployment benefits, etc.)

And let us be painfully frank: this situation was “encouraged” by many administrations who refused to spend the money necessary to close out the 2000 miles of Mexican border. If they would do that now and then sort out the current illegals perhaps an equitable solution can be found. Until then I will continue to witness to them, help them financially, love them and their families, and pray for them. That I believe comes from the Spirit.

17   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 7th, 2010 at 12:35 pm

“The poor”

Yes. It’s always about the poor, isn’t it Fr Frueh? But don’t we have enough poor in this country without adding more? And how are ‘we’ to continue feeding all these ‘poor’ when we can’t feed the ‘poor’ who are here now? And can’t you just as equally feed, love, finance, and pray for them while they are poor in their own country?

It’s always the poor. And there are some of us who are sooooooo compassionate and some of us who are just sooooooo damn evil. It’s only a few who really love the poor whom we will always have with us.

Maybe it’s time to come down the mountain.

18   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Jerry – It’s just the thought that counts. Effectivity is superfluous.

19   Christian P    http://www.churchvoices.com
May 7th, 2010 at 12:49 pm

Mike, that’s a good point and a terrible situation. I considered commenting along similar lines, that maybe being compassionate to illegal immigrants should at times include making them go home. I think that fits with Phil’s comments on boundaries and consequences.

At the same time, I do find the attitude of many Christians towards such individuals as very unChristian. I think Chris L. did a decent job of maintaining the need to love everybody, of every race, equally.

20   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 1:01 pm

Yes, the poor are such thorns. Jerry, you are a carnal man.

21   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 7th, 2010 at 2:06 pm

Rick,

I’ll reserve my thoughts on your character for another time. You seem to think that you can say and write whatever you want without challenge. Grow down Rick.

jerry

22   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 7th, 2010 at 5:20 pm

And can’t you just as equally feed, love, finance, and pray for them while they are poor in their own country?

Yes, you can, Jerry – but when they’re here and tangible, it’s so much more satisfying.

Then, you also get a chance to self-flagellate. Unfortunately, though, you end up missing what Solomon describes as “a gift from God”

Then I realized that it is good and proper for a man to eat and drink, and to find satisfaction in his toilsome labor under the sun during the few days of life God has given him—for this is his lot. Moreover, when God gives any man wealth and possessions, and enables him to enjoy them, to accept his lot and be happy in his work—this is a gift of God. He seldom reflects on the days of his life, because God keeps him occupied with gladness of heart.

23   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 7th, 2010 at 11:28 pm

I love the word ’superfluous.’

24   Joe    http://christianresearchnetwork.com/index.php?s=john+chisham
May 8th, 2010 at 12:18 pm

our response must be with the hands and feet of Jesus…even to criminals.

What does this mean, specifically as it applies to criminals?

25   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 8th, 2010 at 1:06 pm

What does this mean, specifically as it applies to criminals?

That we pretend they’re not in the act of committing a crime, because We CareTM

26   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 8:37 am

The unchristian hypocrisy that surrounds the undocumented workers issue is shameful.

Hypocrites

27   Joe    http://christianresearchnetwork.com/index.php?s=john+chisham
May 9th, 2010 at 9:16 am

Rick,
I’d seriously like to know what you think we should do towards criminals, to be the feet and hands of Jesus. Forget immigration for a minute and tell me what you think we should do towards child abusers etc.

28   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 9:34 am

“…tell me what you think we should do towards child abusers etc.”

That is broad statement. The government prosecutes them and sometimes imprisons them. Fair enough.

As a follower of Jesus I would share redemption with them and visit them in prison. I have done just that.

I have no objection to the government creating their policies toward undocumented people, however I object strenuously to believers supporting the government’s position.

Corrie Ten Boom and others like her broke German law and hid and ministered to undocumented Jews. Our calling to miniter to the poor is at odds with the government’s view of deporting people back to hopeless poverty. I will go to jail if necessary since I REGULARLY minister and care for some illegal poor people.

My daughter teaches a special needs class in Florida where 80% of her kids are Mexicans who were born here to illegals. When she holds meetings many of the Mexican mothers cannot come since they live in housing provided by farmers and if they miss a couple of days they will be kicked out of their homes.

These mothers bord the bus toi the fields and stand in lines very early in order to get the best picking rows. If they have to go the batrhroom they eith hold it or squat right there since they will lose their spots if they go the Port-o-let.

In 20 years this large farm has not had one American even apply for a job. And even in 90 degree heat, these women still will not leave their spot and go to the bathroom. They pay SS taxes which they will never get back, they pay taxes, they buy food and other items in their community, they rarely take their kids to the doctor/hospital since they are afraid of being deported, and they have no debt since they pat cash for everything.

I see the way they are treated in stores by some Americans, and I know many Christian look down upon them. They are for the most part the most humble and hard working people I know.

I will go joyfully to jail today before I reject them. And Jesus hears what I am saying. Christians should run to minister to them instead of espousing these nationalistic laws that are blind to the plight of millions of poor people.

29   Joe    http://christianresearchnetwork.com/index.php?s=john+chisham
May 9th, 2010 at 9:47 am

Are you saying that Christians should not be in government roles such as police or policy makers? Should Christians abdicate all government roles to non-believers?

30   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 10:11 am

That is my position. I know there are committed believers in government, though. Since I am a pacifist I could not be a police officer as well.

But I am in the vast minority and I do not evangelize other believers in those views, but I will express them and defend them. Thank you for a constructive exchange, Joe.

31   Phil Miller    http://pmwords.blogspot.com
May 9th, 2010 at 12:38 pm

Rick,
I understand your position to a degree, but don’t you think that kind of creates a situation where the Church always ends up defending the status quo? I don’t think that we need to be delusional and think that we can bring all the change the world needs through legislation or political action, but I also don’t think that we need to all walk away. Actually, I’m not even necessarily thinking in the realm of politics, but simply everyday vocation.

You mention sending immigrants back to poverty, which is indeed sadly the case, but I wonder if by simply encouraging an ever-growing stream of illegal immigration, if we simply are ignoring the real issue – the stifling poverty in these countries. I guess I would like to see more in the way of efforts to bring education and economic development to these countries rather than simply continuing to treat the symptoms. Of course we can’t ignore the symptoms, either, but I feel that no one is doing much to address the root cause. It’s sort of the same reason I have issues with affirmative action. It’s a band aid on an issue rather than getting to the heart of it.

32   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 12:52 pm

Phil – I do not encourage the stream of illegals, and I understand the need for organized and documented immigration. My point is that we as believers minister to the current situation and the plight of the poor as it exists and definitely not get involved with the callous way in which the government approaches things.

33   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 1:34 pm

Corrie Ten Boom and others like her broke German law and hid and ministered to undocumented Jews.

Who, it was already well-understood, were being (at minimum) forced into labor camps or (as the Dutch had already heard rumors of) being exterminated.

Apples and Oranges.

Our calling to miniter to the poor is at odds with the government’s view of deporting people back to hopeless poverty.

Enforcing the border “deports” nobody, and punishing employers who employ illegal workers is also not deportation.

Even for those returned to their countries of origin, the poverty is not “hopeless”. In fact, the less the US becomes an option for flight, the greater the chance these individuals would create positive change within their own countries.

I will go to jail if necessary since I REGULARLY minister and care for some illegal poor people.

No, you wouldn’t, since citizens are not forbidden to show compassion to undocumented workers, nor a churches forbidden to minister to them.

The farm you describe ought to be held accountable by the government, and – as has already been experienced by raided business with “jobs no Americans would do” in Arizona & New Mexico – they would have plenty of legal workers apply to work there if they were following legal employment practices.

I will go joyfully to jail today before I reject them.

You are not called on to “reject them”. Even so, though, the government’s position is not immoral in any sense of the word, and neither is its agents’ execution of those laws.

34   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 9th, 2010 at 2:41 pm

Some compassion for Rick.

$145,000.

35   Pastorboy    http://crninfo.wordpress.com
May 9th, 2010 at 7:26 pm

First of all, the fruit pickers in the Florida illustration are working for and supporting an illegal operation that the government should shut down, at the very least be fined and forced to pay legal wages and benefits to the employees, including bathroom breaks (for heavens sakes) then they would have American workers.

That said, no one is saying we should not have compassion on the poor. What we are saying is the poor should come here LEGALLY and abide by the laws of the government God has put in place.

I might add that if I chose to immigrate to Mexico in the same way many of these illegal immigrants come here, and I were caught, I would experience the hospitality of the Federales for two years then be deported back here. Their immigration laws are MUCH stricter than ours.

The media has lied about this law, and Arizona should be applauded for enforcing the law. I know of four schoolchildren that might be alive today had an illegal alien who was involved in a traffic accident weeks before and had no drivers license and the police officer could not check her papers even though she had broken the law clearly. Weeks later, she blew a stop sign killing 4 and injuring dozens as she plowed into a bus.

Thank you, Arizona.

36   Rick Frueh    http://judahslion.blogspot.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 9:02 pm

There. PB should be a writer here.

37   Chris L    http://www.fishingtheabyss.com/
May 9th, 2010 at 10:42 pm

There. PB should be a writer here.

If us agreeing w/ someone (or them agreeing w/ us) on a singular topic were all that was required to be a writer here, we could invite MacLaren, Silva, Bell, PB, yourself, Chad, John MacArthur and Joel Osteen.

Fortunately, though, it requires more than simply agreeing on one singular topic or topic area. (And, for that matter, I don’t even know that all the writers here agree with me on any one of the topics I covered in this article)

38   Jerry    http://www.dongoldfish.wordpress.com
May 9th, 2010 at 10:51 pm

I disagree with your placement of a couple of commas.