By: Edward Amartey-Tagoe, Accra, Ghana.
People have ended up in deep trouble for attempting to broadcast their religious faith in areas where such acts are prohibited. One of such people is Ghanaian Daniel Baidoo who was sentenced to 25 years imprison, in Lybia, for preaching Christianity.
Another instance happened in Afghanistan not too far from Al-Quadafi’s territories. Some American soldiers distributed Bibles printed in Pashto and Dari languages—all Afghanistan’s main languages. Their great commission acts, however, have landed them in trouble—thanks to Aljazeera, Brian Hughes and the Law.
The main point I want to highlight in this post is not about the motives behind the propagation of the Christian religion in both cases. My argument is rather centered on whether or not it is right to do something that may seem right to an individual although it is well known that such an activity is illegal within the province of practice? There is no single doubt that the propagators of the acts—considered criminal—in these scenarios were very much aware of the consequences.
By kind courtesy of the Vice-President Mahama of Ghana, Mr. Baidoo was granted some sort of clemency after he had served seven out of his twenty-five-year sentence. The act may be right, but the place made the act wrong. This is what some staunch followers of Christianity refuse to comprehend. The General Order Number One is a military regulation that expressly forbids “proselytizing of any religion, faith or practice” especially in a predominantly Islamic territory such as Afghanistan.
Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff cleared the air by saying “from the United States' military's perspective, it is not our position to ever push any specific kind of religion, period,” That aside, it is even a more serious crime according to the Afghan constitution to propagate any other religion aside Islam. Such a crime is punishable by a death sentence (I guess Daniel was lucky in Lybia then...)
The propagation of the Christian religion in some places has ended some people, usually staunch adherent of Christianity, in trouble. Are there any lessons believers of any faith can take at least from these two instances? I am pretty sure there must be a thousand. I stand to be corrected, but one very intriguing observation I have made is that Muslims are hardly caught up in this trap. Does it mean they are more disciplined than their Christian counterparts are? Also, are Christians more tolerant than Christians, given what has happened?
To a few these issues about Christians breaking the rules to ensure the spread of the Good News might be a debatable one, I personally do not share such opinions though. Nobody is above the very laws that have been made to ensure our existence. I believe the best way to show make-up of one’s religion is to show the discipline that makes up a religion. Breaking the rules to spread one’s faith is not the trick. The spread of a religion I believe can be through other creative mean such as living staying within the legal boundaries set for all.
My closing arguments concern the sort of treatment these ‘criminals’ are to face. Was the clemency really needed for the Ghanaian fellow? Should the same forgiveness be extended to the offender in Afghanistan? Not the likeliest of options, I must admit. In a situation where the crime is not the propagation of Christianity but rather drug trafficking, would a pardon be appropriate?
The law is the law and that is what guides human institutions to run effectively, lest we become savages. I believe the powers that be need not encourage any sort of crime in any form. Believers of various religions should stay within the confines of their faith and be very cautious when they are extending such faith to someone else because God is not a politician.
To you, your religion and to me, mine
ReplyDeleteChanging one's faith is just like telling a child the woman who has been breastfeeding him isn't his mother. Even if it were true, it would take years before such a child can come to terms with it. I believe we need to approach this exercise with utmost caution especially in areas where the laws are far far different from our
ReplyDelete..this is a very complex situation for Christians; very thought provoking I must say.
ReplyDeleteHere's what I think. Jesus Christ commissioned Christians to "go and make disciples of the world." The earliest apostles (and missionaries after that) suffered great tribulation to live by this great commission.
Stephen was stoned to death; and John the Revelator (not the Baptist) was thrown in hot boiling oil on the island of Patmos and that was when he received the Revelations of the end times.
Jesus Christ also said that give onto Caesar what is his and onto God what is His; in apparent reference to obeying secular laws. In Romans the Bible says obey all authority for they were appointed by God. And in the beatitudes in Matthew, Jesus says "blessed are those that are persecuted for righteousness sake...for theirs is the kingdom of God."
So clearly; there is a gray area when it comes to this subject. Where does one draw the line?
I don't think there is any right or wrong answer to this question. Let common sense, prayer and the spirit of God be our guide.
Good job for this insightful post and for delving into such a complex issue as Dela rightly mentioned. But I don't really think there’s a grey area here. Right is right. Wrong is wrong. Your beliefs are your beliefs. One must be able to stand for what they believe in. That's why there's such a thing called martyrs. After all we all know one of Luther King's popular quotes is: “If a man hasn't found something worth dying for, he isn't fit to live." – There’s nothing wrong with preaching what you believe to be true.
ReplyDeleteHow sincere are one’s belief if they collapse under persecution? So I’ll like to see more and more Christians stand up for the Bible and spread the message far and wide. The battle for heavenly Glory is by no means a ride in the park.
Edward - you wrote "I stand to be corrected, but one very intriguing observation I have made is that Muslims are hardly caught up in this trap. Does it mean they are more disciplined than their Christian counterparts are? Also, are Christians more tolerant than Christians, given what has happened?" The reason to me is simple... I don't know any Christian nation where such laws prohibiting the spread of other religions exist... now this is an expression of tolerance writ large... I think persons' belief is an indissoluble and integral part of them and should go with him/her where ever he/she goes... to echo Eche, if a man's belief collapses under persecution then it was no belief at all... it is a farce... Like many wise ones have said, i think we always have a much greater obligation to obey God than to obey man... no matter the cost...
ReplyDelete@ anhilaire what should the law do to the KKK believers. What about the satanists who believe in sacrificing humans once in a while. Should they be allowed to practice their believes. I believe the law was established to make sure we all get our fair share of the freedom we need to live on earth.
ReplyDeleteBesides there are several other ways by which Christians can go round this issue especially in restricted places. Maybe a bit of creativity will do.
@ Edward - yea that can be tricky... but again the groups you mentioned are often characterized by violence and force and the nurturing of fear and hate... that is where they cross the line...
ReplyDelete..that is correct Hilary! But during the 11th century crusades, Christians (mainly Europeans) waged violent and bloody assaults on the Muslim world in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Richard Lion heart of England led an army against Saladin - Sultan of Egypt to attempt to convert Egypt to Christianity.
ReplyDeleteMuslim Jihadists also believe that martyrdom for the cause of spreading Islam is a very noble and honorable thing. So I agree with Etse and MLK that; if there's nothing in this world that you love enough that you can kill for or die for; then you don't deserve to live.
But the Muslims; Hindus; Buddhists; Jews; and even the KKK could say the same thing. Martyrdom is an important part of many religions and beliefs. What kind of world would we have if everybody was a religious fanatic and wanted to be a martyr? It would be chaos; even worse "religious" holocaust.
That is why Jesus Christ charged Christians to give onto Caesar what belonged to him. Caesar in the figurative sense, refers to secular laws. So while Christ has charged us with the great commission; he's also charged us to be obedient to authority. So if a Christian finds himself in an Islamic Republic that has Sharia Law as its constitution, how should he execute this great commission?
How we balance these two; I really don't know. I think it's a gray area...but what it really comes down to is "creativity" - whatever Edward means by that. may be he can explain.
Extremism is passion gone lunatic. So while I agree with DK that religious fanatics exist in almost every religion, it’s no excuse to lump them together with downright psychotics like the KKK, supremacists or Satanists.
ReplyDelete...Etse, the KKK are psychotics like you said. But before they became psychotics they were religious fanatics from the ultra right Christian movements in the Southern U.S. states. Many of the founders of the Klan were former Confederate soldiers during the American civil war. The KKK is Christian far right neo conservatism gone crazy.
ReplyDeleteThe Dutch Reformed Church used old testament scriptures from the Bible to justify apartheid in South Africa. And even the plantation owners in the South used the Bible to keep the slaves obedient and controlled. The same Bible that edifies those of us that are Christians everyday.
So religious fanaticism should never be encouraged cus it ultimately leads to psychosis. While I believe in the great commission; the line must be drawn somewhere; and that line should not be crossed.
@ DK|| By creativity I meant going round the rules to meet the same objective. What if the US soldiers portrayed a very high sense of discipline. A behavior that would have probably attracted the locals to ask what type of religion the soldiers practiced.
ReplyDeleteIn Paul's times the tag 'Christian' was given to Paul's group by strangers who didnt even know Paul. Yet because of the way Paul and the early Christians lived their lives made people refer to them as 'Christians' because their behavior could be likened to Chirst.
Under the circumstances, I believe the acts by the soldiers were downright mischievous. These people are aware of the fact that they are in one of the most politically volatile regions on Earth; their mission is ‘peace-keeping’. I fail to understand how preaching one’s religious beliefs, especially in a region known for its extremist Muslims, could help improve the situation. It defies common sense. If the aim is to gain followers for the religion, wouldn’t it be best to send in preachers, not disguised as soldiers but as men of religion? At least that way, their purpose is clear and honest.
ReplyDeleteEche Sica wrote, “How sincere are one’s belief if they collapse under persecution?” But, the soldier’s individual beliefs were not under persecution here; it is instead his trying to influence another person to subscribe to his belief. And when you are trying to do something like that, as Edward and DK have said before, it is prudent to tread carefully and think twice, nay thrice before doing so. Like many of you have said, it is indeed romantic to ‘die for one’s beliefs,’ but is it justified when you transgress those of others, especially in such situations where you could endanger another life? If we were to do so, how different would we be from Hitler, or many such ‘villains’? If Palestinian soldiers were to occupy Israel and preach Islam, would your responses be the same?
Hilary: Do correct me if I am wrong here, when you say "I think persons' belief is an indissoluble and integral part of them and should go with him/her where ever he/she goes," isn't it ironical that what the soldiers are doing here, is an effort to show the other person that his/her belief is wrong?
ReplyDeleteKabhilan, well those are very interesting comments but you should know that this whole things takes on a religious connotations because Islamic people view their terrorist acts as a form of jihad. What if all religions also decided to embark on their own "jihad"?
ReplyDeleteAnon, that is a more complex and far-reaching question which probably should be debated separately. And before I attempt to answer that, I must first clarify that my views are based on what I have learned from my Muslim friends. I know close to nothing about the Quran or its teachings. But from what I have understood, the Quran, like any other religious text, can be interpreted in different ways, and we can 'choose' to learn only what appeals to us. No religion preaches hate, and not all Muslims are jihadis or terrorists. Jihad is indeed holy war, and it appears to advocate that if a believer were to fight for the cause of religion and die in the process, he is assured of a place in Heaven. To a well-read Muslim, this jihad is placed in the context of the entire Quran, and not just by its individual appeal. However, in the hands of an extremist priest, it can be manipulated and used as a rhetoric tool to preach hate. Random verses picked from different parts of the Quran can be assembled by a skillful politician/religious head to make an effective hate-inducing speech. Such rhetoric is a great tool here, in particular, since there might be many people who have lost a close relative, a friend, and have been through pain that many of us here leading comfortable lives can hardly comprehend. In such conditions, does rationale, or anything other than revenge matter? And when a person whom you consider your leader preaches that your feelings of revenge are justified and need to be exercised by killing as many 'enemies of Islam' as is possible, I'm sure there will be many who are easily influenced. I don't know what the solution for this problem is, but I do know that the 'kill 'em all' idea is not a solution. If all other religions decided that Islam's jihad is reason enough for their own jihad, then there will only be more hate, death, and chaos.
ReplyDeletePeople, as a rule, want peace and happiness. There are perverted exceptions to the rule that indulge in, and enjoy relentless killing, but that group is small. I believe that it is mainly social factors that contribute to these terrorist activities; a lack of education, a life in poverty, endless wars in the region, rigorously conservative governments... all these factors contribute. Eradicating these problems, to any extent possible, might help bring in positive changes. Hope this at least comes close to answering your question.