In Reply to: Re: Persecution: Interview with David Limbaugh posted by Alan on November 28, 2003 at 15:47:19:
look, my main point is simply that persecution may be too strong a term for what limbaugh discusses. maybe it is slight forshadowing or something. but it does devalue the price believrs giving up life and limb go thru elsewhere to equate it with not giving out pencils. its ok, even admirable to defend the right to hand out pencils, on CONSTITUTIONAL grounds, (of course that means the muslim boy needs to be allowed to hand out allah akbr pencils, and the atheist god is dead pencils. but none of it is about what Jesus did in matthew, mark, luke, and john. its about 1776.
what paul did may have been wisdom. it didn't help him avoid religious persecution tho. and that really didn't seem to bother him. did he write a book and go on the roman talk show circuit to defend his right to hand out pencils? didn't he write ph.1:29 from jail? Jesus had more than constitutional rights going for him, remember the 12 legions of angels? but he "opened not his mouth.."
ro.13 is not exactly the core of Jesus' doctrine, yet it applies to rome, russia, and the usa , even if you can't hand out pencils.
constitutional rights is a political matter. i would probably agree w many positions taken by the religious right on constititional questions, (tho not all), but what bugs me is when it somehow becomes the central message of a group of people who really have a far more important message to present to a culture in decay. the mission field becomes the enemy. i don't see it in the gospels or the early church.
when the suffering church in china asks the western church to pray, it is for bibles , not constitutional rights. persecution may actually be a big part of why they are so spiritually alive, and the comfort of cultural christianity in the usa is so laodicean.imo.