CHAPTER 2

RELIGION IN A GLOBAL CULTURE

Faith that is truly global
and able to produce a better world citizen,
is a faith that originates
from the omnipresent God of all.
From a strictly philosophical and apologetical point of view, religion must make
better adherents. True religion must direct God-created individuals to live together in
peaceful coexistence. If the elemental principles of two coexisting religions do not
produce this, then either one or both are maintaining principles that are not in tune with
God. One or both are false, and thus religions that have been created by the adherents.
Humanity is the creation of God. We correctly assume, therefore, that our Creator
would not relegate us to our own devices to sort out our own beliefs and behavior. Only
a cruel god would deistically create man, and then subjugate his creation to the confusion
of depraved minds and sorted ways as He took a vacation in some far off galaxy.
An elementary study of religious history proves one very clear point. Man is totally
unable to direct his own paths. From the Crusades to the suicide bomber, men have only
proved that they are inept authors of their religious behavior and destiny. We seek too
much to create a god after our own imagination and a religion that conforms to our
carnal desires. We are masters at the art of idolatry.
Without a constant standard to guide our ways, therefore, we are always changing
our ways. If the new world that we are developing is a world wherein we seek oneness
for the sake of economic development and a mutual share of the material pie, then will
our religion pay the price? Will our culture of change also constantly change our
religion?

Many in the postmodern generation are spiritually sterile, and thus are very amoral
and nonreligious in culture. There are millions who have said “whatever” to any
cultural norms that may have religious inclinations. However, I would presume that
there is also within this new global culture the emergence of the primal instinct that is
innate within every God-created human. We cannot escape our religious roots. It is the
way God made us. And for this reason we will create some god or some religion,
though it may be orchestrated after our own desires. We must have our religions, even
though it may be environmentalism, or animal rights, or politics or whatever.
And herein is the curse of an idolatrous people. In all our distortion to create new
religions, and thus we distort our ability to coexist. We culturally construct religions
that will pacify our consciences when we seek to bring destruction upon another culture
that has developed its own unique religion. How else can a young person strap on a
bomb and blow himself and innocent people into a million pieces in the name of religion?
It used to be that the terrorist sought to bring sympathy to his cause by the death of a
few examples in an opposing group. He sought to terrorize the few in order to affect the
many. But he was wrong. Terrorism of innocent people can never be right. It can never
be right because it is a cancer of a society wherein individuals make the innocent pay
the price for their own political agendas. Nevertheless, terrorists in times of peace are
seeking to either impose their beliefs or free themselves from those who seek to impose
on them.
We have now moved into a new era of terrorism. We have a new breed of terrorist.
He no longer seeks to kill a few. He seeks to simply kill as many as possible in order to
promote his religious/political agenda. The Islamic terrorist is not content with a few
examples. He is at war with a society he believes is against him. In order to do this, he
wants as many Westerners as possible dead. Period.
The Islamic terrorist – you might want to call him a fundamentalist – has created a
god after his own agenda. The Islamic world has even given him another name. He is
an Islamist. He can thus have links with his mother religion, Islam, and also go about
with his hideous work without judgment from his mother.
Since he, the Islamist, is religious, he must formulate a religion that conforms to the
hideousness of his goals. And in doing this, he has proved that his religion is false. Any
religion that would cause a lack of harmony between God’s created beings cannot be
from God. It can only be demonic, earthly and totally of human origin. How can any
religion that generates hate against the “unbeliever” ever claim to be from a God who is
love?
Since the beginning of time, those who have forsaken a knowledge of God have
always created social chaos. Such would only be expected from a humanity that has
given itself over to itself, and thus allowed Satan to have the day. The world continues
to manufacture twisted world views, and thus cultures are embedded with cues that
move men away from God.
We are now living in a time when a new world culture is being manufactured after
the desire of godless men. It is a world of technological cultures that are in a worldwide
confrontation (competition) with one another. Nations are against one another in an
effort “to develop,” another word that means materialistic cravings must be satisfied.
This international struggle of developing nations against one another is the foundation
upon which five world views are promoted. These are the world views of
Churchianism, secularism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. These world views are
represented by billions of people in regional geographical locations on the planet.
Secularism finds its heartland in Europe and a great deal of America. Churchianism
now finds its seat in Africa, though originally from Europe via America to Africa. Islam
is supposedly “contained” in the Middle East. Buddhism is represented by China and
other Far Eastern nations. Hinduism has the motherland of India. These major religious
world views represent the majority of the human race. They are the foundation upon
which culture is controlled in their homelands, and thus, will be determining factors for
the clash of global cultures in the future of human history. It is incumbent on the
disciple of Jesus, therefore, to realize that his work to populate heaven is a struggle
against the world views of these religions.
A. Churchianism:
In the remainder of the book, I have invented the term “Churchianism” (or,
“churchianity”) to define those who have some resemblance to true Christianity, but
have strayed from a biblical definition to create a religion after sources other than the
Bible. Under this umbrella term I have cast all sorts of twisted groups whose understanding
of the Bible and behaviors are certainly not characteristic of a true disciple of
Jesus. The traditional term, “Protestant” will not work in this discussion since a Protestant
was one who originally protested against the Roman Catholic Church. But in a
discussion concerning global world views, we must include also the world hierarchy of
Catholicism under the umbrella of churchianism. I use the term Churchianism, therefore,
to classify all those who in some way would recognize the Bible as a part of their
religious library and Jesus as more than just a good teacher and man. But I would in no
way assert that such a religion to be like true Christianity, since many who have claimed
to be “Christian” have also distorted their share of the truth in order to create their
beliefs after either their traditions, human generated emotional hysteria, thirst for power,
or carnal desires to live according to the dictates of humanity. They are thus, churchian,
not Christian after the true definition of a biblically defined Christian. Therefore, for
lack of a better term, I will make my own term in order to globally classify even distant
believers in Jesus and the Bible who hang on to a few relics of biblical truth in order to
call themselves “Christian,” but are not.
And now I must be more specific about what I call churchianism. My definition is
simple. Churchianism is based on three erroneous views of Christianity. First, the
power structure of churches of this system of religion is focused on man. From the
congregational level (local independent church), to the national level (traditional
denominationalism), and to the international level (Catholicism, Anglicanism), power
structures are found somewhere at the top from which control originates and church law
and orders are passed down to the adherents. The more one climbs the ladder of power
to the top in these religions, the more power he or she has to pass down orders and law
to the adherents of the group. Though Jesus said that such structures would not exist
among His disciples (Mk 10:42-45), the churchian seeks to establish either heads or
bodies of authority on earth in competition with Jesus who has all authority in heaven
and on earth.
Second, professionalism among the leadership of these churches upholds the power
structures. Contributions of the churchian religion are not primarily for benevolence or
evangelism, but to support the professionals who in some way maintain the power
structures of the organized institutional church. The budgets of churchian groups
clearly manifest that the greater amount of the contribution goes to the religious professionals,
whereas the least of the budget goes toward benevolence and evangelism. It is
the “mission” of the professionals, therefore, to promote the budget in order that their
existence as the leaders of the group continue.
Third, some physical manifestation is emphasized to identify the existence or
uniqueness of the churchian group. This physical identity is usually accomplished
through the construction of a facility (“plant”) that signals to the community the existence
of the churchian religion. The greater and more elaborate the structure, the more
the adherents feel their statement of belief and presence is made in the community. The
structure thus becomes the temple of identity for the existence of the churchian disciples.
Though Jesus said that His people would not be identified by worship in a
specific temple or on a particular mountain (Jn 4:21), the churchian is a very zealous
believer in the existence of his faith being identified by either a physical structure or
prominent location on main street.
Now the rest of the world views churchianism as the religion of the West. The
world has no understanding of the biblically defined church of Christ, nor a correct
understanding of what a true Christian is. The world classifies all Western “Christian”
religions as one religion. They do this with all the misunderstandings of true Christianity
that we would expect from an uninformed world.
Even within the realm of Protestant faiths this misunderstanding prevails. For
example, it is often stated that a good person in the community is a “Christian.” This
biblical term is commonly used to refer to anyone who would live a good moral life in a
“Christian” society. However, what people often fail to understand is that a Christian is
biblically defined as one who has obeyed the gospel, and thus is in a covenant relationship
with God. He is Christian in behavior because he is moved with thanksgiving for
the grace of God that was revealed through the cross.
The truth is that one is not “Christian” because he is good, or even does good works.
He is a Christian because the will of the Father is done on earth through him as it is
done in heaven. Directly speaking, a Christian is a disciple who has been baptized for
the remission of his sins, and thus added to the universal family of God because of his
obedience to the gospel through baptism.
The typical Buddhist or Muslim has no concept that there are true Christians among
the many churchians in Western religion. We might complain within the churchian
culture of the West that we are true Christians, and thus, do not want to be identified
with the churchianism of Western culture, but as true Christians. However, our complaints
fall on deaf ears to those outside our Western religious box. Muslims, Buddhists
and Hindus, and the host of other non-Christian religions of the world, do not separate
true Christians from those who are churchian in practice. In fact, they have no understanding
of what a true biblically defined Christian is. Therefore, in the confrontation
between world cultures and the religions of these cultures, we must keep in mind that
the religious world will always misunderstand the church, and thus never understand the
nature of a true disciple of Jesus.
For the Christian, this is quite frustrating. In religious literature and public discussions
in world forums, the terms “Christianity” and “Christian” are thrown around by
those who have little or no understanding of the Bible. Disciples of Jesus and the
church are just thrown in the religious pot, and thus confused with the host of other
faiths that in some way claim Jesus and the Bible, but have little respect for biblical
authority.
If you are in the box of Western culture, you will probably not understand this point.
But I assure you, as a Western inhabitant, you will always be misunderstood. I presently
live on a continent and in a city where Islam is a very dominant religion. In my personal
discussions with Muslims, it is very difficult for them to separate me from the churchian
religion that prevails throughout my area. There is generally no problem when we
confront the “denominations.” We can argue with denominational churchians about
names and doctrines in the Bible in our efforts to convert one another. But when we are
dealing with the clash of world religious cultures, the rest of the religious world stereotypes
all “Christian” religions that have been traditionally associated with the West.
And so, churchianism is a paradox to the nonchurchian world. I have never discussed
the Bible with a person who has little understanding of the Bible, who does not
also misunderstand the definition of a true Christian. The great Islamic debaters classify
all Protestant/Catholic denominations together, and thus, their arguments become true
against a greatly divided “Christian” religion. They argue that the one true and living
God would never create such religious chaos in the world. Their proof that the Christian
“god” is a false god is in the fact that the churchian believer promotes a god who has
created religious chaos. The typical churchian is content with the religious confusion
that prevails among those who believe in Jesus, and to some extent, the existence of the
Bible as the word of God. But because of this belief that religious chaos under the
disguise of “christianity” is God-ordained, I have never found a churchian debater who
can adequately respond to the Muslim’s argument. If the true God of heaven is the
author of such religious confusion, then certainly He is not God. He is only a god the
churchian has created after his misguided beliefs, and thus, to the Muslim, the churchian
is an infidel.
As long as the churchian justifies such religious confusion and division in the name
of Jesus, then he cannot expect the non-Christian world to see a witness for his faith in
his behavior. Every churchian debater with a Muslim always brings shame on the name
of Jesus since his very practice in religious confusion denies that which he seeks to
argue.
Churchianism, with its bits of Bible and Jesus, have molded the Western world view.
In the promotion of institutional churchianism over Jesus, Bible moral values, nevertheless,
have penetrated the culture of the West, and thus these principles have affected the
thinking of the West. If the civil governments of the West have been influenced by
religion in the past – and they have – then certainly no one would doubt that
churchianism has been the primary religion of the West. Europe, North and South
America have to a great extent developed their cultures for centuries on the foundation
of churchian faith. To ignore this fact is not to understand Western culture.
We must give credit to some of the basic principles of the Bible for the development
of the West, even though the principles have been promoted by those who do not have a
clear understanding of the nature of the church. Basic principles as honoring one’s
fellow man, freedom of choice, reverence for God to whom all must give account,
humanitarianism, and a host of other principles and values have been long-held concepts
of the Western world view that have guided cultural and economic development. This is
not to say that the Bible is a textbook that produces democracy. It is that democracy
thrives on the foundation of a world view that highly promotes the teaching of freedom,
a central teaching of the New Testament.
It is this fact that the Islamic world cannot understand. The Islamist views the West
as “Christian” as he views the Middle East as Muslim. There is, or should be, no
difference between state and religion in the eyes of the Muslim. On the other hand, the
West seeks to maintain a separation between church and state. The European seeks to
eradicate religion from government, and thus maintain truly secular states. All such
thinking is confusing to the fundamental Muslim. He views such efforts to be the
irreligious behavior of an infidel.
This confused understanding by the Islamic world of Western churchianism is
illustrated by the existence of the nation of Israel. Suppose you are a Muslim living in
Saudi Arabia or Baghdad. You pick up any “Christian” religious book of the West and
read about Jesus supposedly coming to the earth again to reign on earth for one thousand
years. It is taught that not only will Jesus reign for a thousand years after He has
conquered all His enemies, He will reign on earth in Jerusalem. All Muslims, all
Hindus, all Buddhists and all religious enemies of Jesus and governments of the world
will be brought under this supposed earthly reign of Jesus from Jerusalem. During this
reign, the Jews will be restored to the land of Palestine, and then there will be peace on
earth for a thousand years under the totalitarian reign of Jesus.
If you were a Muslim viewing the West, now what would you think of the political
motives of the West that supports a churchian faith that upholds the existence of Israel
in anticipation of the coming millennial reign of Jesus? Since the eschatology of
churchianism maintains this premillennial view of the coming of Jesus, then the church
will always be misunderstood as it is lumped with the churchian religions of the rest of
the world who believe in the one thousand year reign of Jesus.
On a global scale, therefore, there will always be a misunderstanding between the
West and the East. Since religion is the driving force in any world view, the West will
always be understood by the churchianism by which its citizens are identified. In the
clash between governments and economies, the West will always be viewed by the
Muslim to be promoting his Western churchianism through his military ventures, since
the expansionism of the Islamic world was historically through military conflict and
economic takeovers.
I would like to add here that churchianism has failed both Europe and America. The
first signals of this failure was seen when Cassius Clay changed his name to Mohammed
Ali. Why did he become Muslim and not “Christian”? The ineptitude of the churchian
religion to fulfill the needs of a great segment of the societies of America and Europe
have led to many turning to Islam and other Eastern religions. We must never forget
that this same scenario existed in North Africa when Christianity became churchian, and
subsequently was wiped off northern Africa by Islam in one hundred years after the
death of Mohammed in 622.
When a society becomes truly secular, ignoring the spiritual part of man, then every
invention of religion will eventually invade that society. Today, it is not uncommon to
find Buddhist temples and Moslem mosques throughout America and Europe, lands that
at one time were the heartlands of Christianity, and lands from which came thousands of
missionaries to evangelize the world. The existence of these temples and mosques is the
prophecy of nations losing their Christian origins. Such is also the evidence that
churchianism has greatly failed the West. If the churchian view of Christianity penetrates
Sub-Saharan Africa and India where the church now thrives, the same will
happen. If we do not recognize this historical truth, our children and grandchildren are
doomed to live in a non-Christian world that will move them off the remainder of the
continent of Africa as Islam did the church in North Africa after the death of
Mohammed.
B. Secularism:
As we marched through the 20st century and into the 21st, Europe, and specifically
France, sought to remove any outward religious expressions from government and civil
life. The word “God” was deleted from the European Union’s constitution. France
banned dominant religious symbols in public schools. Political parties deleted “Christian”
from their letterheads. The argument for doing such was to promote and maintain
a truly secular government, one that is not associated with any religion. Government
was to be truly secular in that it could not promote any religious belief.
Turkey has had a difficult time finding its way into the European Union because it
seeks to carry with it Islamic oriented beliefs and practices. The rest of Europe has
simply said to Turkey, government must be secular and not driven by religious inclinations.
No religion must use the power of the sword to promote its beliefs.
There is some truth to this move since faith must be expressed from within, not
forced upon one from without. This would thus perpetually put the secular state at odds
with Islamic religions, since truly behaved Islam is theocratic. Islam is the civil government,
and thus the laws of the Quran can never be implemented in a democratic system.
Quran laws are asserted to be from God, and thus how can a secular democratic government
ever change the law for the needs of the people. For this reason, Islam will always
be contrary to the emergence of democracies throughout the world.
A secular government does not seek to banish religion from the lives of its citizens.
They seek to guarantee that no one religion should dominate the citizens of the government.
For this reason, civil government should be sterile of religion in the sense of not
enforcing religion upon its citizens. It is simply not the duty of government, especially
democratic government, to determine the faith of the citizens of a country.
It is for the above reason that Islamic nations will never truly be a part of the global
community. While the West seeks to be democratic and secular, the Islamic theocratic
governments of the Middle East will never view governmental decisions apart from
Quranic regulation. Even in their own backyards, Islamic nations have tried to usher in
secular government that is not regulated by the law of the Quran. As a result, nations as
Algeria and Egypt have been plagued with internal conflict. Fundamental Islamists
within such nations will never be content with secular governments.
Those governments that are Islamic will never be at home with secular governments.
It is for this reason that the future will continue to be cursed with conflict between
Islamic oriented nations and those nations that are controlled by secular democratic
governments. As long as secular governments represent the vast majority of nations of
the world, and Islamic controlled nations are “contained,” there will be freedom of
religion in the realm of democratic governments. However, if this changes in the future
– which is the desire of the Islamist – there will be a global persecution against other
religious faiths that the world has never known. This persecution will be targeted
specifically against those nations that promote churchianism.
So herein is the clear and present danger of the disciple of Jesus. Democratic
governments of the West seek to accommodate theocratic religions as Islam. It may be
that the accommodation of Islam in a democratic government is politically correct in
order for politicians to secure the votes of the majority in such a system. But when the
majority vote of the democratic governments throughout the world becomes Islam, there
will be a major change in world order. Christians will be challenged to be Christians in
this new world order.
The evidence of persecution of the Christian in the future is manifested in the
present intolerance of Islamic governments toward Christianity today. While Western
democratic governments seek to present social freedom for the practice of different
religions, Islamic governments are very intolerant toward any religion that is not Islamic.
This is the hypocrisy of the Islamic governments. And this is the weakness of
the democratic system that may eventually lead to its fall through the aggressiveness of
the Islamic movement throughout the world.
C. Islam:
True Islam is locked into a time warp. It was a faith that was born out of an era of
cultural and political conflict in the 7th and 8th centuries. Christianity at that time had
become a foreign religion in the land of its birth. Control, catechism and belief had
been shifted to Rome. Arabs had no religious heritage or history as did the Jews. They
had no identity with the “Christianity” they viewed as a foreign religion in the land of
the Arabs. The time was thus right for Mohammed to give birth to a religion that
outwardly appealed to the Arabic culture. From the time of Mohammed’s death in 622
to the time when the Muslim armies were defeated in their invasion of Europe in 722,
Islam exploded into human history, and has since grown to over 1.2 billion people
throughout the world.
Where Islam is dominat, however, there seems to be a stagnation of both social and
economic development. People remain in poverty. What seems to be one of the curious
natures of true Islamic culture is that few great personalities are allowed to arise. Few
Michelangelos, Shakespeares, Beethovens or Longfellows have arisen in middle eastern
cultures where the clerics of true Islam seek to discourage development outside the
control of the clerics. This is not a generic interpretation, just one that seems to manifest
itself in those countries where strict adherence to Islamic practices is enforced.
Economic development has been slow and painful in those nations wherein Quranic
law has played a dominant part in molding the culture. Modernity is the problem of the
Islamic nations of the world. To modernize seems contradictory to the total sacrificial
life-style that is promoted by the Islamic citizen. Bin Laden found Afghanistan the best
of all possible nations in the 20th century for the practice of true Islam. It was poor,
tribal and divided. It, as Somolia, was a warlord country that was divided between
different clans. Islam was the common denominator by which the Taliban thus took a
nation back to the dark ages. If 9/11 had never happened, the West would have kept on
ignoring the plight of this oppressed nation.
It would be untrue to state that poverty is either unique with Islamic societies, or that
poverty exists only in Islamic nations. If the lack of modernity in Islamic beliefs hinders
financial development in those countries that are predominately Islam, we could argue
that Islam has not helped nations as Afganistan and Somolia. Rich oil reserves have
injected billions of dollars of capital into sparsely populated countries as Saudi Arabia,
Kuwait, Iran, Dubai and Yemen. But if it were not for the oil, we would wonder if these
nations would have ever developed any industry to promote jobs and international
cooperation with the outside world. In fact, their richness in oil may have been the only
reason for these nations to reach outside themselves in order to work in partnership with
the rest of the world. If there were no oil reserves under the sands of the Arabian
Desert, would the true Islamist have ever shaken hands with an infidel in an international
business deal to establish a Western manufacturing business in an Islamic country?
Probably not.
Poverty is a worldwide phenomenon. In 1976, I read a Time Magazine study
concerning the existence of poverty in the world. The feature article of that issue had an
impact on me at the time because I was living in Sao Paulo, Brazil. I was touched by the
poor every day in Brazil as children came by our house and begged for food. Families
slept on the streets and mothers routinely gathered outside restaurants to rummage
through garbage cans for scraps of food to feed their children. The prediction of the
Time research at the time was that by the year 2000, world conflict would exist around
struggles between the rich and the poor. It seems that the prediction has come true.
To a great extent, this is at the heart of the Middle Eastern Islamic struggle against
the West. Since the world view of the Islamist hinders him from shaking hands with the
infidel in a business deal that would generate jobs and development, the Islamist seeks
to bring down symbols of capitalistic development as the World Trade Center. Of
course no Islamist would ever confess that is his motive. Nevertheless, his actions
reveal his world view, that this it is against those who lead people away from the
religious fatalism of dictatorial clerics.
The Islamist, who has nothing, has nothing to lose when he blows his body into a
million pieces in the midst of a crowd of innocent victims. If a state or system of
government seems to be the oppressor of the poor, then the call to rally around those
who would announce jihad against the rich oppressor seems appealing. The Islamist,
who presumes to represent the materially oppressed of the world, has heralded himself
as the savior of the poor.
It is for this reason that there will never be peace between Palestinians and Israel. It
is the poor (Palestinians) against the rich (Israel). Not all Palestinians are Islamic.
However, it is the Islamic part of the Palestinians who are called to jihad against the
supposedly rich land-grabbing Jews, who in reality are only one people in a series of
civilizations who have lived in Palestine since the beginning of time. One culture (the
Palestinians) is locked into poverty. The other (Israel) seems to survive regardless of
holocaust oppressions. There is an economic and cultural jealousy here that will never
be resolved simply because the two peoples are arguing from opposing world views.
Unless the Islamic Palestinians give a right to another civilization to exist, there will be
no peace. The conflict is not over land. It is over the right of a people to exist in this
world as a nation with the right to determine their own future.
What is interesting in this conflict, however, is that no Palestinian Christian has
answered the call to be a suicide bomber. The fact that they have not manifests the
difference between the world views of Christianity and Islam. Christianity is proved to
be of divine origin because it seeks peaceful negotiation. Islam is proved to be manoriginated
and maintained because of its mandate to die for the possession of land. Any
religion that promotes material reward in the afterlife in order to accomplish material
goals in the present life cannot be from God who is spirit.
In our efforts as Christians to evangelize the world, there is a significant difference
between the system of evangelism of the Christian than the system that is used by the
Muslim. Christians evangelize in reference to changing the beliefs of the people to
whom they go. Muslims, on the other hand, evangelize in reference to economic
opportunities. While we seek to convince people that Jesus is the Son of God, and thus
urge obedience to the gospel, the Muslim is in town buying up businesses and shops in
order to corner the job market.
In the 80s and early 90s, I did campaign work in Thohoyandou in the Venda region
of South Africa. There were few Muslims in the city of Thohoyandou at that time.
However, by the year 2000, the majority of the businesses had been bought out by
Muslims. If one wanted a job, he or she had to work for a Muslim. After a friend of
mine was on the job for a Muslim for about two months, he was asked to become a
Muslim. This is subtle economic evangelism. Islam uses the capitalistic system of a
free market nation in order to evangelize the nation. In this way, the Muslim who has
learned to modernize his beliefs is able to exploit the capitalistic system of a nation in
order to propagate his religion. What else would explain the rise to over six million
Muslims in the capitalistic free market economy of America? One day, America will be
as Thohoyandou. The former South African ambassador to Pakistan once visited
Thohoyandou a few years ago and asked the Venda people, “Don’t you see what they
[the Muslims] are doing?” That’s a good question for America.
D. Hinduism:
India is seeking to be a world economic power. Though strapped with a population
that is mired down with poverty, there is an economic elite in India that is driving the
nation forward. If history is a textbook for the future, strong economic countries have
strong cultural influence on the world. And herein India will preach its religious faith to
the world.
India has been the geographical bastion of Hinduism. The government of India is
linked to Hindu faith, and thus cannot be viewed as a truly secular government. This
has historically placed India in conflict with Pakistan and other Islamic countries. In
fact, within India itself there is a growing tension between the emerging Islamic faith
and the dominant Hindu government. Though I believe Hinduism will always remain
the dominant religious world view of the country, Hinduism, because of its pacifist
nature, will always be threatened by more radical religions.
Not only is Islam growing in India, but also the Christian faith. It is for this reason
that the government has made some restrictions on the foreign influence of religious
workers. But it is too late for such legal maneuvers since the seeds of other faiths have
already been firmly planted in Indian culture. The church and churchianism have firmly
been planted in the hearts of millions among the one billion plus population. Christians
will continue to expand in this nation simply because the typical Indian seeks to better
himself in a free-market world. The typical Indian has viewed the West to be economically
strong because of its roots in biblical principles. They have reasoned that if these
principles can make a nation economically strong as America, then they are willing to
incorporate these principles into their faith, or even convert entirely to Jesus.
Hinduism has been known for being tolerant of other faiths. But for its survival, this
may change. Whenever a faith feels threatened it will often seek state and government
to come to its rescue, especially when a faith is tied closely to state and government.
Hinduism, however, is a faith that seems to always be looking for another god. It is for
this reason that many Hindus have simply grafted Jesus into their beliefs, and thus
developed a “Christianized Hinduism.”
Regardless of the futile efforts to hinder outside influence from the Christian
community, the church will continue to permeate this culture in which it is believed the
apostle Thomas spent his last years. India and Africa are and will continue to be the
geographical center of the church. India will have the most disciples as a nation simply
because of its population. Africa will have the most disciples as a continent simply
because of its size.
Pakistan exists today because of an inability of the world views of Islam and Hinduism
to bring a society together into peaceful coexistence. Since both faiths seek to be
linked to state, it was inevitable that two states would eventually form after Indian
independence in 1947. As long as these religions use the power of government to
maintain their dominance, there will never be peaceful coexistence between either state.
Since secular states do not pose a problem, or become competitive in reference to
religion, India will have harmony with the West, but will always be suspicious of
Islamic states. It is for this reason that the West should always shake hands with India in
the global economic world.
E. Buddhism:
Buddhism represents over one billion people of the world. As with churchianism,
Islam and Hinduism, Buddhism will continue to be a major player in the forming of
future cultures. As China continues to emerge and become a strong financial participant
in the global economy, Buddhist China indirectly will influence secular societies that
have largely given up Christianity and become very secular. This is manifested in the
New Age Movement as it continues to grow in the West. The New Age Movement is
Buddhist religion, though called after a different name.
As the West craves cheap goods from the cheap labor of China, a monetary transfer
will bring China into being the top global economy in the near future. As America
bought Japanese products for fifty years after World War II, and subsequently made
Japan a world economic force, so it will happen with China. The only difference is that
China has a population that is measured in a billion plus, not in millions as Japan.
China, as it is under a communist regime, will become increasingly secular. After
years of atheistic communistic teaching, it has become a nation of people who have no
religion. As far as economics is concerned, a class of the rich has already developed.
Porsches and Mercedes are already being driven down streets in Beijing, passing
donkey-pulled carts of a lower economic class who can never seem to get a piece of the
pie.
It will be the emerging rich of China who will challenge the secular West in the
future. As China contents itself with a tremendous gap between the rich and poor, the
rich of China will have an economic source that gives it an economic advantage over the
West. This advantage will be built on the backs of the cheap labor force of the masses
of the unskilled. The West will not be able to compete with this economic strategy. As
long as there is a driving class of the privileged in China who ride on the backs of the
poor, and because of the materialistic thirst of the West to obtain cheap China goods,
capital flow from the West to China will build an economic giant in the Far East with
which the West will eventually have to compete.
I believe one thing is certain. China, with its passive religion of Buddhism, and
atheistic moral culture, will become a strong world power. It will become such simply
because of its massive labor force that is willing to work for meager salaries in comparison
to anyone else in the world. This force that is used by an intelligentsia which feels
comfortable with the exploitation of the poor, will drive China to the forefront of world
economic influence. Its Far East economics and culture is ready to eclipse the economic
giants of the world.
The problem with the emergence of China is that there are no trade unions to rally
the poor to a better life. While the West must deal with trade unions that take care of
labor, a laborer in China is simply set aside for twenty or thirty other laborers who want
the same job. However, there is grumbling in China, especially among the rural poor.
But it will take another generation or more for an economically strong class of workers
to change the government. When only a few people enjoy the blessings of economic
growth, human rights for the masses can be easily ignored. The economic elite in China
know this. They also know that the masses can arise to change government. In preparation
for any such repetition in history as the cultural revolution that was initiated in
1948, China has built a million-man army in order to keep its own population in check.
The ruling elite of China will never forget what was expressed a Tienamen Square.
A suppressed class of young people sought to give birth to greater freedoms. Unfortunately,
the government at that time harshly squashed the efforts of this group, but the
day will come when those who marched in Tienamen Square will be ruling the country.
We must pray that they will not forget that for which many of their friends died.
Regardless of all the blessings and cursings of China’s economic situation, Jesus is
being preached among the masses of China. I once picked up a Time Magazine and read
a two-page article that reported on the destruction of an almost completed church
building in China. The government bulldozers moved in and completely destroyed the
structure, while police beat some of the members. The article concluded that the China
government is not concerned about “Christianity” that meets in homes in a seemingly
disorganized manner. However, when churches get organized and gather great crowds
of people into one place, then they are troubled.
When the early church began in the first century under the oppression of the Jews,
and then the Roman State, the same persecution was launched against Christians. As a
result, the church grew rapidly across the Roman Empire. So are we to be thankful to
the China government for implementing the very thing that will cause the growth of the
church in China? We will remain in small groups and seemingly “disorganized,” for our
Head is in heaven. We need no organized body on earth to take the place of our Head.
In this manner China will continue to be evangelized.
In the year 2000, several house church leaders in China had a secret meeting. They
estimated at that time that there were at least fifty million members of house churches
throughout China. Are we to thank the oppression of the China government for this? It
is ironic that those who promote churchianism in the West are the first to judge the
actions of the China government against religion. But the church is not what the churchian
would teach. It is not what the China government perceives it to be. True Christians
are those who simply seek to live a better life to the glory of God, not build
monuments to make a public statement, nor be represented by a professional clergy who
would voice members’ rights, while siphoning off the money of the poor in order to
maintain their power structures.
I think one thing is true. If the Chinese government truly understood the biblical
world view and behavior of a true Christian, it would be totally tolerant with true
Christians. But as long as it perceives the churchian religion of the Western as a religious
power base with professionals who maintain a Catholic role of control in world
politics, Christians will be lumped in with the masses of churchianists in the minds of
the China government. They will continue to oppress organized religion. But ironically,
I see the government becoming more tolerant of those who want to be simply Christians
and good citizens.
So is the Western disciple able to live and work in China, having been so influenced
by the churchianism that is maintained in the West? When the Western church places so
much emphasis on bands and buildings, how can disciples be trained to work with a
meek and quiet spirit, in an environment where love, not physical structures or performances,
is the means by which the heart of God is proclaimed to the masses?
A good friend of mine and his wife, with their young daughter, have been working in
China for several years. They support themselves by teaching English. They quietly do
the work as disciples of Jesus, teaching and gathering into their home a small group of
Christians. It is a hard and often discouraging work. However, there are others throughout
China doing the same and with great success.
I have often wondered why others are not called to do the same as my friend. Is
China too far away? Does it speak a language that is too difficult to learn? Are the
living conditions bad? Is it that no glowing reports can ever be made of one’s work?
Or, is the religious culture of the Western churchian so radically different from simple
Christianity that Western disciples feel no “call” to go to where it is difficult?

This entry was posted on May 25, 2007 at 10:09 pm and is filed under MAKING DISCIPLES IN A GLOBAL COMMUNITY. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print