Prejudice in the Adventist Church Options

[Green Cochoa]

Greenie, as as an aside, do you really believe that God is waiting on "organized" religion, in general, and in particular, the Advnetist chruch to reach all of these people? Do youreally believe He, God, has no other way to manifest Himself to His people?
You are assuming that everyone in the US has the same opportunities, period. Just like you walked through those remote Asian villages, you might want to take a tour of the US "urban" areas, or some of our own more "remote villages".

You do not understand, because you haven't seen. That's ok. I can tell you stories of what their life is like, but you would probably still not understand. These people do not know God. They do not have an opportunity to know God. I made no mention of organized religion. If you want some mention, let me tell you this. Until now, "we" have ZERO regular Christian broadcasts (AM, FM, Shortwave, TV, cable) in the Thai or Laotian languages either one--ANY DENOMINATION. So much for organized religion doing anything in that area. That is why I am praising the Lord to hear news recently of the construction of a brand new AWR station in Chiangmai, Thailand, intended also to reach into Laos, with some programming in Hmong, Thai, and Laotian. That is only a small step in the right direction. There are countless thousands who never have any opportunity other than the book of nature to know anything about God. And that book isn't enough. They live in fear, worshiping the demons who mistreat them. You would not believe their condition, without seeing it. It's not the bamboo houses with thatch roof, it's not the pigs running around, it's not the ill-clad children playing in the mud, it's not the betel nut they chew, it's not the idols they see, it's not the AIDS epidemic brought back to their villages by their young daughters whom they have sold into the hands of the "nice man who will help her find work in the city so she can send us money," it's not the fact that they survive as subsistence farmers on an extremely meager income--it's none of that. It's something bigger. It's something that even those who are more wealthy, who live in the city, who are more educated, who have more exposure to the media and who may speak another language are bound by. It's the demonic forces that keep the people in fear through real and oppressive means. It's the fact that no one has told them about God in a way that they can understand.

To answer your question more plainly, yes. I believe that God is waiting for us to do what He has told us to do. If He were going to do all of our work for us, why would He have given the disciples the command we call "The Gospel Commission?"

Isn't it more than a little presumptuous for you to assume that non-caucasian and non-christian are synonymous terms?

This is your own presumption. I said no such thing.

Especially in light of the fact that the most underevangelized demographic that is shrinking the most rapidly are North American and European caucasians... both in the Adventist church and in Christianity at large...

The darkest corner of the globe is not America. You have not seen things here, so it's understandable that you might feel that way. I beg to differ.

[princessdi]

You do not understand, because you haven't seen. That's ok. I can tell you stories of what their life is like, but you would probably still not understand. These people do not know God. They do not have an opportunity to know God. I made no mention of organized religion. If you want some mention, let me tell you this. Until now, "we" have ZERO regular Christian broadcasts (AM, FM, Shortwave, TV, cable) in the Thai or Laotian languages either one--ANY DENOMINATION. So much for organized religion doing anything in that area. That is why I am praising the Lord to hear news recently of the construction of a brand new AWR station in Chiangmai, Thailand, intended also to reach into Laos, with some programming in Hmong, Thai, and Laotian. That is only a small step in the right direction. There are countless thousands who never have any opportunity other than the book of nature to know anything about God. And that book isn't enough. They live in fear, worshiping the demons who mistreat them. You would not believe their condition, without seeing it. It's not the bamboo houses with thatch roof, it's not the pigs running around, it's not the ill-clad children playing in the mud, it's not the betel nut they chew, it's not the idols they see, it's not the AIDS epidemic brought back to their villages by their young daughters whom they have sold into the hands of the "nice man who will help her find work in the city so she can send us money," it's not the fact that they survive as subsistence farmers on an extremely meager income--it's none of that. It's something bigger. It's something that even those who are more wealthy, who live in the city, who are more educated, who have more exposure to the media and who may speak another language are bound by. It's the demonic forces that keep the people in fear through real and oppressive means. It's the fact that no one has told them about God in a way that they can understand.

It is you who do not understand, Greenie. I do not not doubt the conditions of which you speak. Anyone watching National Geo. Channel or Discovery can tell you that. What I am trying to get you to see if that you can find many more places than we would like to admit with all too similar issues here in the US.
To answer your question more plainly, yes. I believe that God is waiting for us to do what He has told us to do. If He were going to do all of our work for us, why would He have given the disciples the command we call "The Gospel Commission?"
OK

[PrincessDrRe]

[Clay]

God is not waiting on us to evangelize people who we think don't have an opportunity to know him.... God is not limited to our spreading the word..... now He may be waiting on something, but it aint that....

[Green Cochoa]

PrincessDi, yes. You are right about there being a mission field wherever we are. However, I would truly have a hard time believing that someone in America might NEVER have heard the name of Jesus. Such is the case in places I've been in Asia. Poverty is everywhere: emotional, physical, spiritual poverty. Jesus said we would always have the poor among us. Surely there are people in America who do not know God, but it would seem that they have had multiple exposures, or opportunities to learn about God. EVERY COIN in America is imprinted with the words "In God We Trust." The Pledge of Allegiance, the news media reports, magazines, newspapers, radio, television: all these contribute to the "Christian society" that America was founded upon. But Asia...I have never seen such a vast territory as this with so little infusion of Christianity. There is only about 1 - 2 percent of the population who is Christian in these parts. In Thailand, about the same. Of the one percent in Thailand, less than half is protestant Christian. There are entire provinces in Thailand without an Adventist presence. I cannot speak of other Christian denominations, because I simply do not know their status. But I was privvy to our own statistics dating from about five years ago, and I have seen it with my own eyes. I have spent Sabbaths in a heathen home because I knew of no place to worship with believers within 100 km, perhaps more.

[PrincessDrRe]

PrincessDi, yes. You are right about there being a mission field wherever we are. However, I would truly have a hard time believing that someone in America might NEVER have heard the name of Jesus. Such is the case in places I've been in Asia. Poverty is everywhere: emotional, physical, spiritual poverty. Jesus said we would always have the poor among us. Surely there are people in America who do not know God, but it would seem that they have had multiple exposures, or opportunities to learn about God. EVERY COIN in America is imprinted with the words "In God We Trust." The Pledge of Allegiance, the news media reports, magazines, newspapers, radio, television: all these contribute to the "Christian society" that America was founded upon. But Asia...I have never seen such a vast territory as this with so little infusion of Christianity. There is only about 1 - 2 percent of the population who is Christian in these parts. In Thailand, about the same. Of the one percent in Thailand, less than half is protestant Christian. There are entire provinces in Thailand without an Adventist presence. I cannot speak of other Christian denominations, because I simply do not know their status. But I was privvy to our own statistics dating from about five years ago, and I have seen it with my own eyes. I have spent Sabbaths in a heathen home because I knew of no place to worship with believers within 100 km, perhaps more.

Just because they "heard" the name doesn't mean they "know" the name.

If you go to Benton Harbor, MI - you will find someone....SOMEONE e'ry weekend that can honestly that they have never heard the name Jesus.

Besides I can hear the name "Tom" - however if no one is explaining to me who is "Tom" then his name means nothing - it's just a name....

[LeePaDee]

GREENC WROTE:
There are countless thousands who never have any opportunity other than the book of nature to know anything about God. And that book isn't enough.
-----I was doing ok til you said that part, GC. The bood of nature is not enough.... My relatives, American Indians, would not agree, I don't agree with that statement either.

[LeePaDee]

GREENC WROTE:
If the book of nature were sufficient, why should they live in fear of the evil spirits all of the time? I've seen what those spirits do .....
------WHOA, we were (I was speaking) about the book of nature, you jumped to demons. That is a completely different topic for me. Those that I know personally, relatives that I mentioned included, who had no Bible, did not know the name of Jesus, somehow learned to behave fairly, and much more lovingly than many others I know that claim to be Christ-followers.

[Seraphim7]

Maybe so. I don't have personal experience with congregations experiencing great change in racial makeup, so I really can't speak authoritatively on the subject, just putting forward some thoughts.

But how can one be so certain of how a black congregation would react if there was an influx of white members? Have you observed this? Just wondering.

I also wonder if "white flight" may take place in part because of differing worship styles rather than just skin colour issues?

There is only ONE RACE of men...

I don't remember the pastor ever using the term "people of color." I can tell you that he was not making reference to Asians or others either. I think many in the white church rather accepted his statement. Personally, I had a problem with his support for it, and I felt it was a careless remark to make coming from him to a white congregation. But I would not have a problem with getting to heaven and finding it to be true--except for the fact that that would simply mean folks like me may not have done enough to win souls of other races to Christ.

My heart goes out to all those Asian nations for whom the world has done so little to tell them of Christ. I have walked through villages where in all likelihood I was the first white person they had ever seen. The people could not help staring. The sad part is, they had also not heard of God. They worshiped the spirits of their ancestors. I have heard first-hand accounts of the natives' seeing and hearing siren girls. In one dramatic story, the girl's older brother had been taken away by one, never to be seen again...

However, sadly, I'm not sure that we have done our part to reach them.

I repeat there is only ONE RACE of men. Natives?

There are a whole lot of folk in the USofA who would fall under that category, none of which are people of color.

This post has been edited by seraph|m: Oct 19 2006, 07:19 PM

[Green Cochoa]

There is only ONE RACE of men...
I repeat there is only ONE RACE of men. Natives?

There are a whole lot of folk in the USofA who would fall under that category, none of which are people of color.

As for my use of "natives," I was speaking of those who are "natives" in Asia, not America. I'm sorry if that was not clear. I consider myself, btw, a "native" of America. I was born there, right? What does "native", "nativity" mean?

Regarding race: I guess context is the keyword here. In the context of "human race," yes, there is only one race. But in the context of, say, a U.S. census, we are asked to state our race defined by names such as "Native American", "Caucasian", "Hispanic", "Asian", etc. and sometimes those break down even further, as in "Japanese", "Indonesian", "Thai", "Chinese", etc. In each case, there are clear, visible differences among the groups which makes recognition of a particular "race" possible. Some definitions I have found for "race" from World Book Dictionary:

1. a group of persons connected by common descent or origin... 2. a great division of mankind having certain physical peculiarities in common: the white race, the yellow race.....3. human beings, as a group.

From the internet: "The divisions of the human species. These include the Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid (including Cogoid and Capoid), and Australoid races. Due to racial mixing, the genetic and physiological differences are not always clear in individuals."

Also from the internet: "A race is a distinct population of humans distinguished in some way from other humans. The most widely observed races are those based on skin color, facial features, ancestry, and genetics. Conceptions of race, as well as specific racial groupings, are often controversial due to their impact on social identity hence identity politics. "

So, I guess the issue, in the end, for me is "Is the word 'race' offensive to you?" If so, I'll try to remember that next time I post, as I don't wish to offend you all. I've just never met anyone that was offended by the term before.

[awesumtenor]

As for my use of "natives," I was speaking of those who are "natives" in Asia, not America. I'm sorry if that was not clear. I consider myself, btw, a "native" of America. I was born there, right? What does "native", "nativity" mean?

Regarding race: I guess context is the keyword here. In the context of "human race," yes, there is only one race. But in the context of, say, a U.S. census, we are asked to state our race defined by names such as "Native American", "Caucasian", "Hispanic", "Asian", etc. and sometimes those break down even further, as in "Japanese", "Indonesian", "Thai", "Chinese", etc. In each case, there are clear, visible differences among the groups which makes recognition of a particular "race" possible. Some definitions I have found for "race" from World Book Dictionary:

1. a group of persons connected by common descent or origin... 2. a great division of mankind having certain physical peculiarities in common: the white race, the yellow race.....3. human beings, as a group.

From the internet: "The divisions of the human species. These include the Mongoloid, Caucasoid, Negroid (including Cogoid and Capoid), and Australoid races. Due to racial mixing, the genetic and physiological differences are not always clear in individuals."

Also from the internet: "A race is a distinct population of humans distinguished in some way from other humans. The most widely observed races are those based on skin color, facial features, ancestry, and genetics. Conceptions of race, as well as specific racial groupings, are often controversial due to their impact on social identity hence identity politics. "

So, I guess the issue, in the end, for me is "Is the word 'race' offensive to you?" If so, I'll try to remember that next time I post, as I don't wish to offend you all. I've just never met anyone that was offended by the term before.

The word 'race' is not offensive... the world's concept of it, however is straight from the pit of hell.

Yet it is funny how, when it suits our purposes, we will embrace the world's terms and make them "authoritative" if that helps us make a point... but as a Christian, in spite of all you have stated above, should not the fact that God "hath made of one blood ALL men" carry more weight in your mind than all of those definitions? Should not believers not buy into the faux delineations of men?

Isn't he that is in you supposed to be greater than he that is in the world? That being the case, isn't it time we stopped letting missionary zeal be the velvet glove that covers the iron fist of colonialism and disposed of the idea of the subjugating a people allegedly being a benevolent act?

In His service,
Mr. J

[Green Cochoa]

Awesumtenor, I understand where you might have experienced a lot of negativity. I'm not trying to add to that. I've said before, and I can say it again if you like, I'm not prejudiced regarding colors, races, skin tones, complexions, or whatever term you might prefer. The fact is, the world does use a definition of "race" which last time I checked was not considered politically incorrect and which applied to "skin tones" as y'all seem to be preferring. Maybe things have changed. I don't know. That's why I was asking if it was offensive to you. Having asked, you said "no," and then immediately went on to say things that make me thing your "no" is not said with confidence. Quite frankly, your post sends a mixed message, and leaves me confused. Is the word "race" ok, or not ok, with all of you?

Surely you would not deny the fact that, as Clay mentioned earlier, skin color is something we see at first glance. Clay mentioned that it was up to the perceptions of it that made the difference. I agree with that. I'm not putting one race before another just because I see a difference between them. The fact is, they are different. Just like men and women are different. I've spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out exactly what it is in a man's or a woman's face that clues me in to their gender--and I still don't know, but just the face is all it takes. Now, if you are thinking that recognizing differences among peoples who should be equal is bad, pretty soon we won't be able to make any gender references either...hmm....or maybe I'm just confused.

[Denny]

I am not offended by the word race per se (I doubt awesumtenor is either). We are the same race but different ethnic groups. It does seem ridiculous that a person we deem white and a person we deem black can be of the same colour/skin tone/melanin content but we have this man made divide to describe what is in fact different ethnic groups only by calling one 'black' and the other 'white'.

The USA and the UK have these racial categories due to their past histories of treating people of different ethnic groups as if they were a different race. If they treated skin tone the same as they do eye color or hair colour such categories would never be needed. You notice the Bible recognises people by where they came from not by skin colour - the people from Egypt/Cush/Ethopia were never called black in the Bible from that I deduce that to the writers 'race' as we know it today was an unknown construct. Shows how artificial the whole race thing is....

Example Moses wife-
Exodus 2
The priest of Midian had seven daughters. They came and drew water, filling the troughs and watering their father's sheep. When some shepherds came and chased the girls off, Moses came to their rescue and helped them water their sheep.
18 When they got home to their father, Reuel, he said, "That didn't take long. Why are you back so soon?"
19 "An Egyptian," they said, "rescued us from a bunch of shepherds. Why, he even drew water for us and watered the sheep."
20 He said, "So where is he? Why did you leave him behind? Invite him so he can have something to eat with us."
21-22 Moses agreed to settle down there with the man, who then gave his daughter Zipporah (Bird) to him for his wife. She had a son, and Moses named him Gershom (Sojourner), saying, "I'm a sojourner in a foreign country."


Numbers 12
1 Miriam and Aaron began to talk against Moses because of his Cushite wife, for he had married a Cushite. 2 "Has the LORD spoken only through Moses?" they asked. "Hasn't he also spoken through us?" And the LORD heard this.


If this was written today it would say and Miriam and Aaron begain to talk against Moses because of his black/dark skinned wife.....

This post has been edited by Denny: Oct 20 2006, 07:39 AM

[västergötland]

In the bible, often the different groups or nations are identified either by that particular peoples first patriarch or by the area where they came from. The more interaction with the tribes and the earlier in history, the more likely that the people would be recognised by their patriarch.

[Green Cochoa]

I am not offended by the word race per se (I doubt awesumtenor is either). We are the same race but different ethnic groups. It does seem ridiculous that a person we deem white and a person we deem black can be of the same colour/skin tone/melanin content but we have this man made divide to describe what is in fact different ethnic groups only by calling one 'black' and the other 'white'.

The USA and the UK have these racial categories due to their past histories of treating people of different ethnic groups as if they were a different race. ... You notice the Bible recognises people by where they came from not by skin colour - the people from Egypt/Cush/Ethopia were never called black in the Bible from that I deduce that to the writers 'race' as we know it today was an unknown construct. Shows how artificial the whole race thing is....

I guess I still am not sure I understand your perspective. I've been called "white" many-a-time, and it has never offended me. I've been called caucasian, fahrang, yank, gringo--none of it has ever bothered me. Negative comments about my actions or character tend to wound my spirits far quicker than any comment about my genetics. But that's NOT because I feel at all loftier than others either. I actually worry sometimes about my skin tones, as I think I'm more prone to melanoma than those who are less "melanin-challenged" than I.

Regarding the Bible on skin color--

• "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?"
• "I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother's children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept. "
• "For the hurt of the daughter of my people am I hurt; I am black; astonishment hath taken hold on me."

Lamentations also remarks on skin color. Considering the relative lack of statements regarding skin color in the Bible, and no indication of it being associated with any particular tribe or nation, I guess I will have to agree that the Bible makes no issue of race. However, neither does the Bible seem to condone unity of all "races" (in the Bible, "peoples"). Or at least, not after the flood!

"And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech."

Personally, I think it is the issue of language which causes the most division and prejudice among "peoples" today.