The church suffering on african lands

[Thomas_muntzer]

How about you watch the video.

What video ? where can i find it ?

https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/ ... rsecution/

Thank you so much i'll watch the video

[joshuabgood]

Here is a more full version with an interview with the pastor who tells about another family from his church as well...that were taken...

And its not behind a paywall...

https://www.foxla.com/news/ice-iranian- ... -for-faith

[JohnH]

It's interesting that the response of certain people is "This means we need to make political change happen for unlimited immigration to the U.S." as opposed to "We need to make political change happen in Nigeria so that Christians there aren't beaten/murdered/persecuted".

[MattY]

It's interesting that the response of certain people is "This means we need to make political change happen for unlimited immigration to the U.S." as opposed to "We need to make political change happen in Nigeria so that Christians there aren't beaten/murdered/persecuted".

No one said anything about unlimited immigration, and you're welcome to go over to Nigeria to help them if you want. Or we can do some limited but effective things here to help people - and help prevent people who came here to escape suffering from having to go back to it.

Just because we can't help everyone doesn't mean we shouldn't help some; I can't give money to all good causes, but that doesn't mean I can't choose a few to contribute to. The US doesn't have to admit "the entire world" in order to admit some people. There's no reason people who came here facing persecution in their homeland can't stay here. I understand immigration should be handled in a lawful and orderly fashion but the time to manage the situation and keep entry lawful and orderly is before they get here, not when they're already here and becoming members of their local communities and institutions like the church, and then ripping them apart. There's no good reason to deport people like the Iranian Christians mentioned in the CT article, who are in the US lawfully with pending asylum cases - no reason to treat them the way they were treated in the video. That's simply cruel and shameful, and there's no good reason to defend it.

My ancestors came here from Europe seeking freedom from persecution and were welcomed here. I would like to see the United States remain a place where people can come seeking freedom from persecution. "In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets."

It's highly unlikely any of our posts here on this site is going to change any government policy - butterfly effect, etc., etc. - but people comment about politics, policies and current events here all the time and no one objects that any of us doesn't have the power to affect said policy/event.

[ohio jones]

It's interesting that the response of certain people is "This means we need to make political change happen for unlimited immigration to the U.S." as opposed to "We need to make political change happen in Nigeria so that Christians there aren't beaten/murdered/persecuted".

I'm not inclined to "make political change happen" by earthly means, but if I would be, my chances of being effective in the US are a lot higher than they would be in Nigeria.

As for the part about "unlimited immigration",
Do not take another's statement and distort it to an extreme.

[JohnH]

It's interesting that the response of certain people is "This means we need to make political change happen for unlimited immigration to the U.S." as opposed to "We need to make political change happen in Nigeria so that Christians there aren't beaten/murdered/persecuted".

No one said anything about unlimited immigration,

I was responding specifically to JBG who said he doesn't think governments should impose limitations on migration at all (JBG, if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly, please correct what you think government policy should be).

and you're welcome to go over to Nigeria to help them if you want. Or we can do some limited but effective things here to help people - and help prevent people who came here to escape suffering from having to go back to it.

Nigeria and USA aren't bordering countries. There's a giant ocean between them. It is not a natural place for people genuinely "fleeing" to migrate to.

Nigeria and the USA, on the other hand, do have economic ties, and the USA is in particular a destination for economic migrants from Nigeria. There's nothing particularly wrong with people deciding to move to a new place to make more money, but as a Christian I have no obligation to try to facilitate or promote people moving from place A to place B with the idea they're going to make more money in place B.

Just because we can't help everyone doesn't mean we shouldn't help some; I can't give money to all good causes, but that doesn't mean I can't choose a few to contribute to. The US doesn't have to admit "the entire world" in order to admit some people. There's no reason people who came here facing persecution in their homeland can't stay here. I understand immigration should be handled in a lawful and orderly fashion but the time to manage the situation and keep entry lawful and orderly is before they get here

Which is what some such as myself propose, as opposed to having a de facto open border. We already have a gigantic backlog of asylum claims to get through. There is no need or reason to admit even more asylees.

There's no good reason to deport people like the Iranian Christians mentioned in the CT article, who are in the US lawfully with pending asylum cases - no reason to treat them the way they were treated in the video. That's simply cruel and shameful, and there's no good reason to defend it.

I simply don't take these claims seriously when they are made by individuals or groups (such as CT) that promote increased immigration and basically never see any reason there should be less immigration - only more. Simply put, they don't have any credibility to speak to specifics on the matter. I don't trust them and don't trust their reporting on this particular matter.

My ancestors came here from Europe seeking freedom from persecution and were welcomed here. I would like to see the United States remain a place where people can come seeking freedom from persecution. "In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets."

That's nice. Do you think the U.S. government should be a theocracy that somehow tries to follow the New Testament, such as the Bible quotation you had? I don't think that's the role of governments, nor that we should advocate for it (although several states at the U.S.'s founding explicitly tried to do just that, and even had state-established churches).

[joshuabgood]

I was responding specifically to JBG who said he doesn't think governments should impose limitations on migration at all (JBG, if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly, please correct what you think government policy should be).

Even more fundamentally, I don't believe in the modern geo-political, nation state. I expect them to be gone one day, PTL. In the meantime, I think we advocate for the policies of the Kingdom of God where-ever and whenever. And in any institution, be it a brothel or a nation state, (which bear striking similarity as Reagan noted), that we advocate for the ways, that is policies, of the Kingdom of God. And bit by bit, piece by piece, King Jesus will win and all things will be brought under his feet.

[MattY]

There's no good reason to deport people like the Iranian Christians mentioned in the CT article, who are in the US lawfully with pending asylum cases - no reason to treat them the way they were treated in the video. That's simply cruel and shameful, and there's no good reason to defend it.

I simply don't take these claims seriously when they are made by individuals or groups (such as CT) that promote increased immigration and basically never see any reason there should be less immigration - only more. Simply put, they don't have any credibility to speak to specifics on the matter. I don't trust them and don't trust their reporting on this particular matter.

There's video of it and there are other sites verifying what is going on. JBG posted one. Here's another: https://www.christianpost.com/news/past ... mbers.html

My ancestors came here from Europe seeking freedom from persecution and were welcomed here. I would like to see the United States remain a place where people can come seeking freedom from persecution. "In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills the law and the prophets."

That's nice. Do you think the U.S. government should be a theocracy that somehow tries to follow the New Testament, such as the Bible quotation you had? I don't think that's the role of governments, nor that we should advocate for it (although several states at the U.S.'s founding explicitly tried to do just that, and even had state-established churches).

No, of course not. But treating immigrants/foreigners with justice and equity is not too high a principle for government to attain to, or an exclusively Christian idea (it's found in the OT as well, as is the Golden Rule); it's one of the basic elements of a just society. I'm not asking government to follow theocratic principles; treating people with justice and not oppressing them ought to be a basic expectation of government, and it ought to be a basic expectation of Christians not to make excuses for a government that does not do so. These principles do not need to violate government's responsibility to suppress evil in society and protect its citizens. Government can even actively help people at times, including people in foreign countries, without stepping outside of its role. Consider PEPFAR, the foreign aid program started by Pres. Bush that saved millions of lives in Africa. There's no need to advocate "theocracy" to desire that to continue.

[JohnH]

There's video of it and there are other sites verifying what is going on. JBG posted one. Here's another: https://www.christianpost.com/news/past ... mbers.html

To quote,

The Department of Homeland Security confirmed the arrest of the couple, describing them as “two Iranian nationals unlawfully present in the U.S. — both flagged as subjects of national security interest,” according to Fox11.

They aren't being targeted or "persecuted" for being Christians (or any other religion). It does say the government flagged them as being "subjects of national security interest". Whether we like it or not, governments have a right to decide who enters and stays in the country, particularly people from another country that has decided to be at war with that country for decades.

If they weren't actually spies for the Iranian regime or up to some other kind of questionable activity, then I would say I do feel very sorry for them that they are being removed under those circumstances. However, I would advise anyone as a matter of offering wise counsel that trying to enter and stay in the United States when you don't have a solid legal basis (which lodging an asylum claim isn't) to be here is just not a very good idea, particularly if you are very concerned of being returned to your home country.

No, of course not. But treating immigrants/foreigners with justice and equity is not too high a principle for government to attain to, or an exclusively Christian idea (it's found in the OT as well, as is the Golden Rule); it's one of the basic elements of a just society.

I agree. However, I don't think treating foreigners with "justice and equity" includes having a blanket allowance for migrants to enter and stay in America for economic reasons, or even for many other types of reasons. I don't think that a just society is necessarily a borderless society, and I think a borderless society can in fact be an unjust one.

I'm not asking government to follow theocratic principles; treating people with justice and not oppressing them ought to be a basic expectation of government, and it ought to be a basic expectation of Christians not to make excuses for a government that does not do so. These principles do not need to violate government's responsibility to suppress evil in society and protect its citizens. Government can even actively help people at times, including people in foreign countries, without stepping outside of its role.

Of course it can. And it can also choose to withdraw that help to foreign countries as well, and doing so is not necessarily immoral or unjust.

You are of course welcome to an opinion that the current immigration laws (which have been on the books for decades) and enforcement of them is unjust, and that's OK, but it's also OK if someone has an opinion that they are just fine. I don't think deportees are being "treated with in justice" and I don't think deporting illegal aliens or aliens who have their temporary status revoked is "oppressing them". I don't think deportation is a punishment, and I don't think it's a punishment not to be allowed to stay and live and work in the United States.

Consider PEPFAR, the foreign aid program started by Pres. Bush that saved millions of lives in Africa. There's no need to advocate "theocracy" to desire that to continue.

I don't consider President Bush's programme to try to increase U.S. intelligence assets and government influence in Africa to be a particularly noble one, particularly when cloaked in a religious or "humanitarian" disguise. PEPFAR was explicitly marketed to religious people in America as somehow helping achieve religious ends.

Of course you are welcome to have your own, different opinion on PEPFAR and that's fine.

[Bootstrap]

They aren't being targeted or "persecuted" for being Christians (or any other religion). It does say the government flagged them as being "subjects of national security interest". Whether we like it or not, governments have a right to decide who enters and stays in the country, particularly people from another country that has decided to be at war with that country for decades.

In this country, though, there's something called due process. You have the right to challenge charges people make against you.

If the government can just make up charges and disappear people, we are all at risk.