Chiapas: Expelled Christians Living in Barn

Voice of the Martyrs ^ | February 2013 page 9 | Voice of the Martyrs

[daniel1212]

Chiapas: Expelled Christians Living in Barn
February 2013 issue, page 9

“We aren’t delinquents; we’re people who love God and respect society.”

A leader of a Christian group of 27 families in Altamirano, Chiapas, Mexico were expelled from their community “just for being evangelicals,” according to a recent report in a Chiapas newspaper. And now the families, which include about 40 children, are living in a cattle barn because they have nowhere else to go.

VOM has been providing basic needs to expelled Christians like these through a dedicated pastor who volunteers his time to help. Last year, we provided the Christians living in the cattle barn with mattresses and food. Although the 27 families are sleeping on mattresses on the ground and storing their belongings in a cattle trough, they have an eternal perspective. They chose to give up their temporal homes rather than compromise their faith in the God who will shelter them in his heavenly home for all eternity.

[daniel1212]

There's a rising level of violence coming from armed Marxist Zapatista groups, narcotraficantes, straight-out armed robberies, abductions and terrorism, as well as aggression by "traditional" caciques and now, even Muslims (this is terrifying) coming in and trying to stir up even more serious social conflict and attract the indigenous people to Islam.

Well just send the FR Religion Mods down there.

But in reality, until all bow the knee to King Jesus out of a broken heart and contrite spirit as damned+destitute sinners and be truly born again by repentant faith directly in Him ("nothing in my hands i bring; simply to thy cross i cling), then there will such persecution .

"But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. " (Galatians 4:29)

[Hacksaw]

Or the universally "peaceful native Americans." But that imagination is not close to being an argument here (though things like the Requerimiento were not exactly passive greetings), but it manifests about the broad nature of Catholicism, and relates to its present and past ethos, and that RCs are to obey its current teaching, though the reality is that those at issue here as well as multitudes more do not, often in two extreme directions, though Rome typically treats them both as members in life and in death.

I thank you for the concern about Roman Catholics not follwing church teachings to the letter, but dismissing the hypocrisy your side shows about the Church regarding native populations as "imagination" is not an honest basis for a debate.

[daniel1212]

I thank you for the concern about Roman Catholics not follwing church teachings to the letter, but dismissing the hypocrisy your side shows about the Church regarding native populations as "imagination" is not an honest basis for a debate.

By defining me as being of some class who portray the Aztecs and Mayans as "peaceful and benevolent souls" conquered by the Conquistadors, shows that you really had no argument with me, unless you leave off the hyperbole and favor of a more objective view.

Rather than than some unreferenced Protestants whose protests fit your description, perhaps it would be more fitting for you to target Catholics such as Dominican friar Bartolomé de Las Casas (in the process of beatification), the first resident Bishop of Chiapas, famous for his A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies.

While there can be debate as to what is a balanced view, your portrayal diverts the attention away from how "peaceful and benevolent" church teachings could be considered to be in regards to dealing with opposition, and the submission required to them during the times they are in force.

And which, as pointed out, Protestants also had to unlearn the use of the sword of men to deal with theological dissent, in contrast to the N.T. church as seen in Scripture.

[Hacksaw]

By defining me as being of some class who portray the Aztecs and Mayans as "peaceful and benevolent souls" conquered by the Conquistadors, shows that you really had no argument with me, unless you leave off the hyperbole and favor of a more objective view.

Not defining "you" as an individual sole holder of the views I am criticizing, which is why I said the more general "you people" - who attempt to pivot any argument to another focus. The Catholic Church is roundly crticized for whiping out native American cultures, but then is criticized again from the Protestants when they don't enforce good Catholic doctrine on them today. It's a no win situation. I'd rather have someone accept Jesus with a somewhat warped view than not have heard of Him at all. I think Jesus is smart enough to sort out the difference and intentions.

Lastly (and off topic) I get increasingly disgusted when people argue about who has the better Jesus when our society is becoming more degenerate every day.

[daniel1212]

The Catholic Church is roundly crticized for whiping out native American cultures, but then is criticized again from the Protestants when they don't enforce good Catholic doctrine on them today.

I am sorry but i think this also is exaggeration, as i do not see the Prots. as asking for such enforcement in the second case as she is criticized for doing in the first case.

What was being criticized in the post that you responded to was the lack of denouncing of these Catholics, but which criticism some here did express and which exists on a local local.

However, the criticism you protest against is valid, as in the first case the practices and doctrine behind it was wrong, insomuch as it is true, and in the second case there little to no effective discipline of those whom disobey valid teaching, and which the traditional RCs here claim have excommunicated themselves, and instead they are typically treated quite the opposite.

Moreover the context of such criticism is that of responses to a constant promotion or advertizing of the Catholic church as the one true church and supreme judge, to whom all are to submit, and thus such challenges to that should be expected.

I'd rather have someone accept Jesus with a somewhat warped view than not have heard of Him at all.

I concur, as long as they truly accept the Lord Jesus of Scripture, despite not knowing a lot, as this does not require much of the head but a broken heart and contrite spirit and simple faith in the risen Lord Jesus to save them by His blood. Which institutionalized religion works against, Catholic as well as Protestant to some degree.

Lastly (and off topic) I get increasingly disgusted when people argue about who has the better Jesus when our society is becoming more degenerate every day.

Then you had best censor your fellow RC apologists the most, as it is they who engage in the most sectarian promotion of a particular church, and effective preach a different Jesus, with some making arguments that restrict salvation to Catholics and only Protestants who convert to Catholicism.

And who attack conservative evangelicals more than liberal Prots or their own liberal brethren, as the former are a threat to their church which they must defend, despite overall testifying to a stronger faith in Jesus.

[Hacksaw]

I am sorry but i think this also is exaggeration, as i do not see the Prots. as asking for such enforcement in the second case as she is criticized for doing in the first case.

You are still (intentionally IMO) missing the point. If you don't see it, perhaps change the lens.

[daniel1212]

You are still missing the point. If you don’t see it, perhaps change the lens.

[Lera]

(The reality that “ admirable, if eccentric, individuals were burned, not only without public protest but with general approval,” also evidences how the public could react here to the progressive punishment by liberal “Inquisitors” of souls of Christian character whom it deems incorrect.)

Religio illicita

That is what they consider us and always have
It's no difference today either
The people who run the country have already decided that we are the most dangerous people in the country because we actually believe what the Bible says .
It won't belong till they start trying to lock us up as crazy people and the Catholic public here will react just as it has every where else . They won't say a thing about it .

[daniel1212]

The people who run the country have already decided that we are the most dangerous people in the country because we actually believe what the Bible says . It won't belong till they start trying to lock us up as crazy people and the Catholic public here will react just as it has every where else . They won't say a thing about it .

The majority no, as they are liberal, but neither will the majority of liberal Prots, and as in the case with Pastor Richard Wurmbrand (http://torturedforchrist.com/) , there will some Catholics in detention with conservative evangelicals, like as there want to place both today under mandated "sensitivity training."

[Lera]

The majority no, as they are liberal, but neither will the majority of liberal Prots, and as in the case with Pastor Richard Wurmbrand (http://torturedforchrist.com/) , there will some Catholics in detention with conservative evangelicals, like as there want to place both today under mandated "sensitivity training."



No doubt . That is exactly what happened in Nazi Germany . He is doing exactly what Hitler did and too much of the country is under a seriously deceptive dark spirit.
Hoards will go right along with them , including the priest and many of the hireling pastors.Until they come for them too .


You need to hear this . Download it and start listening at the 35 minute mark

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/nteb/2013/02/04/obama-wants-military-leaders-who-will-fire-on-americans

[Elsie]

“It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a resort to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to physics and chemistry.” ― H.L. Mencken