Comments on: Missionaries, Jesus and N.K. defectors

By: Katz

Katz — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 15:13:27 +0000

North Koreans should ignore those nasty Chinese communists fanatics and rely exclusively on the rescue efforts of South Korean Buddhists. What? There aren’t any South Korean Buddhists doing this kind of thing? North Koreans should just stay put - starvation is preferable to being rescued by disgusting Chinese. Far better for North Koreans to bathe themselves in the warm sunshine of the New York Times’s approval - for choosing death rather than be rescued by Chinese.

By: Zhang Fei

Zhang Fei — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:39:51 +0000

North Koreans should ignore those nasty South Korean Christian fanatics and rely exclusively on the rescue efforts of South Korean Buddhists. What? There aren’t any South Korean Buddhists doing this kind of thing? North Koreans should just stay put - starvation is preferable to being rescued by Christian nutjobs. Far better for North Koreans to bathe themselves in the warm sunshine of the New York Times’s approval - for choosing death rather than be rescued by Christians.

By: Katz

Katz — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 11:39:29 +0000

To nokcha,

How they are “rightly” criticized? Are you pro-China?

By: Mi-Hwa

Mi-Hwa — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 08:37:25 +0000

Christians are doing the most to help NK refugees, and the refugees will remember that.

By: snow

snow — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:52:34 +0000

And what is Onishi doing to help North Korean refugees? His criticisms remind me of when Christopher Hitchens savaged Mother Theresa. Give me a break.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:51:25 +0000

“The Chinese, moreover, are way cool with them being there as long as they don’t cause any trouble.” No, China is not a cool place for N.K. refugees–the women in particular are sold as brides or into prostitution.

China is obligated under a treaty to repatriate the N. Koreans, and doesn’t want them in the first place because they compete with Chinese for work.

If “their work is heavily front-loaded with politics,” then so is the S. Korean gov’t refusal to aid N.K. refugees in China–the difference is that these missionaries are trying to save people’s lives, which is far more than we can credit the S.K. gov’t for.

The prostelytizing aspect is troubling to me, but these people are active in rescuing people in limbo, who have no status in China and are oppressed in N.K. To say “N. koreans are best off laying low and making a good living in China” shows a real lack of understanding.

By: snow

snow — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:49:43 +0000

These missionaries will refuse to help those who won’t convert to Christianity? Maybe a few missionaries are like that, but I highly doubt that most are like that. These missionaries are far from perfect, but at least they are trying to help!

By: snow

snow — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:39:39 +0000

At least these Christian missionaries are trying to help North koreans and often take great personal risks in doing so. Why is there such a hatred and mistrust of Christians? Certainly fundies have their own agendas, but most ‘aid groups’ throughout the world have their own (often anti-capitalistic) agendas (and are often very destructive themselves).

If the Christians are causing more damage than they’re helping, certainly criticism is warranted, but otherwise, I think alot of it is out-and-out anti-Christian bias. Certainly anti-fundamentalist bias (I’m not a fundie, but I know people who are, and I get tired of seeing their views constantly maligned).

By: nokcha

nokcha — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:10:22 +0000

Zhang Fei has an excellent point about how and why
fundo-christians in the U.S. are (to the extent they are) tolerable– by way of lots of the salt of skepticism.
I cannot help but view the actions of christians in China and South Korea critically. Aside from the fact that their help to N. Koreans is soaked in the context of conversion (and so much anti-regime rhetoric) that it seems their work is heavily front-loaded with politics, not humanitarianism.
It seesm those N. koreans are best off laying low and making a good living in China, where the economy is light-years ahead of the North.
The Chinese, moreover, are way cool with them being there as long as they don’t cause any trouble. And the reports of abuse of immigrants i am sure are somewhat true, but immigrants get abused in South korea, too. If one doesn’t have legal status one is bound to get abused. That does not make it right, but it is just the way it is.
If people want to give them stuff, they can, but they should not condition their help with political or religious conversion, which is exactly what these missionaries do.
Thus, they are rightly criticized for it.

By: JYCE

JYCE — Thu, 22 Dec 2005 00:09:04 +0000

I’m going to disagree on the basis of abundant personal experience about the penchant of most Korean Protestants for fundamentalism and obscurantism, but I’ll concede that this doesn’t itself prove anything. However, I think one can look at things like the fact that Korea sends the second largest number of missionaries after the United States, and then look at which Christian denominations send out the lions share of missionaries, and then make a fairly good guess as to how much Korean Christianity endorses ideas of religious pluralism and tolerance. One can also point to the fact that every quack variety of American pentecostalism is warmly welcomed and represented here, but liberal varieties of Christianity, like Unitarianism, equally American and with a quite respectable and important role in American history, are totally unknown.

Anwyway, as Onishi mentioned, how quack/fundo crazy is the notion that “Only when we open up China, with South and North Korea as one, will we be able to go back to Jerusalem?” I think it speaks for itself.