Hypothetical question about Christian persecution

MercyandFaith · Oct 19, 2013

This is a hypothetical question. Most Christians here on Christian Forums will probably never encounter this situation in real life. But I think it's worth discussion anyway.

I think most Christians would agree that if necessary, one should suffer and, if need be, endure martyrdom for the sake of Christ if the situation calls for it. In other words, if someone points a gun at you and says, "Renounce Christ, or die!" then most Christians would agree that it would be better to suffer martyrdom than to renounce one's faith. That's actually the straightforward situation here.

But what if someone threatens another person instead as a way of getting you to renounce your faith in Christ? What if he points a gun at some other person and says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, I will kill this person?" Then what would be the right thing to do?

In other words, is it ever right for someone else to suffer for your faith?

This could even be taken to an extreme. What if someone says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, then I will kill 100 hostages? 500 hostages? 1,000 hostages?" Is it our duty to never renounce our faith no matter what?

The situation gets even more complicated if the person being threatened isn't a believer. If you refuse to renounce your faith in Christ, that person might be killed and go to Hell.

Again, this scenario seems extremely unlikely to happen to most Christians. It's for the most part a hypothetical question. But I am sure some persecuted Christians have been forced to confront a dilemma of this sort in real life. What is your view on such an issue?

TannarDarr · Oct 19, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
This is a hypothetical question. Most Christians here on Christian Forums will probably never encounter this situation in real life. But I think it's worth discussion anyway.

I think most Christians would agree that if necessary, one should suffer and, if need be, endure martyrdom for the sake of Christ if the situation calls for it. In other words, if someone points a gun at you and says, "Renounce Christ, or die!" then most Christians would agree that it would be better to suffer martyrdom than to renounce one's faith. That's actually the straightforward situation here.

But what if someone threatens another person instead as a way of getting you to renounce your faith in Christ? What if he points a gun at some other person and says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, I will kill this person?" Then what would be the right thing to do?

In other words, is it ever right for someone else to suffer for your faith?

This could even be taken to an extreme. What if someone says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, then I will kill 100 hostages? 500 hostages? 1,000 hostages?" Is it our duty to never renounce our faith no matter what?

The situation gets even more complicated if the person being threatened isn't a believer. If you refuse to renounce your faith in Christ, that person might be killed and go to Hell.

Again, this scenario seems extremely unlikely to happen to most Christians. It's for the most part a hypothetical question. But I am sure some persecuted Christians have been forced to confront a dilemma of this sort in real life. What is your view on such an issue?

I try to talk the person down. I don't consider making that decision, I'll address the individual and explain the utter stupidity of their actions.

How's that for a non answer?

I'm not evading though, literally that is how I'd address it. If it's at me, it's my only chance at survival. If it's someone else, it's their only chance of survival. Find a working synapse between their ears and feed that spark to make a fire.

MercyandFaith · Oct 19, 2013

TannarDarr said:
I try to talk the person down. I don't consider making that decision, I'll address the individual and explain the utter stupidity of their actions.

If trying to talk down someone who seeks to persecute Christians were the solution, then you'd think that all of the Christians who had been martyred in history would not have been martyred.

I'm not saying this be snarky, not in the least, but I do think that some people who are bent on bloodshed will carry out that bloodshed. I don't think that nicely asking Hitler not to carry out the Holocaust would have prevented the Holocaust, for instance.

TannarDarr · Oct 19, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
If trying to talk down someone who seeks to persecute Christians were the solution, then you'd think that all of the Christians who had been martyred in history would not have been martyred.

I'm not saying this be snarky, not in the least, but I do think that some people who are bent on bloodshed will carry out that bloodshed. I don't think that nicely asking Hitler not to carry out the Holocaust would have prevented the Holocaust, for instance.

I said it's the solution for what you CAN do, not that it would save every person.

What I get more worked up on this topic about, is the USAmericans acting like they are persecuted because of abortion laws, or gay marriages, or whatever else they wanna whine about. No ten commandments in the court house, blah blah blah blah blah. Folks here in the States have some odd thoughts some times on this topic.

Knee V · Oct 19, 2013

If someone is bent on doing evil, nothing I do is going to stop them. If they were to threaten to kill people unless I renounce Christ, and I were to renounce Christ, they'll either just kill them anyway or threaten the same thing with someone else. If those people were to die, it would have nothing to do with me. The guilt for a crime is always on the one committing the crime, not on his scapegoats.

Adding evil to evil is evil. Renouncing Christ to save lives will not save anyone's life, and I may lose my own soul in the process.

HisSparkPlug · Oct 19, 2013

One would have to trust God with the lives of those being threatened.

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. - Luke 14:26

This scripture isn't to be taken literally - we are not to hate anyone, it is figment of speech in that our love for God in comparison to our love of others should be so vastly strong.

seeingeyes · Oct 19, 2013

I think it's qualitatively better to 'claim Christ' with actions than with words. So in the scenario you mention, it would be better to give up one's life for another than to cling to 'righteous' words.

The former is righteous, the latter is a mere shadow of righteousness.

Lion King · Oct 19, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
This is a hypothetical question. Most Christians here on Christian Forums will probably never encounter this situation in real life. But I think it's worth discussion anyway.

I think most Christians would agree that if necessary, one should suffer and, if need be, endure martyrdom for the sake of Christ if the situation calls for it. In other words, if someone points a gun at you and says, "Renounce Christ, or die!" then most Christians would agree that it would be better to suffer martyrdom than to renounce one's faith. That's actually the straightforward situation here.

But what if someone threatens another person instead as a way of getting you to renounce your faith in Christ? What if he points a gun at some other person and says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, I will kill this person?" Then what would be the right thing to do?

In other words, is it ever right for someone else to suffer for your faith?

This could even be taken to an extreme. What if someone says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, then I will kill 100 hostages? 500 hostages? 1,000 hostages?" Is it our duty to never renounce our faith no matter what?

The situation gets even more complicated if the person being threatened isn't a believer. If you refuse to renounce your faith in Christ, that person might be killed and go to Hell.

Again, this scenario seems extremely unlikely to happen to most Christians. It's for the most part a hypothetical question. But I am sure some persecuted Christians have been forced to confront a dilemma of this sort in real life. What is your view on such an issue?

To be honest, I would lie to save a life...always.

football5680 · Oct 19, 2013

I wouldn't deny Jesus in any situation because worldly life means very little to me because in comparison to the afterlife it will be nothing. It is much harder to put other people in danger but this is something I could never do. If I put myself in the position of the victim and somebody else was being asked then I would not want them to renounce their faith even if it meant I would die.

TannarDarr · Oct 19, 2013

football5680 said:
I wouldn't deny Jesus in any situation because worldly life means very little to me because in comparison to the afterlife it will be nothing. It is much harder to put other people in danger but this is something I could never do. If I put myself in the position of the victim and somebody else was being asked then I would not want them to renounce their faith even if it meant I would die.

Why do you think God gave us a life to live, and commanded us to be His instruments of righteousness to the OTHER people on earth with life to lives....> IF He only wanted us to die and be resurrected?

hmmm

Lion King · Oct 19, 2013

football5680 said:
I wouldn't deny Jesus in any situation because worldly life means very little to me because in comparison to the afterlife it will be nothing. It is much harder to put other people in danger but this is something I could never do. If I put myself in the position of the victim and somebody else was being asked then I would not want them to renounce their faith even if it meant I would die.

Will you really lay your life for Jesus Christ?

It's really simple to say you'll die for Christ now, but when a blood-thirsty mob comes calling, threatening to blind you and cut off your body parts bit by bit unless you say you renounce Christ, will you still sing the same tune?

HisSparkPlug · Oct 20, 2013

Lion King said:
Will you really lay your life for Jesus Christ?

It's really simple to say you'll die for Christ now, but when a blood-thirsty mob comes calling, threatening to blind you and cut off your body parts bit by bit unless you say you renounce Christ, will you still sing the same tune?

I think you need to read this: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/FOXS_BOOK_OF_MARTYRS.pdf

Fireinfolding · Oct 20, 2013

Lion King said:
Will you really lay your life for Jesus Christ?

It's really simple to say you'll die for Christ now, but when a blood-thirsty mob comes calling, threatening to blind you and cut off your body parts bit by bit unless you say you renounce Christ, will you still sing the same tune?

Mat 26:35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.

You will only know when the time comes.

Like Jesus speaks of those which believe for a while, then come temptation or persecution and its there they either fall away or or offend. Before that its unknown, though such confidences are expressed beforehand.

Gxg (G²) · Oct 20, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
What if someone says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, then I will kill 100 hostages? 500 hostages? 1,000 hostages?" Is it our duty to never renounce our faith no matter what?

The situation gets even more complicated if the person being threatened isn't a believer. If you refuse to renounce your faith in Christ, that person might be killed and go to Hell.

Some of this is similar to others who have to deal with situations around the world where they seem to be presented with the choice of sinning or letting someone suffer (i.e. a lady in Nazi Germany choosing to allow herself to be raped/slept with in order to ensure her children or others are not murdered ruthlessly). And to me, it seems to remind me of a lot of what has actually occurred when believers have not seen things as a simple matter of giving in easily to persecution in the name of Christ for the sake of their faith and yet ALLOWING others to suffer for it.

Surely for slaves helping runaways out during the Underground Railroad rather than having all collectively suffer together under oppression.....or others in China lying directly to officials asking where other believers are to protect them....we have to wrestle with those realities. Some of this was discussed more in-depth elsewhere, if interested, as seen here:

Gxg (G²);59143107 said:
For another example, smuggling goods into nations (i.e. food, clothing, material, etc)--an act of piracy---be something that needed to be condemned if one was doing it in line with what the Lord noted in serving His people rather than what men desired? The Underground Railroad is a famous example of what comes to mind too....very close to home for me personally (As a person of Color) when it comes to the ways slaves were smuggled out from the lands of their slave masters/delivered to freedom secretly--with raids somethings occurring. The freeing of slaves was viewed as stealing slave owners' personal property....and it was made worse whenever an owner's property was damaged in order to protect those abused in slavery, or slaves stole food from local food reserves to survive the trip.

As said best at Slave Resistance, Freedom's Story, TeacherServe®, National ...:

One common form of slave resistance was theft. Slaves pilfered fruits, vegetables, livestock, tobacco, liquor, and money from their masters. The theft of foodstuffs was especially common and was justified on several grounds. First, slave rations were often woefully inadequate in providing the nutrition and calories necessary to support the daily exertions of plantation labor. Hungry slaves reasoned that the masters abundance should be shared with those who produced it. Second, slaves recognized the inherent contradiction of the masters theft accusations. How could slaves, who were themselves the masters property, steal anything that the master owned? After all, the masters ownership claims over the slave meant that he owned everything that the slave owned. When a slave staked claim to a masters chicken, he merely transferred it to his stomach, or as Frederick Douglass put it, the slave was simply taking [the masters] meat out of one tub and putting it in another

For more:

Slavery, Resistance, and Flight

Underground Railroad: A Path to Freedom

The Underground Railroad . Abraham and Mary Lincoln: A House ...

Where these things may occur today when it comes to human trafficking today or freeing others trapped in certain lifestyles and denied justice, the subject becomes a very relevant issue (IMHO)...

Gxg (G²);59110124 said:

Rahab lied to the kings messengers. Yet God blessed Rahab, as is evident from the fact that: (a) she and her family were the only ones spared when the Israelites invaded Jericho; and (b) she is commended in two separate New Testament passages (Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25). And with Rahab's lie, she did sonot once, but twice. When the kings emissaries came to interrogate her, she lied when she feigned ignorance about the spies being Israelites. She then lied a second time when she told the intermediaries that the spies had left the city through the main gate under cover of darkness. Let us also freely admit that Rahab and her household were the only ones saved during the assault upon Jericho (Joshua 6:17).

With Rabab--as well as the Hebrew Midwives in Exodus 1-2 who lied to protect the babies/their lives from being exterminated by Pharoah---they were praised for their faith, but not their lie. For their faith was expressed precisily by their works....and as J Dourma said best, "It is an abstraction to disconnect the effect of their acts from the path they took to achieve that effect."

To be clear, though, clearly all of these women performed a service to their neighbors by means of the lie of necessity---as this kind of lie is different from the lie told for personal survival, told sometimes at the cost of our neighbor;s life....as that was what occured in the examples of Abraham and Issac when they pretended in Egypt concerning the nature of their relationships to their wives.Genesis 12:7 and Genesis 20:16 /Genesis 26:4 .....for their half-truths/full blown lies intended to rescue then from their own personal distress, could've resulted in other men committing adultery with their wives. The same occured with King David and the issue of the showbread---for David lied to Ahilemech to protect himself from SAUL. Some excuse this lie because a war was going on and it is the duty of a soldier to decieve the enemy. Nowhere is Davids's lie condoned...and it led to the opposite effect in resulting in the death of 85 priests.......as Saul already suspected a conspiracy among Jonathan, David and the priests---and the same sword David lied to get was what DOeg witnessed and reported Ahimelech the high priest for when he gave him food/weapons. 1 Samuel 22:9-11/ 1 Samuel 22 / Psalm 52. Davids reasons for lying seemed to be that wanted to protect himself...and so he wouldnot tell Ahimelech why he has come or where he is going, so Ahimelech cant inform on him to Saul. Probably, David felt he didn't know Ahimelech well enough to really trust him. Another reason for his lie was that he wanted to protect Ahimelech and the priests by keeping them out of the conflict between himself and Saul. Why couldnt he come to Ahimelech the priest, and say Ahimelech, as strange as it might seem to you, Saul is trying to kill me. I dont understand the situation myself, but I know God does not want me to die at the hands of Saul. So I am running for my life, and trusting God will protect me and show me what to do. Please pray for me, because Im pretty depressed and scared! This might have been hard for David to say... but his lie became harder still.

Those situations are something to keep in mind when it comes to situations today that we face or that are praised. The scenario with Ann Frank is one that always comes up regarding the hiding of the Jews.

Gxg (G²);62316860 said:

To give further clarity as to where I'm seeking to come from, perhaps it'd be best to give more practical examples of how Crypto-Christianity is with the practical. Discussing this kind of subject always has strong implications for how we see certain groups. In example, if being aware of what's known as "Crypto-Christianity" , the issue of using deceit becomes more of a real issue. Crypto Christianity refers to the secret practice of the Christian religion, usually while attempting to camouflage it as another faith or observing the rituals of another religion publicly.

In places and time periods where Christians were persecuted or Christianity was outlawed, instances of crypto-Christianity have surfaced before. In example, when it comes to Churches in China meeting under false pretenses as if they're with the state religion and using "dummy corporations" in order to have church meetings for true believers, this is something that many in the West would probably condemn.

But due to Circumstances regarding persecution, it's a necessity--just as it was throughout various points in history, including the time when Hitler controlled much of the Church and believers claimed to belong to the organization and yet in secret they smuggled out Jews from the country/sabatouge from within.

When considering what occurs around the world in churches experiencing EXTREME persecution from the goverment such as the House Church Movement in China, The praxis of the movment may be described as exhibiting a strong expectation that God will intervene in miraculous ways in the daily lives of believers. House church Christians exhibit a firm belief in Gods ability and willingness to work miracles in their midst. Their testimonies often refer to God healing the sick, raising the dead, granting special wisdom or direction, communicating through dreams, visions, or prophetic messages, providing boldness for witness, or granting miraculous strength and protection (such as when Peter was delivered from Prision MIRACULOUSLY or other times when it comes to protecting others in the faith and praying for the Lord to give miraculous ways of escape).

However, here in the WEST, many would say that when faced with danger, hoping for the miraculous would be silly---and that pulling a RAHAB (per Joshua 2 ...or the Hebrew Midwives in Exodus 1 who lied to protect the Hebrew boys) in the form of lying in order to protect those who're in danger is the most logical course of action to take.

That's what many such as ANNE Frank did and various others----and I've heard many make some pretty intriguing arguments saying that to choose NOT TO LIE when facing danger is unbiblical, with examples like Rahab or David lying and various others being brought up.

And many of Those who're Charismatic seem to be more open to trusting in the Power of the Lord than lying in order to protect. If you've ever read the book entitled "God Smuggler", this is something that's very evident in Brother Andrew's story----as there was one point where he had to say his occupation in order to get into the Soviet Union.....but he didn't wish to lie by saying he was something other than one who was an evangelist.

For many, they would've simply told the truth....and others, however, would've gladly LIED in order to avoid being suspect, though others would say those lying do not truly trust in the POWER OF GOD and have TRUE FAITH. There are times when it seems clear that deceptive means are needed in order to get a message through at any costs. And it's a wisdom standpoint-----just as others have had, whether those smuggling Bibles into the country or others such as Brother Andrew doing so in the USSR.

For others, the example that's remembered is that of a woman by the name ofCorrie Ten Boom - someone who many would liken to a Modern Day Esther

Powerful woman of God, if one has not already heard of her. There was one time when the Nazis came to her door and demanded to know where the Jews were hiding. One would've easily expected her to lie as many of the other Christians during her time did when it came to the welfare of the Jews.

However, Corrie surprisingly told the truth----and the Nazi's ended up not believing her and turning away. When Corrie's Sister came back furious that she had risked the safety of the Jews in being truthful, Corrie simply responded "God will honor my truthfulness before Him"......

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

ForChristJesus · Oct 20, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
This is a hypothetical question. Most Christians here on Christian Forums will probably never encounter this situation in real life. But I think it's worth discussion anyway.

I think most Christians would agree that if necessary, one should suffer and, if need be, endure martyrdom for the sake of Christ if the situation calls for it. In other words, if someone points a gun at you and says, "Renounce Christ, or die!" then most Christians would agree that it would be better to suffer martyrdom than to renounce one's faith. That's actually the straightforward situation here.

But what if someone threatens another person instead as a way of getting you to renounce your faith in Christ? What if he points a gun at some other person and says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, I will kill this person?" Then what would be the right thing to do?

In other words, is it ever right for someone else to suffer for your faith?

This could even be taken to an extreme. What if someone says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, then I will kill 100 hostages? 500 hostages? 1,000 hostages?" Is it our duty to never renounce our faith no matter what?

The situation gets even more complicated if the person being threatened isn't a believer. If you refuse to renounce your faith in Christ, that person might be killed and go to Hell.

Again, this scenario seems extremely unlikely to happen to most Christians. It's for the most part a hypothetical question. But I am sure some persecuted Christians have been forced to confront a dilemma of this sort in real life. What is your view on such an issue?

As it is written there is no greater love than to give your life for a friend of Christ.

Fireinfolding · Oct 20, 2013

I would still follow Rahabs example since its a scriptural.

Lion King · Oct 20, 2013

Fireinfolding said:
Mat 26:35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.

You will only know when the time comes.

Like Jesus speaks of those which believe for a while, then come temptation or persecution and its there they either fall away or or offend. Before that its unknown, though such confidences are expressed beforehand.

That's the reason I don't make bold declarations as these, because I dunno what I'll truly do when or if the time comes. See, it was easy for Peter to say he'll follow Christ anywhere, but when that mob came looking for Christ's disciples to kill, he was quick to distance himself from the LORD without even a moment's of hesitation. Sometimes, the fear of death makes us do things we thought we would never do...that is, if our faith is weak.

Lion King · Oct 20, 2013

HisSparkPlug said:
I think you need to read this: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/FOXS_BOOK_OF_MARTYRS.pdf

All men of great faith, but unfortunately, I do not have faith strong as them. When (or if) the time of persecution comes, will I stand and die for Christ or will I run and cower like a coward that I am?

I truly dunno.

Cjwinnit · Oct 20, 2013

MercyandFaith said:
But what if someone threatens another person instead as a way of getting you to renounce your faith in Christ? What if he points a gun at some other person and says, "If you don't renounce your faith in Christ, I will kill this person?" Then what would be the right thing to do?

Anyone trying to control someone by threatening violence against an innocent third party should be stopped immediately.
From Wikipedia:

"In 2004, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1566 condemned terrorist acts as:

"criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, which constitute offences within the scope of and as defined in the international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism, are under no circumstances justifiable by considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other similar nature,"

TannarDarr · Oct 20, 2013

HisSparkPlug said:
I think you need to read this: http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/FOXS_BOOK_OF_MARTYRS.pdf

I'm confident, someone else's stories does NOT indicate how someone else will behave.

Until your life is threatened, really threatened, no one has a clue how they'd act.

Hypothetical question about Christian persecution

Newbie

Regular Member

Newbie

Regular Member

It's phonetic.

Offspring of a Genius

Newbie

Veni, vidi, vici

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Veni, vidi, vici

Offspring of a Genius

Well-Known Member

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Veni, vidi, vici

Veni, vidi, vici

Advocatus Diaboli (Retired)

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency