Missionaries far from selfish
I would like to respond to Dan Bloom's criticism of foreign missionaries (Letters, May 6, page 8). Interestingly, Bloom, after acknowledging the good deeds of missionaries, stated that, "there is another point that needs to be politely addressed." He then proceeds to insult Christian missionaries by asserting that the faith they are trying to share is "superstitious" and "unfounded." If this is Bloom's polite argument, then I pity the person who gets on his bad side.
His main point seems to be that missionaries are not here to serve, but rather to convert people. In Bloom's words they are here "to destroy native beliefs." I'd like to know how Bloom presumes to know the hearts and motives of people who practice a faith that he so clearly detests. Christian service involves much more than evangelism. Most Christians believe that they should "be a light" to those who may never embrace their faith. They are commanded to love their enemies and pray for those who persecute them. Jesus even teaches that refusing to serve a cup of cold water to "the least one of these" is the same as refusing to serve him.
Of course, Christian missionaries are also convinced of the truth of their faith. And they will share that faith. To today's relativists, this notion of "one religion is the correct religion" is the height of arrogance. Relativists prefer to argue -- as Bloom has in past opinions -- that all religions are equally valid and that no one religion has a claim to truth. This certainly feels more fair, and does much to promote civility and tolerance. But does the universe really adjust to our different beliefs? When moral decisions between religions conflict, are both religions actually right? Did a new god "appear" when the Heaven's Gate cult was formed, and then disappear at its demise? I would think not, just as the earth would not change shape if the Flat Earth Society starting writing our science textbooks.
Humans can disagree about many things -- whether God even exists, whether he incarnates, etc -- but they cannot logically say that two religions describing mutually exclusive realities are both true. If relativism existed as the only guide for humanity, then there would be no motivation outside of mere impulse to change one's beliefs. Modern science would be filled with alchemists and phrenologists. There is one truth, even if it's an uncomfortable one and even if it hurts someone's
feelings.
It seems that the new Bloom would at least agree with that final point. There is a truth out there, but Christianity is not it. Bloom argues that Christianity is a superstition, the religion of a "dead Middle Eastern prophet." Perhaps Bloom believes that all religions are false and that humankind invented the concept of God. But is such an "all-knowing" view of the universe any less arrogant then a few missionaries claiming that their faith is correct?
Bloom is entitled to his anti-Christian views. He's certainly not alone. Though I disagree with his conclusions, his clear stance suggests a larger discussion that would be anchored (hopefully) in the pursuit of truth. My hope is that Bloom has truly done his homework before confidently drawing conclusions on matters of eternity.
Vance Fry
Taipei
I recently came across Dan Bloom's in your newspaper regarding missionaries.
While living in Taiwan on business, I came in contact with several missionaries who have either spent most of their adult lives there and will probably go to their grave in Taiwan or are on at least a three- to five-year mission. Regardless of their time commitment, I found these dedicated servants of God and of the people of Taiwan to be of the utmost givers of life.
Bloom's harsh accusation that missionaries are "selfish" couldn't be further from the truth. These giving people are there to help people in need first of whatever the circumstance may be. Whether it be medical, educational or even economic need, the missionaries are there for the people. If they were selfish, would they give up Western living conditions and conveniences? Would they uproot their families and forgo other family members and friends alike to take on a journey of "selfishness?" Hardly!
I have seen and met them up close and personal, and like any of the Sept. 11 heroes and heroines of the moment, they too deserve a better title than what Bloom has tried to paint for them.
It is true and no one denies that they would love to see those who they are helping come to know Jesus Christ like they do. But no one missionary holds a gun, a knife or a Chinese bottle rocket to anybody's head and says, "believe or I'll light the match." It is always a freewill choice after the Gospel is presented. And do the missionaries stop helping those in need even if they don't see Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior? No! They keep on being the heroes and heroines for the very people Bloom is sorely attempting to protect, and they do it year after year after year.
Tobie Hatfield
Beaverton, Oregon
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS