Render unto Caesar

Biblical Steps to Good Citizenship

Jun 8, 2007 Brian Tubbs

With the summer upon us (and the Fourth of July around the corner), this article explains how the Bible suggests Christians today can practice good citizenship.

Jesus told Jerusalem's leaders that, in spite of their discomfort with Roman policies, they must still "render unto Caesar" what is Caesar's (Matthew 22:21). This concession to civil law infuriated many of the Jews who were hoping for Jesus to lead a violent, messianic revolt against Roman rule.

The principle of rendering unto Caesar is indeed a Christian one. Christians are called to good citizenship. Paul makes this clear in his letter to the Christian church in Rome when he writes that God "ordains the higher powers" and that Christians must be "subject" to its authority (Romans 13:1-7).

How then can Christians take these principles of Scripture and apply them to today? Here are a few very practical and biblical steps you can take to be a good Christian citizen in the 21st century:

1. Be a GOOD citizen

Both Paul and Peter emphasize law-abiding citizenship in their epistles. They also encourage believers to honor and pray for those in authority.

Do you respect the institutions of your community and country? Does your life reflect that of a respectful, law-abiding, tax-paying, constructive citizen? Are you the kind of citizen that adds to society or takes away from it?

Does this mean you can't protest or object to government policy? Hardly. Daniel refused to honor King Darius' policy that people could only pray to him - and was thrown (briefly) in the lion's den for it. Don't forget the three Hebrew young men thrown into the fiery furnace for openly defying King Nebuchadnezzar. They too survived.

In the New Testament, the tradition continued. All twelve of the apostles were imprisoned, persecuted, and ultimately executed for practicing and proclaiming their faith against the policies and wishes of the governing authorities. The exception was John. But, according to Eusebius, they tried killing John. When they failed, they exiled him to Patmos.

Bottom line...civil protest and even civil disobedience is a biblical tradition. BUT...in each case, respect and honor was nevertheless shown to the governing authorities. AND...the protest and disobedience was based on a HIGHER calling, namely the call to serve God.

Oh, and they made sure they were in God's will when engaging in civil disobedience. They didn't just do it to defy the government or advance their own agendas.

2. Know who your elected officials are – at each level of government.

The Bible teaches stewardship. Accordingly, you should know your government. Call your local Registrar and verify the political districts of your residence along with the elected official that serves each of those districts.

For example, each state has two U.S. senators and a governor. Get their names, office numbers, and addresses. Find out what U.S. House of Representatives or congressional district do you live in? Get the district number and then the name and contact information for your U.S. Representative. Repeat this process for the state legislative districts you live in - you should have a state-level senator and a state-level representative or delegate.

Then, go to your city or county level and finally, if you live in one, your town. Once you know your elected officials, the levels in which they serve (national, state, or local) and their contact information, you're ready to start contacting them - and influencing them.

3. Stay informed on the issues

Get to know the issues that your elected officials at their respective levels of government are facing. That means you must follow the news. In this Information Age, there is no excuse for being ignorant. For federal-level issues, you can listen to the radio during your commute to and from work, watch TV at night, read one of the major dailies each morning or at lunch, or read through any number of news websites.

Don't be an ignorant voter that's easily manipulated by bumper stickers and sound bytes. Be informed.

4. Affirm Tradition and Bedrock Values

There is a repeated tradition of remembering the "days of old" and guarding the "landmarks" in the Old Testament. And in the New Testament, Paul and Peter each emphasize that we should render honor where honor is due.

Therefore, KNOW YOUR COUNTRY'S HERITAGE. If you're a citizen of the United States, you should know why we have a country to begin with. Study American history, especially the founding era - where it all started.

In addition, read books on faith and philosophy - things that help explain the world we're in. As a Christian, read the Bible daily. Always get to the foundation of what you believe and why. That will fuel your passion and make your a citizen-leader of purpose and conviction.

5. Master the framework of your government.

As the old saying goes, the "devil is in the details." When Lyndon Johnson first came to Congress, he became an effective leader very quickly, because he, among other things, mastered the intricacies of congressional rules and procedures.

To be an effective citizen, you must know the lay of the land. For starters, this means understanding the nature of your government. That means, for Americans, reading and studying the Constitution of the United States, which lays out the three-branch system of government we have at every level of our society.

Then, study the laws of your state and locality. Go over the rules of your community group, homeowners association, and so forth. Learn parliamentary procedure.

Be knowledgeable. As James Madison said, "Knowledge will forever govern ignorance."

By following these steps, you will be the kind of citizen everyone respects and many will follow.

The copyright of the article Render unto Caesar in Protestantism is owned by Brian Tubbs. Permission to republish Render unto Caesar in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
32 Comments

Comments

Jun 8, 2007 6:06 AM
Pink :
.
A good article, Brian. Again, we need more like this one.
.
As we prepare to vote in our next upcoming national elections, we should keep your admonitions in mind. We ARE a self governing society--at least that is what our Declaration says about us. We are the governors of our government.
.
I noticed after the recent debate, among Republican candidates, in an interview withTom DeLay that he was asked about Romney's response to any loyalties he might have to the Mormon religion. DeLay defined what it means to be a person of faith. Such a person would HAVE to put their beliefs ahead of everything else. That made me think about people like Senator Lieberman from Conneticutt who has dual citizenship--aside from being a U.S. citizen, he is a citizen of Israel.
.
How do you feel about dual citizenship in those people who want your vote as they run for office to represent you? What if a person has dual citizenship? Where are their innermost loyalties? Is it something you want to take a chance on?
.
Do Christians have dual citizenship? Are Christian candidates not only citizens of the United States; but, also citizens of Heaven? Where do Christian candidates for office put their loyalties? What comes first in their minds, the Bible or the U.S. Constitution? I think we need answers on these questions.
.
In America, the leaders have a biblical injunction to be loyal to the people and their interests and desires--the people are the rulers.
.
Jun 8, 2007 8:06 PM
Brian Tubbs :
<i>Do Christians have dual citizenship?</i>

In a way....yes. Former Watergate conspirator turned Christian Chuck Colson wrote an EXCELLENT book on this subject. It's called <i>Kingdoms in Conflict</i>. It's written from a Christian POV, but you would LOVE it. You probably wouldn't agree with all of it, but knowing you....I'm confident you'd be enthralled by it. It's a little dated. Came out in the 1980s, but still a great read. I do recommend it, as it is ALL about these questions that you've raised.

<i> Are Christian candidates not only citizens of the United States; but, also citizens of Heaven? </i>

Same answer as above. Christians in a way DO have dual citizenship, and this includes Christian candidates.

<i>Where do Christian candidates for office put their loyalties? </i>

Those that I'm aware of would answer that they are loyal to both God and country

<i>What comes first in their minds, the Bible or the U.S. Constitution? </i>

Depends on the situation. In terms of bedrock values and daily living....the Bible. In terms of law and politics...the U.S. Constitution.

But, certainly, a person's faith WILL influence their worldview and thus will influence their values - which, in turn, will influence his or her politics. I don't think there's anything wrong with this. But, it is part of the answer you're looking for.
Jun 9, 2007 6:48 AM
Pink :
.
The crux of my post is in this short paragraph:
.
<i>How do you feel about dual citizenship in those people who want your vote as they run for office to represent you? What if a person has dual citizenship? Where are their innermost loyalties? Is it something you want to take a chance on?</i>
.
When I see men like Huckabee making comments that it's okay if "you" want to believe humans descended from a monkey that's your business; but, he believes the Bible. I'm not willing to take any chances on putting such a nut in charge of America's destiny.
.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where religionists will take us if we give them an inch than they have already taken. It is vital that some of us continue to sound the alarms.
.
..
Jun 9, 2007 9:03 AM
Pink :
.
These questions require open and honest dialog outside the demagoguery laid down by leaders motivated by religiosity.
.
When a discussion can be ended with the cold blast out of some ideology, we are in deep trouble.
.
.
Jun 9, 2007 9:12 PM
Brian Tubbs :
<i>When a discussion can be ended with the cold blast out of some ideology, we are in deep trouble</i>

You mean like calling a Creationist a "nut"? See your comment on Huckabee.
Jun 9, 2007 9:41 PM
Migisi :
.
We could use Huckabee and Creation as one example.
.
If Huckabee was elected President, do you think his Creation belief would negatively impact federal funding of evolution science, or have an effect on public education curriculum?
Jun 10, 2007 7:09 AM
Pink :
.
My point was clear.
.
In the first post regarding the idea of divided loyalties and a <i>dual citizenship</i>, I wrote,
.
"How do you feel about dual citizenship in those people who want your vote as they run for office to represent you? What if a person has dual citizenship? Where are their innermost loyalties? <b>Is it something you want to take a chance on?</b>
.
"Do Christians have dual citizenship? Are Christian candidates not only citizens of the United States; but, also citizens of Heaven? Where do Christian candidates for office put their loyalties? What comes first in their minds, the Bible or the U.S. Constitution? I think we need answers on these questions.
.
"In America, the leaders have a biblical injunction to be loyal to the people and their interests and desires--the people are the rulers."
.
____________________
.
I think that can be put together. I doubt that my comment about Huckabee was misunderstood. This is the year 2007. Anyone who denies the facts of evolution IS a nut based on the facts. I have a shirt tail relative for whom I have a great deal of respect; but, he swears up and down that no one has ever landed on the moon. He thinks science is a religion in competition with the Bible. I have an idea that that is the case with Huckabee. He sure comes off as a nut case to me.
.
Jun 10, 2007 11:37 AM
Brian Tubbs :
Asking those questions are valid. Calling him a "nut" for believing in Creation is another. Do you see the difference?

As to the questions themselves, if the evolutionists are so confident that their theory is superior and that Creationism is so obviously stupid and crazy, then why are they afraid of giving Creation some time in the classroom?

For my own part, I don't believe six-day Creationism should be taught in the public school science classroom. I would teach it, if at all, in philosophy class or religion class. And, yes, I do believe that public schools SHOULD have classes on religion and philosophy - classes that explain the basic tenets of the various world views and the major world religions.
Jun 10, 2007 11:40 AM
Brian Tubbs :
<i>Anyone who denies the facts of evolution IS a nut based on the facts.</i>

You are dancing close to anti-religious bigotry here, Pink. There are a lot of extremely intelligent people, including scientifically trained people, who believe in Creationism or at least Intelligent Design. Quite a few. For you to just sit back and call them nut jobs strikes me as bigoted.
Jun 10, 2007 12:58 PM
Brian Tubbs :
Getting back to your questions (we'll probably debate Creation v. Evolution more in the other thread)...

Consider this quote...

"God who gave us life, gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?"

How does a quote like this, from a former President of the United States, strike you? Is this ex-President guilty of dual citizenship? Is he guilty of mixing church and state? Is he one of those "nut jobs" you are warning us about?
Jun 10, 2007 1:27 PM
Pink :
.
There is nothing wrong with Intelligent Design as a belief; but, it doesn't qualify as a theory, does it?
.
Evolution is a theory and it can be shown to actually be something that is active in biological terms.
.
That's the difference.
.
The effort to reduce Evolution to a belief is what makes Huckabee a nut.
.
In my book.
.
You have a right to reduce scientific theory to belief if you like; but, it's a dangerous slope.
.
Jun 10, 2007 1:36 PM
Pink :
.
I don't know who deserves the credit for your quote.
.
But, I can comment on it.
.
It appears the quote cannot be well understood without seeing it in context.
.
The Founding Fathers believed that human beings possessed <i>Natural Rights</i> a priori to society and they called those rights <i>Inalienable</i>. I am sure you are well aware of that fact. Right?
.
<i>Natural Rights</i> or the <i>Inalienable Rights</i> are different from <i>Civil Rights</i>. We can agree on that, right?
.
<i>Civil Rights</i> are those rights that human beings must have in society as the organization of society presents us with situations that do not exist in our natural state where there is no government, right? The printing press is an example of something that never existed in the natural state of human existence. So, Freedom of the Press is a Civil Right.
.
And, does not our Declaration state that we form government in order to <i>SECURE</i> those <i>Natural Rights</i>?
.
.
.
Jun 10, 2007 2:16 PM
Brian Tubbs :
I agree with everything in your last post - the distinctions between natural and civil rights are right on!

The quote was from Thomas Jefferson.
Jun 10, 2007 2:17 PM
Brian Tubbs :
I'm going to take this one over to the other thread.
Jun 10, 2007 2:52 PM
Pink :
.
See!
.
We can be productive if we stay away from being upset about something the other person wrote.
.
Now, maybe we can attract other participants.
.
I admit to short comings, so you don't have to defend yourself.
.
I don't like to defend myself.
.
I like to express myself and that is how I get to know myself better. When we are suppressed from expressing ourselves, we cannot have a good and clear knowledge of who it is that we are becoming.
.
That, my friend, is one of the main benefits of free speech--self knowledge.
.
.
Jun 10, 2007 11:34 PM
Kim Jeremy Sheil :
<i>As to the questions themselves, if the evolutionists are so confident that their theory is superior and that Creationism is so obviously stupid and crazy, then why are they afraid of giving Creation some time in the classroom?</i>

Interesting question. I often wonder why people think a believer of Creation to be "crazy" and a believer of evolution to be an intellectual. They are both unproven and are both just theories (I still stand by my belief that both Creation and Evolution are not scientific. I also stand by my belief that one cannot call themself a Christian and doubt Creation).

I believe that if they just give Creationism a chance, they'll see it's not a crack pot theory after all. Much like you said, what are the critics so afraid of?

<i>For my own part, I don't believe six-day Creationism should be taught in the public school science classroom. I would teach it, if at all, in philosophy class or religion class.</i>

True. Creation is not scientific, and thus, it has no place in science class. Scientific evidence for the theory maybe, but, as you said, a religion/philosophy class would be best.

<i>And, yes, I do believe that public schools SHOULD have classes on religion and philosophy - classes that explain the basic tenets of the various world views and the major world religions. </i>

Many secular schools here have religious education classes (or RE) and it's all good, although the only "religion" taught here is Christianity. The children of parents who don't want to raise their kids Christian don't have to sit through this class. When I was in school they would just go play on the computers or do some other activity. I think they should teach other religions, faiths and beliefs in school. I think it'll be great for kids to learn about other culture's beliefs. They may even learn tolerance for other peoples faiths, something which people need to learn in this day and age.
Jun 11, 2007 5:03 AM
Pink :
.
<i>"[Creation and Evolution] are both unproven and are both just theories (I still stand by my belief that both Creation and Evolution are not scientific...."</i>
.
That is an untrue statement. Evolution has been proven. Viruses evolve according to the medicines used against them and that is just one of the proofs that evolution is active biologically.
.
Creationism is the activity that requires proof.
.
So, with respect, your entire comment loses its intended impact, Kim. You will have to do better than that.
.
<b>:~)</b>
Jun 11, 2007 5:24 AM
Brother_Jones :
<i>I think they should teach other religions, faiths and beliefs in school. I think it'll be great for kids to learn about other culture's beliefs. They may even learn tolerance for other peoples faiths, something which people need to learn in this day and age.</i>

There has always been a resident fear of teaching a false religion to another persons family whatever the setting. I think it is shared by everyone who takes faith seriously. We want to be able to eat our cake and enjoy the icing without all the trouble that war brings.

Of course there are the folks who believe the best religion is somehow a mixture of all of them tossed in like salad and spread thinly when it comes to rituals and dogma. They are the ones who contend that just the principle of 'doing good' is the only basic principle that should guide us. And eventually they would rid us of all gods, rituals, and thoughts of heaven. And the idea of being our brothers keeper would depend on whether our brother could tolerate a no rules environment and keep up a good spirit by a group testimony that, 'i'm okay with your personal behavior as long as you don't start with the Jesus stuff.'

i am just an oldtimer for the Lord.
Jun 11, 2007 6:59 AM
Pink :
.
<i>There has always been a resident fear of teaching a false religion to another persons family whatever the setting.</i> And so on in your post.
.
These are heady statements you make, Brother Jones.
.
They open large areas of discussion within which there is much to question.
.
As long as you are interacting with those people who are in complete agreement with you, it will be easy for you to make your points. But, the minute a person who differs enters onto the scene, your arguments fall apart.
.
THAT accounts for statements made about you in which it is said that are preaching to the choir.
.
Jun 11, 2007 11:14 AM
Paper Turtle :
<i><b>EvilChihuahua wrote: </b>
I think they should teach other religions, faiths and beliefs in school. I think it'll be great for kids to learn about other culture's beliefs. They may even learn tolerance for other peoples faiths, something which people need to learn in this day and age.
.
<b>Brother Jones responded:</b>
There has always been a resident fear of teaching a false religion to another persons family whatever the setting. I think it is shared by everyone who takes faith seriously. We want to be able to eat our cake and enjoy the icing without all the trouble that war brings.</i>
.
I fail to see how a comparative religion class could be thought of, even remotely, as teaching ralse religion. And, no, not all those who take faith seriously feel threatened by having their children exposed to the religious practices of others. Seems to me war is more often caused by one group trying to force another group to do things their way, in the name of their god.
.
<i>Of course there are the folks who believe the best religion is somehow a mixture of all of them tossed in like salad and spread thinly when it comes to rituals and dogma.</i>
.
Yes, some people DO believe that. BUT many people see that the world's religions, when looked at with an open mind (and heart) share MANY values in common. Seems to me we could do a lot more good in the world if we stopped focusing on how everyone is different.
.
<i>And eventually they would rid us of all gods, rituals, and thoughts of heaven. And the idea of being our brothers keeper would depend on whether our brother could tolerate a no rules environment and keep up a good spirit by a group testimony that, 'i'm okay with your personal behavior as long as you don't start with the Jesus stuff.'</i>
.
I think you are grossly overstating your case. I don't see the world as a "godless" place, and with or without organized religion humankind shares certain core values such as kindness, honesty, compassion, and decency. I believe in goodness. I believe goodness does conquer all evil. Where is *your* faith, Brother Jones?
.
"And the light shines on in the dark, and the darkness has never mastered it." (John 1:5)
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle
Jun 11, 2007 4:37 PM
Kim Jeremy Sheil :
<i>So, with respect, your entire comment loses its intended impact, Kim. You will have to do better than that.
.
:~) </i>

OK, fair enough. Check out the AiG website. They do a great job presenting the evidence that evolution is a religious theory and not a scientific one.:)
Jun 11, 2007 4:47 PM
Kim Jeremy Sheil :
My idea of a religion class would not be something like "this is what is true" like many critics of a religion class may believe, but rather the teacher saying "this is what Buddhists believe" or "this is what Hindus believe" and then teach on that. I don't think it would be fair, however, for a teacher to say "of coarse, they are wrong because this is true". The idea would be to teach what others believe, not teach that the students should believe in this or that.
Jun 11, 2007 4:48 PM
Brother_Jones :
<i>I fail to see how a comparative religion class could be thought of, even remotely, as teaching ralse religion.</i>

I might have phrased it wrongly, but I was trying to give Kim a sense of concern that a Christian parent might have with a Buddhist who is intructing Christian kids on the comparison of Jesus with Sidhartha Ghatama, (Buddha) in a comparative religions class. I don't believe that I would think my kids would be threatened to being exposed to Buddhist ideas about Buddha but whoever teaches comparative religion is going to be somewhat subject to his/her own faith bias when it comes to explaining the beliefs of those who they differ with.


<i>BUT many people see that the world's religions, when looked at with an open mind (and heart) share MANY values in common. Seems to me we could do a lot more good in the world if we stopped focusing on how everyone is different.</i>

A religion that has an absence any belief in God should at the very least be questioned....don't you think?

<i>I don't see the world as a "godless" place, and with or without organized religion humankind shares certain core values such as kindness, honesty, compassion, and decency.</i>

I guess we have come to the place we disagree about some things. You don't believe in evil spirits, which is very odd for someone who claims to follow Christ.

<i>I believe goodness does conquer all evil. Where is *your* faith, Brother Jones?</i>

That has always been my concern with you, that you believe your goodness comes from within your own heart, and not from the saving blood of Christ. At least that seems to be what you have been saying lately.

My faith is in Christ, Paper Turtle.

i am just an oldtimer for the Lord.
Jun 11, 2007 5:30 PM
Pink :
.
<i>"My faith is in Christ..."</i>
.
Maybe you should say, "My faith is in the Christ of the Bible."
.
Which, in a more real sense is to say that your faith is in the Bible. No wonder you defend it as the Revealed Word of God. If you lose that, you're down the tubes.
.
Jun 12, 2007 1:00 AM
Paper Turtle :
.
<i><b>Brother Jones wrote:</b>
I was trying to give Kim a sense of concern that a Christian parent might have with a Buddhist who is intructing Christian kids on the comparison of Jesus with Sidhartha Ghatama, (Buddha) in a comparative religions class. . . . whoever teaches comparative religion is going to be somewhat subject to his/her own faith bias when it comes to explaining the beliefs of those who they differ with.</i>
.
Not necessarily. The Dalai Lama and Thich Naht Hanh are two Buddists who have a very deep understanding of, and appreciation for, Christianity. Thomas Merton, a Catholic, had the same understanding and appreciation for Buddhism. My hunch is that a Buddhist instructor would be the least biased. (wink)
.
When I took Comparative Religion in college, the instructor was not the one who did the comparisons--the students did. I would think it would place an incredible burden on anyone seeking to explain the basic tenets of his/her own religion in comparison with all others.
.
If I were teaching comparative religion in high school, I would start by asking local pastors to speak, then find representatives for other religions without active congregations in my community (such as Jews, Greek Orthodox, Taoist).
.
<i>A religion that has an absence any belief in God should at the very least be questioned....don't you think?</i>
.
I believe God is called by many different names, appropriate to the culture of the religion. Who are we to say their Holy One is NOT God, particularly if the believers are wise amd loving, live peaceful lives, with stable families, and a system of governance which is just.
.
<i>you believe your goodness comes from within your own heart, and not from the saving blood of Christ. At least that seems to be what you have been saying lately.</i>
.
I believe goodness resides within the hearts of every person. I call this goodness Spirit, others may call it differently. If humankind did not possess innate goodness, we would not recognize goodness, nor seek to do what is good.
.
IMHO, one who believes in Christ also believes that Christ is stronger than any evil, and that Christ has the power to preserve the church--provided the church still follows his teachings. Therefore, I don't see the point in (forgive me)wringing my hands in alarm simply because I see people who don't share my beliefs. What is true perseveres. What is false dies away.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle
Jun 12, 2007 1:03 AM
Paper Turtle :
.
<i>The idea would be to teach what others believe, not teach that the students should believe in this or that. </i>
.
Yes, that would be my idea, too. :)
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle
Jun 12, 2007 1:13 AM
Migisi :
.
<i>Asking those questions are valid. Calling him a "nut" for believing in Creation is another. Do you see the difference?</i>
.
Um, if the answer is 'yes' to my question <i>"...do you think his Creation belief would negatively impact federal funding of evolution science, or have an effect on public education curriculum"</i>, then there'd be no difference. He ~would~ be a nut.
Jun 12, 2007 3:48 AM
:
<i>A religion that has an absence any belief in God should at the very least be questioned....don't you think?</i>

It could also be argued that any religion that makes any statement about God should at the very least be questioned.
Jun 12, 2007 4:34 AM
Brother_Jones :
<i>It could also be argued that any religion that makes any statement about God should at the very least be questioned.</i>

Where you been? I have been worried about you? lol.

I think every detail in the life of Christ and His followers is scrutinized daily by us all. And I guess there is a reason for the notion that most of us can't claim knowledge on a single Buddhist pioneer and we wouldn't know if Gautama had parents, wife or kids or if he lived to be a ripe old age and died of food posioning.

Some things seem to matter greatly and some things are just obviously matter free, I suppose.

i am just an oldtimer for the Lord.
Jun 12, 2007 4:42 AM
Pink :
.
Yupper....
.
Jun 12, 2007 5:02 AM
Kim Jeremy Sheil :
<i>Yes, that would be my idea, too. :)</i>

I'd also have to say that it would work out better as a philosophy class, rather than a religion class. Many people, such as myself, do not classify Christianity, in it's purest form, as a religion, while many, many Buddhists and Atheists don't classify Buddhism or Atheism, in their purest form, as religions. There are Christian, Buddhist and Atheist (well AA anyway) religions, but it's better to teach on the philosophies of these three. The religious side would be more fitting in a study on the dangers of religionizing philosophy.
Jun 13, 2007 8:03 AM
Migisi :
.
<i>And I guess there is a reason for the notion that most of us can't claim knowledge on a single Buddhist pioneer and we wouldn't know if Gautama had parents, wife or kids or if he lived to be a ripe old age and died of food posioning.</i>
.
We'd know about Gautama if we lived in a predominantly Buddhist country, wouldn't we. Since we don't, it's no surprise so few have knowledge about Buddhism, or most other non Judeo-Christian belief systems for that matter. Christians are preoccupied with trying to understand their own religion.
32 Comments