“The Chinese communists only took the opportunity to expand and consolidate communist forces, and made no substantial contribution to the war of resistance, let alone ‘leading’ the war of resistance,” it said.
Ben Blanchard
Fri, May 9, 2025 at 11:03 AM GMT+32 min read
By Ben Blanchard
TAIPEI (Reuters) – Taiwan criticised Russia and China on Friday for distorting World War Two history, saying Chinese communist forces made “no substantial contribution” to fighting Japan and instead took the opportunity to expand their own forces.
The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.Psalm 18 : 4
Taiwan has this year sought to cast the war as a lesson to China in why aggression will end in failure, reminding the world it was not the government in Beijing that won the war.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Chinese government at the time was the Republic of China, part of the U.S., British and Russian-led alliance, and its forces did much of the fighting against Japan, putting on pause a bitter civil war with Mao Zedong’s Communists whose military also fought the Japanese.
Papists, Protestants, and worldlings will alike accept the form of godliness without the power, and they will see in this union a grand movement for the conversion of the world and the ushering in of the long-expected millennium. GC 588.3
Speaking of the law against Sabbath breaking in the time of the ancient Israelite theocracy, Mr. Hazard says: “There was no tyranny over conscience in the case, and there is none. In things moral and social the State has right over the conscience of the minority in it, to compel it.” Has the State such right? Are the American people ready to accept such doctrine? If they are, then the scenes of the Dark Ages are ready to be repeated in this land; for no worse principle was ever cited in justification of any act of oppression or prosecution.
Think of it: “In things moral, … the State has right over the conscience of the minority in it, to compel it!” Is this the doctrine that is to be gathered from the pages of history or of revelation, or deduced from reason in the light of the nineteenth century? Is it a true saying, after all, that “might makes right”? Is the State to define morality? and not only that, but to compel the conscience of individuals in moral things, who happen to be in the minority? God himself does not undertake to compel the conscience.
The author of this proposition cites as an example under it the case of a man who has “a conscience distorted to fit stealing,” or “another” who “may fail to see the use and value of the Sabbath,” in which case, he says, the State will see it for him. But if a man should plead conscience for stealing, the State would disregard his plea not on the ground that his conscience was bad or that he was in the minority, but simply on the ground that he had violated human rights, which it is the purpose of the government to protect. The State would not make itself lord of his conscience; it would not concern itself with his conscience at all. It would simply take cognizance of the fact that the rights of some of its citizens had been violated, and as the appointed protector of those rights, its proper action in the matter would be clear, without any reference to the criminal’s plea of conscience. AMS February 6, 1896, page 43.3 – AMS February 6, 1896, page 43.5
The republican government then fled to Taiwan in 1949 after finally being defeated by Mao, and Republic of China remains the democratic island’s official name.
Responding to comments by Russian President Vladimir Putin to Chinese President Xi Jinping that the war was won under the leadership of China’s communist party, Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council said it was the Republic of China government and people who fought and ultimately won.
“The Chinese communists only took the opportunity to expand and consolidate communist forces, and made no substantial contribution to the war of resistance, let alone ‘leading’ the war of resistance,” it said.
Everywhere there is a tendency to substitute the work of organizations for individual effort. Human wisdom tends to consolidation, to centralization, to the building up of great churches and institutions. Multitudes leave to institutions and organizations the work of benevolence; they excuse themselves from contact with the world, and their hearts grow cold. They become self-absorbed and unimpressible. Love for God and man dies out of the soul.
Christ commits to His followers an individual work—a work that cannot be done by proxy. Ministry to the sick and the poor, the giving of the gospel to the lost, is not to be left to committees or organized charities. Individual responsibility, individual effort, personal sacrifice, is the requirement of the gospel.
“Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in,” is Christ’s command, “that My house may be filled.” He brings men into touch with those whom they seek to benefit. “Bring the poor that are cast out to thy house,” He says. “When thou seest the naked, that thou cover him.” “They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Luke 14:23; Isaiah 58:7; Mark 16:18. Through direct contact, through personal ministry, the blessings of the gospel are to be communicated. MH 147.3 – MH 147.5
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Xi is in Moscow to attend Friday’s military parade marking the 80th anniversary of the end of the war in Europe.
In a joint statement with China, Russia reaffirmed that Taiwan was an “inseparable part of the People’s Republic of China” – a position the government in Taipei strongly disputes.
The pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist church, having accepted the Sabbath truth, eagerly reached out to follow the Word of God in every particular, while at the same time they were careful to protect themselves against distorted interpretations of the Word and any extremes or fanaticism. They saw clearly the privileges and the obligations of the Lord’s Supper established for the church by our Lord. EW 302.1
The government in Beijing says that as it is the successor state to the Republic of China it has a legal right to claim Taiwan under the text of the 1943 Cairo Declaration and 1945 Potsdam Declaration, the island at the time being a Japanese colony.
ADVERTISEMENT
Advertisement
Taiwan’s foreign ministry said those documents confirmed that it was the Republic of China which had sovereignty over Taiwan.
“At the time, the People’s Republic of China did not exist at all,” it said.
“Any false statements intended to distort Taiwan’s sovereign status cannot change history, nor can they shake the objective facts recognised by the international community.”
China labels Taiwan President Lai Ching-te a “separatist”. He rejects Beijing’s sovereignty claims, saying only Taiwan’s people can decide their future.
(Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Additional reporting by Ryan Woo in Beijing; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman and Philippa Fletcher)
Adventist Angels Watchman Radio 