• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pioneering: Teaching or Proselytizing?

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
No, absolutely not. Get a dictionary.

Proselytize: convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another. https://www.google.com

If there is no attempt to convert someone then it cannot be proselytizing.

I hope my husband will mow the lawn by virtue of his own free will, but I make no attempt to convert him to a yard man. :rolleyes:

So you’re hoping by sharing that people don’t become Baha’i? Or you just don’t care?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
So you’re hoping by sharing that people don’t become Baha’i? Or you just don’t care?
You are getting closer....
I do not care for my sake, I only care for the sake of others, but I am not really hoping because I have given up hope. :(
But I still have to announce the coming of Baha'u'llah, because that is my duty.
Then if anybody asks me questions I have to answer them, because that is by duty.

I try to look at it like this: People do not have to become Baha'is but they still learn about Baha'i as the result of my sharing, and then maybe someday they could decide to become a Baha'i. Life has many twists and turns.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
The only time I shared my vegetarianism was when I was asked why I wasn't eating. Associates at work over nearly 30 years didn't even know I was vegetarian. (Much less a Hindu) There is no need to share. Still isn't. Why are people so darn egocentric about their particular POV? No need to share any of it. Of course some people do have that need ... but psychologically it reeks of originating in their own insecurity. Gotta tell someone. "Look, Mommy, I saw a birdy!" "Look, Mommy, I made a picture." "Looky, everybody, I have the most wonderful world view on this planet!" The principle is the same.
You share your POV (Why the hell should people share their POV) big time now also, taking my example out of context and totally the wrong way. To be clear, I did not say I share being vegatarian. I just gave a few examples where sharing can be with and without conversion intent.

And my main point was that sharing becomes conversion IMO, when you think you know better what is good for the other OR you think the other is wrong in what he does or thinks.

And in a way this process of introspection and sharing helps evolution. I also prefer to focus as much as possible on my own improvement, because that's what I know most about and plenty of work to do.

I am fine with people sharing their POV. That's what happens on RF all the time. Only when people belittle or hurt other beings in the process, I rather avoid them.
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Victims? Nobody is a victim unless someone forcibly tries to convert them, some group like ISIS.

Yes, they're victims. I stand by that. You're entitled to your opinion also. When indigenous kids got forcibly removed by the Catholic Church from their home to be converted and 'civilised' in the residential schools, often beaten and raped repeatedly in the process, yes, they were victims.

Or are you suggesting that this was good for that society?
 
Last edited:

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
I am fine with people sharing their POV. That's what happens on RF all the time. Only when people belittle or hurt other beings in the process, I rather avoid them.

Yes, I am the same. I read lots of stuff on RF and elsewhere, and don't comment. I'm often in a DIR I'm not a member of. In a sense all non-fiction writing outside of personal journaling is done in the hopes that someone reads it.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes, they're victims. I stand by that. You're entitled to your opinion also. When indigenous kids got forcibly removed by the Catholic Church from their home to be converted and 'civilised' in the residential schools, often beaten and raped repeatedly in the process, yes, they were victims.

Or are you suggesting that this was good for that society?
Yes, they are victims under the circumstances you noted.
No, that is not good for society.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
I’m tempted to nominate this post for the doublespeak if the decade award.

Use whatever euphemisms you wish. If you “share” your beliefs with another In hoping p of their own free will through further investigation of something you put in their head, it's still proselytizing.

Maybe all people proselytize on RF. Some Atheists shared a while back that they post on RF hoping that Theists "come down to earth and accept science" or something like that. They are also proselytizing their views "hoping the Theists make a decision of their own free will through further investigation of something you put in their head, it's still proselytizing".

Maybe when I am only posting on RF to receive frubals I am free of proselytizing, or when just posting for the fun of typing or sharing jokes, without any deeper meaning.

Whenever I share something I think has value for me and maybe for others, your above quote seems to indicate it can be labelled proselytizing.

For me it becomes proselytizing when the other belittles my POV or thinks my feelings or beliefs are inferior than his. And I realize I must be very alert not to fall in that trap myself. And I do fall more than I like. But becoming more aware in the process, and less judgmental step by step thanks to all responses I get in return.

So RF has been of great help for me in especially this area.
 
Last edited:

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Yes, I am the same. I read lots of stuff on RF and elsewhere, and don't comment. I'm often in a DIR I'm not a member of. In a sense all non-fiction writing outside of personal journaling is done in the hopes that someone reads it.
Good point. Sharing, without reacting on the other is a great way, without getting into this proselytizing. So in that way the DIR is a good RF invention (with the extra restrictions making it more easy to be respectful).

Debate forum has been good to me to practise formulating my own ideas and sharpening and taking the sharp edges off.

But realizing that proselytizing is not my thing, I might shift more to the DIR forums
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
You are getting closer....
I do not care for my sake, I only care for the sake of others, but I am not really hoping because I have given up hope. :(
But I still have to announce the coming of Baha'u'llah, because that is my duty.
Then if anybody asks me questions I have to answer them, because that is by duty.
Then I have, for now, 1 simple Yes/No question left:
Do you believe that the teachings of Bahaullah are needed for all people (now or at some time in the future) to reach "their ultimate goal in life".
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Baha'i that I've encountered are rather insistent that pioneering is not proselytizing. In fact, in their words, they are forbidden to proselytize.

I think pioneering is the same as evangelizing-sharing about one's own beliefs and experiences without regards to others. A self-centered approach to teaching. I wouldn't be surprised if it is inline with proselytizing. Many organization [or those who don't refer to themselves as churches etc from the few I know] tend to share their belief but don't realize it's passively saying, "we don't have enough members, join us" type of thing.

"It is true that Bahá'u'lláh lays on every Bahá'í the duty to teach His Faith. At the same time, however, we are forbidden to proselytize, so it is important for all the believers to understand the difference between teaching and proselytizing. It is a significant difference and, in some countries where teaching a religion is permitted, but proselytizing is forbidden, the distinction is made in the law of the land. Proselytizing implies bringing undue pressure to bear upon someone to change his Faith. It is also usually understood to imply the making of threats or the offering of material benefits as an inducement to conversion. In some countries mission schools or hospitals, for all the good they do, are regarded with suspicion and even aversion by the local authorities because they are considered to be material inducements to conversion and hence instruments of proselytization."

A good example of this is quoting scriptures more than having conversations. I didn't know Bahai does this too until, well, back when [hoping to forget] type of thing. It's not a good technique for "teaching" and sends red flags.

Which leads me to the reason I created this topic. Are teaching and proselytizing mutually exclusive?

They're separate. When you teach, usually the other person wants to learn. There is a dialogue and engagement between the two parties. Proselytizing not so much. It has a "I'll learn about you so I can tell you about myself" type of thing. I notice religious people who seem mature, I guess, don't teach but observe and converse. Once they trust you, it's not instruction [unless both are on the same level and faith] just general conversation of each other's point of view.

Proselytizing can be as simple as, "why don't you come to my church and see what you think."

I don't think they are. As I see it, teaching can be proselytizing if the intent of the teacher is to affect change to the worldview of another, whether or not undue pressure, threats, or coercion are present in the message. If one were to come up to you and give you unsolicited information about their views in the absence of your initial intent to learn something from them, would you consider that teaching or proselytizing?

Proselytizing has a negative connotation. Maybe the teacher is convincing others to take up a worldview or debating depending on the situation and atmosphere of the people and environment in context.

In reading the article and in my interaction with Baha'i here on the forum, I'm led to the conclusion that pioneering is little more than proselytizing under the guise of teaching, or as has been the case in this forum, debate.

Yes. After a year or so, that's exactly the conclusion I'd would take up. Many names for the same concept. Though, just because, it doesn't make it negative in intent. Just, some people who do don't realize how it affects others and/or don't care because it's justified by their religious views.

What are your thoughts? Is pioneering simply teaching? Or is it proselyting?

To me, pioneering just as Shakabuku, evangelizing, etc are just another word for proselytizing. Even the word missionaries have negative historical connotations. If their intent is not to share to bring interest to others so that they engage, I'm sure there are other ways of teaching to interact. That's basically how people learn. It's fishy when there is no two way conversation.

You can say Bahauallah does this or that but if you're not interested in the other party in -any- topic, regardless the intent, the message sends a bad signal. That's not teaching.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Yeah, it's proselytizing through and through. All but the Baha'i know it. My personal bigger question is whether or not proselytizing helps the victims in any way at all. My stance is it does a lot of harm. It's like a village invading a village in the days of old.
Sure it is.
I just reverse any Bahai claim ...... it's so accurate as well.

Many African groups came over to Bahai very very quickly. One Bahai pioneer (Chad) boasted that a whole village declared at the same time. If a chieftain got sold on it he could order a group changeover, although some groups just incorporated the bits that they liked in to their own 'Traditions'. But Pioneers would report a 'mass declaration'.

The thing is....... easy in can lead to 'easy out'. A boating acquaintance of mine went to an African country for a long holiday (1978) and he got interested in the people of a town. When he discovered that they loved football but had no ball, uniforms, kits, etc etc he bought everything they needed. And when he was leaving to go home the town leaders came to him and declared him a prophet from God. In England, if you make or have enough money to chuck around (and behave) you can be sit in the House of Lords, but in some places in Africa you could be (1978) a Prophet from God.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I suppose they could be if they wanted to be converted, but that is on them, not on me, because I am not trying to convert anyone.

I cannot even count the number of times atheists have told me it is MY responsibility to convince them that God exists or that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. They say I have the “burden of proof” because I made the claim. I tell them I have no burden, the burden is on them to prove it to themselves. If I was trying to convert them I would try to be more convincing, dontcha think?
It's never been my impression that you don't try to convince people that your views are correct. Maybe I'm reading too much into your posts, but there have been many occasions where it's seemed to me like you've gotten frustrated when your arguments failed to convince the other person.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It's never been my impression that you don't try to convince people that your views are correct. Maybe I'm reading too much into your posts, but there have been many occasions where it's seemed to me like you've gotten frustrated when your arguments failed to convince the other person.
Your impression is wrong.
My only goal is to accurately represent the Baha'i Faith.
I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. If I was, I would be frustrated by now, and I probably would not still be on forums. Hopefully, you can do the math. :)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It really demonstrates arrogance when people think that they can know the intent of another person.
What they are saying is one of two things:
1. I know you better than you know yourself, or
2. You are lying, so I do not believe you

Either way, it is extremely arrogant.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
It really demonstrates arrogance when people think that they can know the intent of another person.
What they are saying is one of two things:
1. I know you better than you know yourself, or
2. You are lying, so I do not believe you

Either way, it is extremely arrogant.
I wasn't speaking to your actual intent; I spoke to how you come across.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
You are getting closer....

Then I have, for now, 1 simple Yes/No question left:
Do you believe that the teachings of Bahaullah are needed for all people (now or at some time in the future) to reach "their ultimate goal in life".

I cannot answer that with a yes or no. That would depend upon what you mean by "ultimate goal."
What I can say is that the teachings of Baha'u'llah are necessary if mankind is going to have peace and security.
Okay, let me be more specific:

Then I have, for now, 1 simple Yes/No question left:
Do you believe that the teachings of Bahaullah are needed for all people (now or at some time in the future) to reach "their ultimate goal in life", when their ultimate goal in life equals your ultimate goal in life? Or the ultimate goal in life as defined by Bahaullah?

Just pick the one you can answer.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I wasn't speaking to your actual intent; I spoke to how you come across.
FYI, that post to which you are responding was not directed at you. I wrote it for everyone on this thread.

But regarding how I come across, I hope you realize that comes through the filter of your own mind, so it is YOUR perception of ME.

You come across a certain way to me, but I do not consider that is who you are; it is just how I perceive you through the lens of my own understanding.

I perceive you as a rational and just person. I do not consider you arrogant.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Okay, let me be more specific:

Then I have, for now, 1 simple Yes/No question left:
Do you believe that the teachings of Bahaullah are needed for all people (now or at some time in the future) to reach "their ultimate goal in life", when their ultimate goal in life equals your ultimate goal in life? Or the ultimate goal in life as defined by Bahaullah?

Just pick the one you can answer.
My answer would be yes, the teachings of Baha’u’llah are needed for all people to reach “their ultimate goal in life” as defined by Baha’u’llah. If you want to know why you will have to ask me, lest I get accused of proselytizing.
 
Top