• 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!

What Is Proselytizing?

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Debate. In India, the opponents state their positions clearly. Nothing surreptitious. That is known as 'Shastrartha' (Shastra + Artha, debating on the meaning of the books). Old past-time, like playing chess or internet games. From educational institutions to tea shops, pan (betel)/cigarette/marijuana shops. Very popular. Ranging from God or astronomy to crime or politics.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Ours is not so demonstrative. Both the contestants sit, always talk civilly, and begin with this famous invocation from "Taittiriya Upanishad" (probably 2.200 BCE):

Saha Naav[au]-Avatu | Saha Nau Bhunaktu | Saha Viiryam Karavaavahai | Tejasvi Naav[au]-Adhiitam-Astu | Maa Vidvissaavahai |
Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih ||
Together may we two Move; Together may we two Relish; Together may we perform with Vigor; May our efforts be brilliant; May it Not give rise to Hostility.
Peace, Peace, Peace.
 
Last edited:

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry, that came out wrong.....
I meant that everyone is sharing their opinions and/or beliefs, not that they have a particular message.

But what is wrong with people sharing their religious beliefs? After all, this is a religious forum. If people do not want to read anything about religious beliefs maybe they should not come to a religious forum.

If nobody shared anything about their religion, what would be posted?
Are we going to talk about politics? Maybe we can talk about how God does not exist?

There is a vast difference between sharing religious beliefs and convincing another that yours are more correct than theirs.

And to be clear, I'm using "yours" in the general sense, not with the intention of singling you out.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
I see the dictionary definition would not allow a debate section on RF. A debate is aimed at showing the Truth of a point of view on the topic discussed.

Thus as a Baha'i I would be putting the Baha'i teaching forward as that proof to which in the dictionary definition, is proselytizing, but is also the aim of the debate.

"The aim of a debate is to convince the opposition that you are right. When the two sides agree on the subject or when one side's arguments are more convincing than the other side that is when the debate
comes to a close."

Thus proselytizing has a wider meaning in the Baha'i Writings, stated as this:

" It is true that Bahá'u'lláh lays on every Bahá'í the duty to teach His Faith. ...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."

That duty I see is found in all the worlds faiths, even to teach one's self first.

But I see it is not Proselytizing as there is no intention to convert, the intention is to only deliver the point of view.

Regards Tony

The problem with your putting the Baha'i teaching forward as proof is that the Baha'i teachings, at least the ones you've shared here, offer no proof of anything. They offer a view based on people's beliefs, experiences, and opinions of them, which is really no different than any other worldview. Suggesting that this view is "truth" is, in fact, proselytizing. It very well may be your truth, but attempting to make it another's truth amounts to proselytizing, even if you use euphemisms such as "teach."

And no, Tony. This "duty" isn't found in all the world's faiths.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
There is a vast difference between sharing religious beliefs and convincing another that yours are more correct than theirs.

And to be clear, I'm using "yours" in the general sense, not with the intention of singling you out.

I've said this or something similar at least a hundred times ... unsolicited sharing is indeed proselytising, for all except the folks who are hardwired to see it as duty. Solicited sharing, (after you're asked a question) is another matter. I would venture 90% of the folks here only respond if questioned.

I think you understand the differences as well. Thanks for holding this discussion.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
And no, Tony. This "duty" isn't found in all the world's faiths.

For me, it would be 'sin', not duty. Not sin in the strictest Abrahamic sense, but in the sense that it would accrue bad karma ... unless solicited. Even answering questions isn't necessary any more, as a person can search for the answers, and find them.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
As is evidenced by a recent thread on the forum where someone gives a narrative on an experience he had in church, there appears to be some confusion by our membership as to what proselytizing is.

Merriam-Webster defines "proselytize" as "to induce someone to convert to one's faith."

Definition of PROSELYTIZE

Yet, on the mere sight of a narrative of an Christian experience, with no apparent intent to convert anyone, more than one member cried "proselytizing."

Do you have a different definition than the one above for proselytizing? If so, where did you find it?

If it's your own definition, wouldn't using such a definition publicly with the expectation of others using the term the same way be a form of proselytizing itself?

Discuss.
I don't think proselytizing is wrong, unless it derails a thread, resulting in consternation.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The problem with your putting the Baha'i teaching forward as proof is that the Baha'i teachings, at least the ones you've shared here, offer no proof of anything. They offer a view based on people's beliefs, experiences, and opinions of them, which is really no different than any other worldview.
You re correct, the Baha'i teachings are not "proof" of anything, not anymore than the Christian teachings such as that Jesus rose from the dead, are proof of anything. However, "some" Christians do offer these teachings as proof that Jesus is superior to all the other so-called Messengers of God and that Christianity is thus superior to all the other religions.

If people ask me for proof that the Baha'i Faith is the truth, I tell them there is no proof, only evidence, and the evidence is not that Baha'u'llah claimed to be a Manifestation of God because a claim is not proof of anything, since anyone can claim anything. I offer them what "I believe" supports this claim, and tell them that is not proof that Baha'u'llah got communication from God because nobody can ever prove that they received communication from God. If that could be proven, it would be a fact, not a belief. The same goes for any religion, since all religious claims are associated with a God that can never be proven to exist.

All religions are thus believed on faith, although some religions have more "evidence" to support that faith than others. Of course I am biased, but I believe that the Baha'i Faith has more evidence to support its claims than any other religion, and some of that evidence is verifiable.
Suggesting that this view is "truth" is, in fact, proselytizing. It very well may be your truth, but attempting to make it another's truth amounts to proselytizing, even if you use euphemisms such as "teach."
It would be proselytizing unless he said "I believe" this is the truth, and of course it would also depend upon the context of the statement. Baha'is are only supposed to "share" what we believe and teach only when the recipient shows an interest in more information about the Faith.
And no, Tony. This "duty" isn't found in all the world's faiths.
No, it is not a duty in all the world's faiths, but the Baha'i Faith has similar goals and is in a similar "position" as Christianity when it was very young. Jesus told his disciples to go out far and wide and tell people the "good news."

Mark 16:1 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.”

Matthew 24:1 This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.


Now that Christianity is well-established Christians do not "generally" preach the Gospel message, although it is shared by ardent believers on forums such as this one.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Solicited sharing, (after you're asked a question) is another matter. I would venture 90% of the folks here only respond if questioned.
I would say that is not the case. Most discussions about religious beliefs lead to "sharing" one's beliefs, especially in the Religious Debates forum.

For example, if Mr. X says "this is what I believe" and Mr. Y disagrees with that belief, normally Mr. Y would explain why he disagrees, and that would naturally be followed by "sharing" what he believes that is different from what Mr. X believes. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this back and forth sharing because by responding it becomes a mutually agreed upon sharing. If someone does not want to hear another person's beliefs then they should not be discussing their beliefs with a person who has different beliefs.

And if someone posts a new thread soliciting opinions or beliefs, it is fair game for anyone to respond by sharing what they believe.

Moreover, if someone does not want to hear about many different religious beliefs or just certain ones, maybe they should not be reading posts on a religious forum. It is not as if anyone is holding a gun to anyone's head forcing them to read posts.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
You re correct, the Baha'i teachings are not "proof" of anything, not anymore than the Christian teachings such as that Jesus rose from the dead, are proof of anything. However, "some" Christians do offer these teachings as proof that Jesus is superior to all the other so-called Messengers of God and that Christianity is thus superior to all the other religions.

If people ask me for proof that the Baha'i Faith is the truth, I tell them there is no proof, only evidence, and the evidence is not that Baha'u'llah claimed to be a Manifestation of God because a claim is not proof of anything, since anyone can claim anything. I offer them what "I believe" supports this claim, and tell them that is not proof that Baha'u'llah got communication from God because nobody can ever prove that they received communication from God. If that could be proven, it would be a fact, not a belief. The same goes for any religion, since all religious claims are associated with a God that can never be proven to exist.

All religions are thus believed on faith, although some religions have more "evidence" to support that faith than others. Of course I am biased, but I believe that the Baha'i Faith has more evidence to support its claims than any other religion, and some of that evidence is verifiable.

It would be proselytizing unless he said "I believe" this is the truth, and of course it would also depend upon the context of the statement. Baha'is are only supposed to "share" what we believe and teach only when the recipient shows an interest in more information about the Faith.

No, it is not a duty in all the world's faiths, but the Bahai Faith has similar goals and is in a similar "position" as Christianity when it was very young. Jesus told his disciples to go out far and wide and tell people the "good news."

Mark 16:1 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.”

Matthew 24:1 This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.


Now that Christianity is well-established Christians do not "generally" preach the Gospel message, although it is shared by ardent believers on forums such as this one.

Why are we comparing and contrasting Christianity to Baha'i Faith?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Have you looked if that is so? I will clarify that when I use world faiths, I am saying Faiths given by God through a Messenger or Prophet.

Regards Tony
With all due respect, this is not a "duty" found in all the world's faiths that were established by what we Baha’is call Messengers of God. In other words, all religions that had a “Messenger” do not have a goal to garner followers.

I ran across this website about Ethnic vs. Universalizing Religions several years ago. It explains the difference between these two kinds of religions. A universalizing religion looks for new members and welcomes anyone and everyone who wishes to adopt their belief system. Throughout history, some of these religions such as Christianity have attempted to convert people to their religion.

By contrast, ethnic religions consist of beliefs that were handed down from generation to generation within an ethnicity and culture and these religions do not try to convert others to their belief system. That is one reason Judaism is a relatively small religion, with only about 14 million members after over 4000 years. Compare that with Christianity and Islam, who have 2.3 billion and 1.9 billion members, respectively.

The Baha’i Faith is not included on this website but it goes without saying that it is universalizing religion.

Universalizing Religions

First, let’s look at the definition of universalizing religion. Universalizing religions offer belief systems that are attractive to the universal population. They look for new members and welcome anyone and everyone who wishes to adopt their belief system. Universalizing religions have many diverse members, who come from different ethnic backgrounds, hence the term universal. Therefore, it is evident that universal religions consist of many different ethnic groups because they convert and accept anyone of any background and are usually not closely tied to one location.

Christianity

Christianity is the largest universalizing religion, both in area and in number, with about two billion adherents. Founded on the teachings of Jesus, Christianity is monotheistic, believing that God is a Trinity and Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The three main branches of Christianity are Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants. Roman Catholics are predominate in Southwest Europe and Latin America, Protestants in Northwest Europe and North America, and Orthodox in Eastern Europe. Eastern Orthodoxy is the largest single religious faith in Greece, Cyprus, and Russia.

Islam

Islam is the second largest universalizing religion with over 1.5 billion adherents. In Arabic, Islam means “submitting to the will of God”. Those who practice Islam are Muslims, which means one who surrenders to God. Islam begins with Abraham like Christianity and Judaism, but traces their story through Abraham’s second wife and son, Hagar and Ishmael, not Sarah and Isaac like the Christians and Jews. Their leader and prophet is Muhammad. The two branches of Islam are Sunni and Shiite. The division between the Sunni and Shia originated in a disagreement over leadership after Muhammad’s death in 632 CE. Islam is the predominant religion in the Middle East from North Africa to Central Asia. More than half of the world’s Muslims live in four countries outside the Middle East: Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India.

Buddhism

Buddhism is the fourth largest religion, with about 350 million adherents. Buddhism was founded in Northern India by the first known Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama. The core Buddhist belief is reincarnation. In this concept, people are reborn after dying. One can attain Nirvana if one releases their attachment to desire and self. Today, Buddhism is a majority faith in Southeast Asia, China, and Japan.

Ethnic Religions

In contrast to universalizing religions, ethnic religions usually consist of beliefs, superstitions, and rituals handed down from generation to generation within an ethnicity and culture. It follows one’s ethnicity because the religion does not tend to convert. In some ways, ethnic religions act like a folk culture. It expands via relocation diffusion and often increases through birth rates. Ethnic religions relate closely to culture, ethnic heritage, and to the physical geography of a particular place. Ethnic religions do not attempt to appeal to all people, but only one group, maybe in one locale or within one ethnicity. Judaism and Hinduism are two prime examples of ethnic religions.

Hinduism

Hinduism is the largest ethnic religion and the world’s third largest religion with about 1 billion adherents. Hinduism existed before recorded history and had no specific founder. The origins of Hinduism in India are unclear; however, the oldest manuscripts date to 1500 BCE. Hinduism consists of many different religious groups evolved in India since 1500 BCE. Other religions are more centrally organized than Hinduism, and it is up to the individual to decide the best way to worship God. The principle of reincarnation is the cornerstone of Hinduism, and their doctrine closely mirrors India’s caste system. Almost all Hindus live in one country, India, but also are in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Nepal.

Judaism

Judaism is an ethnic religion that has more than 14 million followers worldwide. There are 6 million Jews in Israel and 5 million in the United States. Two of the main universalizing religions, Christianity and Islam, find some of their roots in Judaism, recognizing Abraham as a Patriarch. Jews believe in one true God, and the Western Wall of the old temple in Jerusalem is one of their most holy sites. The three branches of Judaism are Orthodox, Conservatives, and Reformed. Judaism is distributed throughout part of the Middle East and North Africa, the United States, Russia, and Europe.

Ethnic vs. Universalizing Religions: AP® Human Geography Crash Course | Albert.io
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
With all due respect, this is not a "duty" found in all the world's faiths that were established by what we Baha’is call Messengers of God. In other words, all religions that had a “Messenger” do not have a goal to garner followers.

Then it is my poor English.

Thus an Obligation may be better use of words.

This quote uses both.

"In the Aqdas Bahá’u’lláh considers teaching as a spiritual obligation imposed upon every devoted believer and servant of His Faith. Should the friends become fully conscious of this duty and arise to do their share, this Cause will soon permeate every home throughout the world and the Kingdom of God will be established."
(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer: Bahá’í News, No. 85, p. 8, July 1934)

These quotes can be found in abundance and In other scriptures also.

I need not discuss the point any further as it is a play only on words as to what people see on this topic.

Regards Tony
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
I don't think proselytizing is wrong, unless it derails a thread, resulting in consternation.
Useful standard there. After all, any viewpoint can be mis-used that way, including for instance a political ideology, atheism, or a social-economic ideology.
 
Top