Proselytizing: What is it and is it a good or bad thing?

[Unveiled Artist]

Proselytizing can mean different things to different people. Some people may feel a duty to proselytize as part of their faith. Others may use the word in a pejorative way to criticise others who 'teach' their faith to others while insisting on being above whatever they perceive the word to mean.

So what is proselytising? To me it means trying to convert people from one religion or worldview to another. Personally I wouldn't try to convert anyone to my religion, but if someone had questions about my faith or were interested to learn I would certainly help them. If someone wanted to join my religion, if I believed they were sincere and understood what my faith was about, I would certainly assist them in their journey to become part of the worldwide community of my faith. So none of this I would consider proselytizing. I would avoid any manipulation, coercion or deception which certainly runs contrary to the truthfulness and trsutworthiness that is at the foundation of any genuine religion.

Proselytizing on religious forum is against the rules btw. Some of you may be aware of rule 8:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

RF Rules

I've certainly experienced a great deal of proselytizing during my time on RF and have been accused of it myself.

So what is proselytizing to you and is it a good or bad thing.

Adrian, I see it like this:

Talking:

Hey, you want to go out tomorrow?"

Rats, I can't. I have to go to church. I got to praise the lord. What about Monday?

Sure!

Sharing:

Hey, I was reading about how the America is influenced by the Romans and how...

Really? Did you know we, I mean christians, we're the first ones to believe in god before America even came about?

Actually, no. I heard otherwise. Do tell...

Evangelizing:

Hey, did you want to go out tomorrow?

I can't. I got to go to church, praising the lord and all. God did a lot for me. I can't go to church without praising his name. I want to show you some verses that called to me. He did a lot for me.

Dude. I just wanted to know if you want to go out tomorrow.

Proselytizing:

Hey, did you want to go out tomorrow?

I can't. I have to go to church. I'm praising the lord. Do you have the lord with you? Maybe you can come to church too?

I told you I don't do all that. I'm Pagan, you know that.

But, Paganism is of the devil. You really need christ. It's up to you, of course.

Dude, I just wanted to know if you want to go out tomorrow. Oh. Never mind. I'll call you when I'm free.

 

[Vinayaka]

Many of us try to make the best decisions we can and we are the only ones who can read the reality of our lives. I spent 5 years going through a process of searching for truth and that culminated in becoming a Baha’i. On reflection 30 years later was it the best decision? It still looks the right decision but I could be wrong. Choice of a religion has so many subjective aspects.

Hinduism was certainly a spiritual path I considered. I had little doubt there was a light within Hinduism similar to Christianity I had grown up with. Incredibly in a city of over 100,000 people there was no Hindu community at that time. A Tibetan Buddhist community with a Centre had been established nearly 5 years beforehand. I actually was living in the house with 12 others when it was purchased by the Buddhists.

The Hare Krishnas established a community centre about 5 years ago. Sai Baba have had a presence but have never had a community centre. They have now shrunk and merged into the mainstream Hindu community that currently uses the Baha’i Centre. I really hope they can establish a Centre/Temple which is their plan.

The. availability of an actual community (didn’t need to have a Centre) was hugely important for me. If I hadn’t become a Baha’i then I would probably have persisted with Christianity.

The need for community is not a need I cherish personally, although I am a member of one. Our temple festival is on now, and some folks do have that need and it's obvious. To me, it's not at all about whether or not people are even there: it's far more about whether or not God is there, and the priests do their job of invoking their presence.

The question of whether or not religion of any sort makes for a better person is interesting. Most definitely it does make someone different, especially if it's full blown, like an official name change, vows, or being born again. I have no idea if I'm a better person or not. Tough to tell. But I do know that I figured a former friend/acquaintance of mine who became a born again Christian was easier for me to talk to before the dramatic change. He was a nice guy who became a condescending preaching jerk, in my view. I know it's just one personal testimony, although I ponder if others have had similar experiences with friends. That guy would lay claim to the idea that he is now a better person.

The loose definition of proselytising on this forum is one of consensus of a group of moderators, and not a personal opinion. We all have to live with that operating definition, whether we agree or not. For those who are unable to adhere, then this is clearly not the place for them. For those like me who feel too much gets through, I'm certainly free to leave.

Some folks who claim to be better people ... one can't help but wonder what they were like before the shift. If that's better, then how bad was it before?

 

[Dawnofhope]

The need for community is not a need I cherish personally, although I am a member of one. Our temple festival is on now, and some folks do have that need and it's obvious. To me, it's not at all about whether or not people are even there: it's far more about whether or not God is there, and the priests do their job of invoking their presence.

I must admit I really enjoyed attending the Pooja at the Baha’i Centre recently. It was a real privilege to join the Hindu community and definitely spiritually uplifting.

The need for community changes for us all with time. The balance for me now has shifted firmly to wanting more time to myself. I especially want to avoid meetings that involves collective decision making. I’d like less responsibility thanks!

On the other hand I’d like to be attending more community gatherings with a devotional character. I had a phone call from a friend of a friend this morning. He’s a Sufi Muslim who wants to join Baha’i activities (not become a Baha’i). He’s feeling over attending the local Mosque for personal reasons and the Baha’is believing in the Quran and Muhammad is the next logical step. He’s had quite a lot to do with the Baha’is over the last few years so he wants to take it to another level. I’ll certainly help him with that.

The question of whether or not religion of any sort makes for a better person is interesting. Most definitely it does make someone different, especially if it's full blown, like an official name change, vows, or being born again. I have no idea if I'm a better person or not. Tough to tell. But I do know that I figured a former friend/acquaintance of mine who became a born again Christian was easier for me to talk to before the dramatic change. He was a nice guy who became a condescending preaching jerk, in my view. I know it's just one personal testimony, although I ponder if others have had similar experiences with friends. That guy would lay claim to the idea that he is now a better person.

I think most of us have had intensely negative experiences with fundamentalist Christians. It’s very likely to be contributing to the decline of Christianity in the West. My negative experiences are numerous and I’ve become accustomed to being preached at occasionally. I’ve also seen major changes in attitudes from diehard Christians at the Christian Medical Centre I work at. I remain an optimist.

The loose definition of proselytising on this forum is one of consensus of a group of moderators, and not a personal opinion. We all have to live with that operating definition, whether we agree or not. For those who are unable to adhere, then this is clearly not the place for them. For those like me who feel too much gets through, I'm certainly free to leave.

I personally haven’t found the rules here problematic either as a participant or as a moderator. I like it that decisions are made by consensus requiring the support of three moderators. You’ll be somewhat familiar with how it works as you were once a moderator I understand. Do you think you would do it again if asked? Be very careful how you answer that question!

Some folks who claim to be better people ... one can't help but wonder what they were like before the shift. if that's better, then how bad was it before?

Fair enough.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Adrian, I see it like this:

Talking:

Hey, you want to go out tomorrow?"

Rats, I can't. I have to go to church. I got to praise the lord. What about Monday?
Sure!

Sharing:

Hey, I was reading about how the America is influenced by the Romans and how...

Really? Did you know we, I mean christians, we're the first ones to believe in god before America even came about?

Actually, no. I heard otherwise. Do tell...

Evangelizing:

Hey, did you want to out tomorrow?

I can't. I got to go to church, praising the lord and all. God did a lot for me. I can't go to church without praising his name. I want to show you some verses that called to me. He did a lot for me.

Dude. I just wanted to know if you want to go out tomorrow.

Proselytizing:

Hey, did you want to go out tomorrow?

I can't. I have to go to church. I'm praising the lord. Do you have the lord with you? Maybe you can come to church too?

I told you I don't do all that. I'm Pagan, you know that.

But, Paganism is of the devil. You really need christ. It's up to you, of course.

Dude, I just wanted to know if you want to go out tomorrow. Oh. Never mind. I'll call you when I'm free.

They are excellent examples, Thank you.

 

[loverofhumanity]

As you know, I was with Baha'i friends in the 70's that went to Indian Reservations and held meetings to "teach" people about the Faith. To get them there, they depended on the few local Baha'is, most were native people, to invite friends and family. But also, the visiting Baha'is were sent out to "invite" people to the meeting. Typically, it went like this... Knock, knock... Yes. Hi we are Baha'is and would like to invite you to a meeting tonight. Oh, what's the Baha'i Faith? So glad you asked....

Those that went to the meeting were shown a film of how great the Baha'i Faith is and how it is the fulfillment of every other major religion. Some would sign a card declaring their belief in Baha'u'llah. Most wouldn't. I've got to imagine there was some pressure on the people to join... kind of like peer pressure, since their relatives or friends belong to this new religion. Or, the pressure of seeing and hearing how wonderful this new religion is, and that it can bring all people and all nations together in peace? And then they are just going to walk out the door and not join and help?

Sure it sounds like the intent is to proselytize. But, what is a new religion to do? Their job is to "find" new Baha'is. But, it's the same with what Evangelical Christians do too. They "witness" to others or "preach" the truth about Jesus to others in order to "save" them from hell and to bring them into the Kingdom of God.

So it's strange that Loverofhumanity says this...

I wonder, how many Baha'is "love" that some Christians tell them that that they are dying in their sins and need to believe in the God of the Bible and his only Son Jesus to be "saved" from the wiles of Satan the devil? And, that the religion that they, the Baha'is believe in, is a false religion?

Of course they don't "love" that. And then Christians and Baha'is go back and forth "discussing" (or arguing) whose interpretation of the Bible is the truth. I know that Christians will usually say that they are trying to convert people, but why won't Baha'is? If they have the one and only truth from God for this day. And in those Sacred Writings is the answer to all the problems the world is facing, Then, shouldn't they proclaim it from the mountain tops? But no, they don't want to what? Offend anybody? Yet they do. When they say that now is the time for God's new Prophet and God's new message, and that all other messages from all the other religions no longer have the answers that can heal the world and bring people together in peace and love. Only the Baha'is have that message.

For me, though, subtle "proselytizing" is okay. It's what keeps things interesting here... the back and forth people go through to show that their beliefs are better or truer than someone else's. However, in the end, it is still proselytizing. The ones doing it just change the name to "teaching" or "sharing" things about their Faith. And, like I said, I don't mind it and hope it continues. But, I'm also glad that others, like yourself, point it out and call them out for doing it. That really makes things interesting here.

Hi CG. I don’t believe it’s strange because we Baha’is are supposed to treasure and value every person. I love having Christians in my home. I know their beliefs but I don’t feel inconvenienced or annoyed because firstly I accept Christ and the Bible and next we are all humans and we are diverse. So what they have a different viewpoint. To me that doesn’t exclude them from the human race or make them undesirables. I’m happy for them to believe I’m influenced by the devil or condemned to hell because it doesn’t bother me. It’s part and parcel of being tolerant.

I see the good in them not their faults and shortcomings of which I myself have many also.

It doesn’t matter what people believe or don’t believe , it’s the person behind that belief that’s what’s important, that all life is precious.

It’s only too easy to forget the person and get caught up in wrangling and trying to ‘win’ but that’s what life is all about to me, mastering and conquering our own egos. Often we fail. Often I fail.

 

[Aupmanyav]

They do not love themselves. Failing the last part of their Highest commandment, they are unable to fulfill the first part of their Highest commandment

No, stvdv, they love their neighbor and want the best for them. That is why Teresa insisted for even a dying person to accept Jesus before the last breath. I think a Bahai also would do the same.

My understanding is we all need to find the truth for ourselves through our personal encounter with the Gospels rather than blindly following others.

Are Gospels, Christian or otherwise, truth? They too are advertising brochures. Thank Allah that we don't have any.

Some folks who claim to be better people ... one can't help but wonder what they were like before the shift. if that's better, then how bad was it before?

A nice person is a nice person. He/she cannot be any better by being a Christian or Hindu or Muslim or Bahai, he can only be worse. Religious beliefs do not change the 'Samskaras' (childhood training, education, effect of experiences).

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Proselytizing can mean different things to different people. Some people may feel a duty to proselytize as part of their faith. Others may use the word in a pejorative way to criticise others who 'teach' their faith to others while insisting on being above whatever they perceive the word to mean.

So what is proselytising? To me it means trying to convert people from one religion or worldview to another. Personally I wouldn't try to convert anyone to my religion, but if someone had questions about my faith or were interested to learn I would certainly help them. If someone wanted to join my religion, if I believed they were sincere and understood what my faith was about, I would certainly assist them in their journey to become part of the worldwide community of my faith. So none of this I would consider proselytizing. I would avoid any manipulation, coercion or deception which certainly runs contrary to the truthfulness and trsutworthiness that is at the foundation of any genuine religion.

Proselytizing on religious forum is against the rules btw. Some of you may be aware of rule 8:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

RF Rules

I've certainly experienced a great deal of proselytizing during my time on RF and have been accused of it myself.

So what is proselytizing to you and is it a good or bad thing.

I've had bad experiences with it, in fact, growing up in the Baptist church proselytizing was usually an attempt at justifying personal judgment on someone. Proselytizing has its uses, but how it is enacted, its just a reinterpretation of what someone thinks how someone ought to believe. Ironically, this exorbitant form of preaching often has the opposite effect of what it intends.

 

[stvdv]

Someone claiming "my religion is the best for everyone" is indirectly claiming that he knows all other religions, practiced all and experienced they were wrong. Not such a smart claim to make, knowing we only have 100 years to study everything. Beside that, I find it also rude and lacking Love, compassion and empathy.

Do the proselytizers care about that? For some it is their profession and livelihood. They have to.

If the proselytizer is a Christian I think this is very strange, because their "Highest Commandment" tells them "Love thy neighbor as thyself"
If they are rude and lacking Love, compassion and empathy, I can only come up with one conclusion

They do not love themselves. Failing the last part of their Highest commandment, they are unable to fulfill the first part of their Highest commandment

No, stvdv, they love their neighbor and want the best for them. That is why Teresa insisted for even a dying person to accept Jesus before the last breath. I think a Bahai also would do the same.

No @Aupmanyav, I was talking about real Love (Love thy neighbor as thy Self), not about selfish love.
I can easily explain the difference with below example
A father makes love to his daughter ... he really loves his daughter, but the Law is not on his side in most countries. Why is that?

Are Gospels, Christian or otherwise, truth? They too are advertising brochures. Thank Allah that we don't have any.

Truth is beyond words. But words can inspire to seek the Truth, but not in those words. You have to read between the lines to find Truth

 

[Dawnofhope]

I've had bad experiences with it, in fact, growing up in the Baptist church proselytizing was usually an attempt at justifying personal judgment on someone. Proselytizing has its uses, but how it is enacted, its just a reinterpretation of what someone thinks how someone ought to believe. Ironically, this exorbitant form of preaching often has the opposite effect of what it intends.

I don’t know what the experience of the Baptist church would be like in the USA but I was involved with the Baptist Church in New Zealand prior to becoming a Baha’i. They were involved in setting up the free medical clinic I work at so it’s good they are involved in charity. However they have at times alienated themselves from other religious groups including the Catholics on account of their hardline fundamentalist attitudes. Their condescending views on other religions are not attractive and whatever Biblical verses are used as justification, I’m convinced their views are not even remotely inspired by the Gospels they claim to represent.

 

[Samana Johann]

Proselytizing can mean different things to different people. Some people may feel a duty to proselytize as part of their faith. Others may use the word in a pejorative way to criticise others who 'teach' their faith to others while insisting on being above whatever they perceive the word to mean.

So what is proselytising? To me it means trying to convert people from one religion or worldview to another. Personally I wouldn't try to convert anyone to my religion, but if someone had questions about my faith or were interested to learn I would certainly help them. If someone wanted to join my religion, if I believed they were sincere and understood what my faith was about, I would certainly assist them in their journey to become part of the worldwide community of my faith. So none of this I would consider proselytizing. I would avoid any manipulation, coercion or deception which certainly runs contrary to the truthfulness and trsutworthiness that is at the foundation of any genuine religion.

Proselytizing on religious forum is against the rules btw. Some of you may be aware of rule 8:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

RF Rules

I've certainly experienced a great deal of proselytizing during my time on RF and have been accused of it myself.

So what is proselytizing to you and is it a good or bad thing.

Althought there is much doubt that those sticking to hypocrisy, those denying the support of taming, can be turned to a better, caught in confusion and pseudo liberality:

There is no such as any religion without advices at first place. If there are no advices needed there is no need of religion. Guess your self in how far you are already freed of suffering and stress, having gained independecy in all regards or even gained any higher stage then bond to world.

It's a sign of outstanding confusion if having a problem with good advices not to speak of the evidence of simply other interests (gain throw accumulating people, not so smart) as religion to use a hypocratical rule that can be used to kill off what is not in ones interest. It's like saying "come fools, come fools... here you stay safe to be not guided to better". Or to put it into othe words:

The"enemy":

(2) "In four ways, young householder, should one who renders lip-service be understood as a foe in the guise of a friend:

(i) he makes friendly profession as regards the past,
(ii) he makes friendly profession as regards the future,
(iii) he tries to gain one's favor by empty words,
(iv) when opportunity for service has arisen, he expresses his inability.

(3) "In four ways, young householder, should one who flatters be understood as a foe in the guise of a friend:

(i) he approves of his friend's evil deeds,
(ii) he disapproves his friend's good deeds,
(iii) he praises him in his presence,
(iv) he speaks ill of him in his absence.

(4) "In four ways, young householder, should one who brings ruin be understood as a foe in the guise of a friend:

(i) he is a companion in indulging in intoxicants that cause infatuation and heedlessness,
(ii) he is a companion in sauntering in streets at unseemly hours,
(iii) he is a companion in frequenting theatrical shows,
(iv) he is a companion in indulging in gambling which causes heedlessness."

The "friend"

(2) "In four ways, young householder, should one who is the same in happiness and sorrow be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he reveals his secrets,
(ii) he conceals one's own secrets,
(iii) in misfortune he does not forsake one,
(iv) his life even he sacrifices for one's sake.

(3) "In four ways, young householder, should one who gives good counsel be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he restrains one from doing evil,
(ii) he encourages one to do good,
(iii) he informs one of what is unknown to oneself,
(iv) he points out the path to heaven.

(4) "In four ways, young householder, should one who sympathises be understood as a warm-hearted friend:

(i) he does not rejoice in one's misfortune,
(ii) he rejoices in one's prosperity,
(iii) he restrains others speaking ill of oneself,
(iv) he praises those who speak well of oneself."
​

The place itself here starts with a proselytism: "Join, here you are happy and safe..." So simply foolish to deny a requirement.

Better to ask and investigate whether "preacher" known of what he talks about, has gone the way, or is on the way, or repeats of what those had taught.

And adding "I believe, that a believe, that I believe...": if knowing, perceiving clear, wouldn't it be a lie? Who would force others to lie? On the other hand, if one says "I see", when not, it's his as long as one does not give into.

It's not even possible for a leader to protect sheeps, not for Gods, not the wise, yet how lost when sheep guide sheep...

And if the OP would not actually simply go right after getting every good advice out of it's sphere for it's communist ideologies, using here very political strategies to cut off what ever Sublime, if it wouldn't be a very strategical post to manipulate sheeps and gain their favor, it could be explained further.

Sheeps seek always after their slayer and nobody could prevent them.

The "rescue-pig" is bond to it's piggies and vici-versa.

A lifes as rescue pig

Spoiler: Picture powered by Brahmas, yield power over the creation off others and the Devas delight in creation

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/...jnB2dgkXdXxc-QxQArPa3ICm_NQK0JC7bx5kNWw9bRMKw

May Householder correct if the OP wasn't actually a well considered "the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another" or the simply attempt to gain majority under sheeps for his communist sect and ideals which is after low worldly gains and does not tolerate others autonomy, but plunders and makes use from all sides for their gains and interests, imperialism.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I don’t know what the experience of the Baptist church would be like in the USA but I was involved with the Baptist Church in New Zealand prior to becoming a Baha’i. They were involved in setting up the free medical clinic I work at so it’s good they are involved in charity. However they have at times alienated themselves from other religious groups including the Catholics on account of their hardline fundamentalist attitudes. Their condescending views on other religions are not attractive and whatever Biblical verses are used as justification, I’m convinced their views are not even remotely inspired by the Gospels they claim to represent.

Well speaking from experiences, the culture of NZ is different than the culture of us North Americans (for obvious reasons) and breaking down into the microcosm of the United States the African-American community within the Baptist faith is also different than other Baptist. Because this requires a longer conversation I'll summarize and say that African-Americans in religion are vociferous people when it comes to the expression of faith. Add the history of racism and the adoption of Christianity including the fiery rhetoric of salvation you have what I've just described. Many Baptist preachers here often literally take the Biblical expression of voicing their devotion to God literally and often times many Baptist sermons are nothing more than praise concerts. The moment I've seen people "Crip walking" in a church all because they felt the "Holy Ghost" I stopped taking Christianity of this kind seriously.

It's sad because this sort of Christianity is what drove me away.

 

[dianaiad]

Proselytizing can mean different things to different people. Some people may feel a duty to proselytize as part of their faith. Others may use the word in a pejorative way to criticise others who 'teach' their faith to others while insisting on being above whatever they perceive the word to mean.

So what is proselytising? To me it means trying to convert people from one religion or worldview to another. Personally I wouldn't try to convert anyone to my religion, but if someone had questions about my faith or were interested to learn I would certainly help them. If someone wanted to join my religion, if I believed they were sincere and understood what my faith was about, I would certainly assist them in their journey to become part of the worldwide community of my faith. So none of this I would consider proselytizing.

Except...that it is. that's what proselytizing IS.

And I should know. I used to be an official missionary. You know, one of those people who went door to door? If anybody knows what proselytizing is, it would be me. What you have described is the very best and most effective methods of proselytizing.

I would avoid any manipulation, coercion or deception which certainly runs contrary to the truthfulness and trsutworthiness that is at the foundation of any genuine religion.

That's not proselytizing. That's scamming. And it's stupid. People who have been scammed into joining a religion almost always figure it out later, and leave. Generally bitterly.

Proselytizing on religious forum is against the rules btw. Some of you may be aware of rule 8:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

RF Rules

I've certainly experienced a great deal of proselytizing during my time on RF and have been accused of it myself.

So what is proselytizing to you and is it a good or bad thing.

There is the sort of proselytizing which is referred to in the rules, which I think is an active attempt to go find converts, when the purpose is strictly and only to get converts. You know, the 'can we set a date for your baptism?" sort of approach. There is a time and a place for that, and RF is neither the time nor the place.

Then there is the sort of proselytizing which is education, or perhaps is best known as 'planting seeds of curiosity.' This is answering questions others come up with first, correcting misinformation, and stuff like that. It IS proselytizing, sort of, because you are getting your ideas and beliefs out there for people to learn about, think about, and perhaps, someday, do something about. However, the purpose is to educate, not convert. Some have problems seeing the difference between the two.

Oh, and at my most intense knocking on the doors, if it were answered by the frazzled mom hanging on to two toddlers and a five year old, my first statement would have been "We're from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints, and you look like you need a break. My companion and I will help you with your little ones for a bit in exchange for a glass of water..."

Always worked. She got a break, the kids got to mess up two strangers, and we USUALLY got to talk a little about our beliefs. Everybody was happy. Now THAT"S proselytizing.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Well speaking from experiences, the culture of NZ is different than the culture of us North Americans (for obvious reasons) and breaking down into the microcosm of the United States the African-American community within the Baptist faith is also different than other Baptist. Because this requires a longer conversation I'll summarize and say that African-Americans in religion are vociferous people when it comes to the expression of faith. Add the history of racism and the adoption of Christianity including the fiery rhetoric of salvation you have what I've just described. Many Baptist preachers here often literally take the Biblical expression of voicing their devotion to God literally and often times many Baptist sermons are nothing more than praise concerts. The moment I've seen people "Crip walking" in a church all because they felt the "Holy Ghost" I stopped taking Christianity of this kind seriously.

It's sad because this sort of Christianity is what drove me away.

I’m sorry to hear your experiences with Christianity drove you away. To some extent I’ve had the same experience and so I’ve had to reframe my understanding of Christianity rather than reject it entirely. I don’t see you have rejected Christianity in its totality either.

Our countries do have some important similarities that are perhaps relevant to this thread.

1/ NZ and the USA both had the experience of being British colonies.

2/ The indigenous peoples of both our countries experienced oppression under colonial rule. Regardless, Christianity has been established.

3/ We both have stable democracies, have high levels of education, excellent life expectancy and are extremely prosperous compared to some parts of the world.

Differences include experiences of slavery. The British government had effectively abolished slavery when NZ was formally colonised. Slavery was part of the history of the USA and it took a long time to abolish. Racism and segregation existed for African Americans for a long time and still does to some degree.

The founding document for NZ was a treaty signed in 1840 between the British Crown and the tribal leaders of the Maori. I doubt if the USA had anything similar with the native Indians. Maybe I should learn about the bill of rights!

NZ currently has our third female prime minister a 38 year old unmarried women who recently had her first child while in office. I can’t see the USA having a female president anytime soon. Then again the same could be said about having an African American president until Obama was elected.

Jacinda Ardern - Wikipedia

NZ is much more secular than USA with much lower numbers of Christians despite once being a Christian country. Religion has largely fallen into disrepute here. Any politician that starts talking about religion too much doesn’t get too far. Americans seem to thrive on it.

Religion in New Zealand - Wikipedia

Hope I haven’t bored you with all that.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I don’t see you have rejected Christianity in its totality either.

Conceptually I don't reject the principles of Christianity, rather the theology that Jesus is the medium to God which I find incompatible to Jesus' historical rabbinical teachings. Because of the philosophical changes regarding the theology of Christianity such as the period of Arianism of Alexandria, to Homoousians of Cordoba, and finally Athanasian philosophy I've become skeptical of the authenticity of Christianity's philosophy as well as it's theology.

NZ is much more secular than USA with much lower numbers of Christians despite once being a Christian country. Religion has largely fallen into disrepute here. Any politician that starts talking about religion too much doesn’t get too far. Americans seem to thrive on it.

Very interesting...

Hope I haven’t bored you with all that.

No it was quite informative. I've always wondered how the Maori people acclimated to British rule and how it affected their culture.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Althought there is much doubt that those sticking to hypocrisy, those denying the support of taming, can be turned to a better, caught in confusion and pseudo liberality:

I’m not sure what you mean here.

There is no such as any religion without advices at first place. If there are no advices needed there is no need of religion. Guess your self in how far you are already freed of suffering and stress, having gained independecy in all regards or even gained any higher stage then bond to world.

Giving advice based on religious understanding is fine. Giving unsolicited admonition for the purposes of converting another is different.

And if the OP would not actually simply go right after getting every good advice out of it's sphere for it's communist ideologies, using here very political strategies to cut off what ever Sublime, if it wouldn't be a very strategical post to manipulate sheeps and gain their favor, it could be explained further.

I have a sense from your post you regard me as a hypocritical communist....a kind of wolf in sheep’s clothing! Is that what you’re trying to say?

May Householder correct if the OP wasn't actually a well considered "the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another" or the simply attempt to gain majority under sheeps for his communist sect and ideals which is after low worldly gains and does not tolerate others autonomy, but plunders and makes use from all sides for their gains and interests, imperialism.

?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Proselytizing can mean different things to different people. Some people may feel a duty to proselytize as part of their faith. Others may use the word in a pejorative way to criticise others who 'teach' their faith to others while insisting on being above whatever they perceive the word to mean.

So what is proselytising? To me it means trying to convert people from one religion or worldview to another. Personally I wouldn't try to convert anyone to my religion, but if someone had questions about my faith or were interested to learn I would certainly help them. If someone wanted to join my religion, if I believed they were sincere and understood what my faith was about, I would certainly assist them in their journey to become part of the worldwide community of my faith. So none of this I would consider proselytizing. I would avoid any manipulation, coercion or deception which certainly runs contrary to the truthfulness and trsutworthiness that is at the foundation of any genuine religion.

Proselytizing on religious forum is against the rules btw. Some of you may be aware of rule 8:

8. Preaching/Proselytizing
Creating (or linking to) content intended to convert/recruit others to your religion, spirituality, sect/denomination, or lack thereof is not permitted. Similarly, attempting to convert others away from their religion, spiritual convictions, or sect/denomination will also be considered a form of preaching. Stating opinions as a definitive matter of fact (i.e., without "I believe/feel/think" language, and/or without references) may be moderated as preaching.

RF Rules

I've certainly experienced a great deal of proselytizing during my time on RF and have been accused of it myself.

So what is proselytizing to you and is it a good or bad thing.

Proselytizing imv, for all intents and purposes , is an act of desperation.

Over the years , I discovered that proselytizing essentially is the hallmark of a religion that cannot stand on its own merits, and therefore necessitates a continual and consistent form of reinforcement and convincing in order to stay relevant and intact, whether it is employed for new potential adherents, or for the retention of present members.

Either way, it's a strong determination that a religion that requires and employs proselytization has effectively demonstrated in its own right there is a deficit that exists for which , without proselytization, will disappear into obscurity.

 

[Samana Johann]

I’m not sure what you mean here.

One without firm refuge or arrived at secure can not give refuge. Assuming that there are no such, why using the lable?

Giving advice based on religious understanding is fine. Giving unsolicited admonition for the purposes of converting another is different.

Why? One does not exclude the other. Yet both are not different if not even knowing where the palace is and how it looks like, yet engaging and encouraging in building a stairway to it.

One should follow a man of wisdom who rebukes one for one's faults, as one would follow a guide to some buried treasure. To one who follows such a wise man, it will be an advantage and not a disadvantage.

Story to Dhp 76

---

"Monks, could a person of no integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"

"No, lord."

"Good, monks. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity.'

"Could a person of no integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"

"No, lord."

"Good, monks. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity.'"...

"Now, monks, could a person of integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"

"Yes, lord."

"Good, monks. It is possible that a person of integrity would know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity.'

"Could a person of integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"

"Yes, lord."

"Good, monks. It is possible that a person of integrity would know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity.'

"A person of integrity is endowed with qualities of integrity; he is a person of integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills, the way he gives advice, the way he speaks, the way he acts, the views he holds, & the way he gives a gift.

"And how is a person of integrity endowed with qualities of integrity? There is the case where a person of integrity is endowed with conviction, conscience, concern; he is learned, with aroused persistence, unmuddled mindfulness, & good discernment. This is how a person of integrity is endowed with qualities of integrity.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in his friendship? There is the case where a person of integrity has, as his friends & companions, those contemplatives & brahmans who are endowed with conviction, shame, compunction; who are learned, with aroused persistence, unmuddled mindfulness, & good discernment. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in his friendship.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he wills? There is the case where a person of integrity wills neither for his own affliction, nor for the affliction of others, nor for the affliction of both. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he wills.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he gives advice? There is the case where a person of integrity gives advice neither for his own affliction, nor for the affliction of others, nor for the affliction of both. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he gives advice.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he speaks? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who refrains from lies, refrains from divisive tale-bearing, refrains from harsh speech, refrains from idle chatter. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he speaks.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he acts? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who refrains from taking life, refrains from stealing, refrains from illicit sex. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he acts.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the views he holds? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who holds a view like this: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the views he holds.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he gives a gift? There is the case where a person of integrity gives a gift attentively, with his own hand, respectfully, not as if throwing it away, with the view that something will come of it. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he gives a gift.

"This person of integrity — thus endowed with qualities of integrity; a person of integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills, the way he gives advice, the way he speaks, the way he acts, the views he holds, & the way he gives a gift — on the break-up of the body, after death, reappears in the destination of people of integrity. And what is the destination of people of integrity? Greatness among devas or among human beings."

— MN 110​

I have a sense from your post you regard me as a hypocritical communist....a kind of wolf in sheep’s clothing! Is that what you’re trying to say?

That's something householder could prove for himself. If no more thirst and hunger surely no danger.

?

Yes!?

 

[Dawnofhope]

It sounds as if your church takes pride in being known as a ‘proselytising’ church then extends the definition to include activities that many others wouldn’t consider proselytising at all. I don’t see anything wrong or offensive in your approach. It’s just different from how I would see it. As stated in the OP there are different perspectives on what proselytising is and isn’t. You’ve illustrated that point very well thanks.

Except...that it is. that's what proselytizing IS.

And I should know. I used to be an official missionary. You know, one of those people who went door to door? If anybody knows what proselytizing is, it would be me. What you have described is the very best and most effective methods of proselytizing.

The JWs and Mormons are the best known sects of Christianity in regards door to door activities so it’s good to hear from you. I’ve spoken to a number of Mormons who’ve come knocking. I’ve heard your message so in that respect your approach has been successful with me.

That's not proselytizing. That's scamming. And it's stupid. People who have been scammed into joining a religion almost always figure it out later, and leave. Generally bitterly.

Fair enough. I’d include these activities as part of proselytising but it’s semantics really.

There is the sort of proselytizing which is referred to in the rules, which I think is an active attempt to go find converts, when the purpose is strictly and only to get converts. You know, the 'can we set a date for your baptism?" sort of approach. There is a time and a place for that, and RF is neither the time nor the place.

Baha’is do door to door outreach in some neighbourhoods, usually to invite people to our activities that are open to all. There’s no definitive agenda to convert beyond though critics would argue there must be. So that would definitely be considered proselytising to you and quite a few others too.

Then there is the sort of proselytizing which is education, or perhaps is best known as 'planting seeds of curiosity.' This is answering questions others come up with first, correcting misinformation, and stuff like that. It IS proselytizing, sort of, because you are getting your ideas and beliefs out there for people to learn about, think about, and perhaps, someday, do something about. However, the purpose is to educate, not convert. Some have problems seeing the difference between the two.

If the purpose is to educate rather than convert, its not proselytising IMHO.

Oh, and at my most intense knocking on the doors, if it were answered by the frazzled mom hanging on to two toddlers and a five year old, my first statement would have been "We're from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints, and you look like you need a break. My companion and I will help you with your little ones for a bit in exchange for a glass of water..."

Always worked. She got a break, the kids got to mess up two strangers, and we USUALLY got to talk a little about our beliefs. Everybody was happy. Now THAT"S proselytizing.

It’s a good strategy, I agree. Thanks for your post.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Proselytizing imv, for all intents and purposes , is an act of desperation.

Over the years , I discovered that proselytizing essentially is the hallmark of a religion that cannot stand on its own merits, and therefore necessitates a continual and consistent form of reinforcement and convincing in order to stay relevant and intact, whether it is employed for new potential adherents, or for the retention of present members.

Either way, it's a strong determination that a religion that requires and employs proselytization has effectively demonstrated in its own right there is a deficit that exists for which , without proselytization, will disappear into obscurity.

Before Jesus was crucified He gave instruction for His disciples to spread the Gospel to all nations. I don’t know if you consider that proselytising. Regardless, it proved extremely effective.

 

[Dawnofhope]

One without firm refuge or arrived at secure can not give refuge. Assuming that there are no such, why using the lable?

I agree that one without firm refuge can not give refuge to others. In the West we speak of the blind leading the blind.

Why? One does not exclude the other. Yet both are not different if not even knowing where the palace is and how it looks like, yet engaging and encouraging in building a stairway to it.

One should follow a man of wisdom who rebukes one for one's faults, as one would follow a guide to some buried treasure. To one who follows such a wise man, it will be an advantage and not a disadvantage.

I agree we should follow men of wisdom. For me, Buddha was one such man. I don’t follow someone as a man of wisdom though, just because he makes such a claim.

"Monks, could a person of no integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"

"No, lord."

"Good, monks. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity.'

"Could a person of no integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"

"No, lord."

"Good, monks. It's impossible, there's no way, that a person of no integrity would know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity.'"...

"Now, monks, could a person of integrity know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity'?"

"Yes, lord."

"Good, monks. It is possible that a person of integrity would know of a person of no integrity: 'This is a person of no integrity.'

"Could a person of integrity know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity'?"

"Yes, lord."

"Good, monks. It is possible that a person of integrity would know of a person of integrity: 'This is a person of integrity.'

"A person of integrity is endowed with qualities of integrity; he is a person of integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills, the way he gives advice, the way he speaks, the way he acts, the views he holds, & the way he gives a gift.

"And how is a person of integrity endowed with qualities of integrity? There is the case where a person of integrity is endowed with conviction, conscience, concern; he is learned, with aroused persistence, unmuddled mindfulness, & good discernment. This is how a person of integrity is endowed with qualities of integrity.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in his friendship? There is the case where a person of integrity has, as his friends & companions, those contemplatives & brahmans who are endowed with conviction, shame, compunction; who are learned, with aroused persistence, unmuddled mindfulness, & good discernment. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in his friendship.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he wills? There is the case where a person of integrity wills neither for his own affliction, nor for the affliction of others, nor for the affliction of both. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he wills.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he gives advice? There is the case where a person of integrity gives advice neither for his own affliction, nor for the affliction of others, nor for the affliction of both. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he gives advice.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he speaks? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who refrains from lies, refrains from divisive tale-bearing, refrains from harsh speech, refrains from idle chatter. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he speaks.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he acts? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who refrains from taking life, refrains from stealing, refrains from illicit sex. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he acts.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the views he holds? There is the case where a person of integrity is one who holds a view like this: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are contemplatives & brahmans who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the views he holds.

"And how is a person of integrity a person of integrity in the way he gives a gift? There is the case where a person of integrity gives a gift attentively, with his own hand, respectfully, not as if throwing it away, with the view that something will come of it. This is how a person of integrity is a person of integrity in the way he gives a gift.

"This person of integrity — thus endowed with qualities of integrity; a person of integrity in his friendship, in the way he wills, the way he gives advice, the way he speaks, the way he acts, the views he holds, & the way he gives a gift — on the break-up of the body, after death, reappears in the destination of people of integrity. And what is the destination of people of integrity? Greatness among devas or among human beings."

— MN 110

I do enjoy the Words of Buddha you share.

That's something householder could prove for himself. If no more thirst and hunger surely no danger.

I know I’m not a communist, nor a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but if you think I am, I wish you well regardless. A wise man avoids giving or taking offence. I am not wise but that is what I aspire to.