What is the silliest proselytizing line you've heard?

[Sunstone]

I can think of two that struck me as especially silly:

(1) "The bottom line is that more people have died for Christianity than for any other cause in the history of the world"

That person who spoke that line to me seemed to think that the sheer number of people who have died for a cause is reason enough to support that cause.

(2) "I checked all the religions in the world and only Christianity claims to have the Truth."

I doubted that he'd checked.

What's the silliest line you've heard? I don't mean to limit this to just Christianity. Or even to just proselytizing for a religion. Have you ever been proselytized by an atheist or an agnostic in a silly way?

 

[Bastet]

Well, I don't know if this counts, but I thought I'd share it anyway. I was sitting in a bus stop at my University one day (going back about 10 years now), and a young man approached me, sat down, and started talking. Well, I thought he was trying to pick me up...he was very friendly, asking questions about my study etc. Then he suggested we meet somewhere later that day ('what's this?', I thought, 'a date?!')...and he handed me a piece of paper he'd pulled out of his backpack. Not his phone number - a pamphlet about his church, and directions on how to get there. Maybe he thought I needed saving lol. I politely turned him down and caught a different bus.

 

[anders]

N/A.

The only effforts I have been exposed to are from door-knockning Jehova's Witnesses (less than once a year) and (even fewer) Mormons.

Normally, they don't even get a chance to push their stuff. After converting to my present set of (non-?)beliefs, some four years ago?, I have talked to two pairs of JW:s. The first two persons dídn't know a thing about their beliefs or the Bible, so that was a quick affair. Last month, two guys tried. One of them was quite smart, and we had a long and interesting talk before we parted as friends, none of us convincing the other party, of course.

 

[Druidus]

(1) "The bottom line is that more people have died for Christianity than for any other cause in the history of the world"

...

Try the Mayans and Aztecs, who had their religion and culture obliterated, because they were not Christian. Try the countries attacked during the Crusades. Try the ancient Druids, who were nearly obliterated, and were tortured in horrible ways, and yet still wouldn't give up their religion, and had to be killed. Try the Inuit. Try the native Americans. Try, basically, and non-Christian culture that came in contact with Cristian culture. Brutally tortured and murdered.

(2) "I checked all the religions in the world and only Christianity claims to have the Truth."

? Claiming to have the truth now validates it? I claim that the true way to God is to kill as many people as possible. Is that now the true religion? Will you now convert? lol


For me, I had this conversation:

-Fanatic

"Well, I know that Christianity is true, because God says so."


-Druidus

"Where did she say that?"

-Fanatic

"In the bible, of course. And God is a "he""

-Druidus

"Who wrote the bible?"

-Fanatic

"Men did, but it was divinely inspired.

-Druidus

"How do you know that it was divinely inspired?"

-Fanatic

"Because it says so, in the bible."

I was like "wtf?". The sad thing is, he failed to notice the circular logic.

 

[Jaymes]

What's the silliest line you've heard?

"Because there are pinecones, God exists."

No, really.

 

[Lightkeeper]

"I am going to heaven and I am going to walk on streets paved in gold."


Really, I thought there were no treasures in heaven.

 

[standing_on_one_foot]

"Well when you die, you'll see I'm right."

Not a proselytizing argument so much as a you're-going-to-burn-in-hell-haha! threat, but still, I like when people use it as a parting argument

 

[Melody]

...
Try the Mayans and Aztecs, who had their religion and culture obliterated, because they were not Christian. Try the countries attacked during the Crusades.

First, they weren't killed because they weren't Christian....it was because they weren't Catholic. A Catholic is not necessarily a Christian although a Christian might also be a Catholic...I think. I'm not sure if the church doctrine allows for that distinction since a Christian believes you're saved by believing in Christ and I think the Catholic Church has a bunch more rules.

Second, the difference in religion may be the excuse they used, but the real reason had little to do with religion and more to do with plunder.

 

[Druidus]

Plunder? They owned it anyway! Montezuma saw the Spanish captain and immediately proclaimed him the reincarnation of Quetzoactl, a God of the Aztecs. They were willing to follow whatever the Spanish said, and yet, they were massacred. Because they were "heretics".

Also, I realize the distinction between Catholic and Christian, however, the main belief behind both is in Jesus, and thus, are similar enough to be grouped under "Christian". The Druids were punished far after the land was taken. So were the Mayans and Aztecs, Native Americans, an many others.

Not to offend, however.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

A Catholic is not necessarily a Christian although a Christian might also be a Catholic...I think.

Did I miss something? Where is Linwood or Deut? I would venture that they would burn up a keyboard or two on this one. How can you make the statement that a Catholic is not necessarily a Christian? Protestants are people that disagreed with some of the Catholic church's teachings. If anything, I would say that a Catholic has more right to claim the title of "Christian" than a Protestant.
Somebody help me here - am I nuts?
Alas, the "excuse" that someone is not a Christian is the very point of the post of Druidus. Throughout history, more people have been killed, maimed, and tortured in the name of religion than for any other cause - and Christianity has an incredible amount of blood on its hands.
To the original question of the thread - you'll just love this Sunstone.
When I was in Junior High School (a long time ago and far, far away), we were given a pamphlet by an evangelist that came in to save a few more souls. On the back of the pamphlet was a list of points that doubted the existence of God and the fact that Christianity was the "one true way". At the bottom of the list was the following statement:
"If you believe in any of these points, you may be guilty of improper thinking".
My brother and I nearly died laughing that night.

TVOR

 

[Melody]

Also, I realize the distinction between Catholic and Christian, however, the main belief behind both is in Jesus, and thus, are similar enough to be grouped under "Christian".

Sorry...that's not accurate. Christians believe that their only salvation is through accepting Christ as their Saviour. Unless Catholicism has done a 180, this is not true of them. While they believe in Christ as Saviour, there are also lots more rules that have to be followed and sacraments, etc. Where are the Catholics. Perhaps they could address this better than I could.

 

[Melody]

Plunder? They owned it anyway! Montezuma saw the Spanish captain and immediately proclaimed him the reincarnation of Quetzoactl, a God of the Aztecs. They were willing to follow whatever the Spanish said, and yet, they were massacred. Because they were "heretics".

Yes, I think that's what I said. They were massacred because they weren't Catholic. The term "heretic" covered anyone who wasn't Catholic. If you read some of the history of the time it was pretty apparent that even if you converted, they'd find some excuse somewhere down the line to find you had lapsed...and burn you at the stake. I believe this was a common method of ridding themselves of the Jewish population.

They were after the gold and religion was the excuse to get rid of them. What need did they have for a bunch "savages" and gold when they could get rid of them and still have the gold...or so they thought.

 

[Melody]

Did I miss something? If anything, I would say that a Catholic has more right to claim the title of "Christian" than a Protestant.
Somebody help me here - am I nuts?

A right to claim a title? It's not a title....it's a belief system. A Christian not only believes that Jesus is the Christ, but that salvation is only found in accepting him as Saviour. Not following the rules and doctrines of a particular religion.

Take a poll among Catholics and I believe you'll find that the vast majority believe their admittance into heaven has to do with whether they go to church or confession, or miss getting one of the sacraments from the church.

I've been to a number of churches of various religions (presbyt., methodist, unitarian, etc.) and, while they read the gospel, there isn't a lot of emphasis on accepting Christ as their Saviour.

You can be a catholic or protestant and be a Christian, but just because you're one of those, it doesn't mean that you are a Christian.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Melody -

I have asked our good friends SOGPFF and Deut 32.8 to take a look at this thread. I don't have the depth of knowledge that either of these fine people have in the area of Catholicism or Christianity, but what you are saying just doesn't make sense to me. I may very well be wrong, that is why I have asked for more input. Please keep an eye on this thread to see what input they may have.

Also - Christianity is a belief system, as you stated. However, in this case, the people that you state are "using it as an excuse" are merely interested in the title - unless of course you would like to make the case that they are truly Christians exercising their faith.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[Ardhanariswar]

you may attend church and you may be a christian wannabee, but that certainly does not make you a christian. not everyone in a church is christian, not every object in a garaje is a car!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I have asked our good friends SOGPFF and Deut 32.8 to take a look at this thread.

I hate to disappoint, but I consider it a sectarian squabble with no possible resolution, since it's based on the illusion that we know how to take the NT and differentiate between fact, fable, and fabrication in such a way as to cull anything of historical value. Those who say 'a Christian is {X} because Jesus said {Y}' should pay serious attention to the scriptural reference to throwing stones and its implications.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I hate to disappoint, but I consider it a sectarian squabble with no possible resolution, since it's based on the illusion that we know how to take the NT and differentiate between fact, fable, and fabrication in such a way as to cull anything of historical value. Those who say 'a Christian is {X} because Jesus said {Y}' should pay serious attention to the scriptural reference to throwing stones and its implications.

Deut -
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying that you have no opinion or that we can't possibly resolve this? Either way, thanks for dropping by. Perhaps SOG will have a little insight.
Thanks,
TVOR

 

[Scott1]

Take a poll among Catholics and I believe you'll find that the vast majority believe their admittance into heaven has to do with whether they go to church or confession, or miss getting one of the sacraments from the church.

I am redeemed by the blood of Christ and I trust in Him alone for my salvation. As the Scriptures say, I am working out my salvation in "fear and trembling", knowing that good works are not my own, but by the grace of God.

Any Catholic who tells you salvation can be "earned" by good works or the Sacraments does not understand the faith.

Hope you understand and REMEMBER this.

Scott

 

[Mr Spinkles]

***MOD POST***

Hey folks-- I do enjoy the great discussion we're having here I'm afraid we're a bit off topic. This thread is supposed to be about "What is the silliest proselytizing line you've heard?". If you folks want, I can start up a new thread "Are Catholics Christians?" or "Druid Persecution" or "Heretic Persecution" or something.

Thanks everyone.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Point made Sprinkles - I started another thread entitled "Are Catholics Christians?"

Thanks,
TVOR