Proselytism

[Hope]

The words 'proselytism' and 'proselytise' have been used on a number of occasions over the months on this board.

Whilst there is a very precise dictionary definition of the terms I wondered how posters here understand the term.

Without trying to skew the debate, I will simply state that whilst working in the Subcontinent during the 80s and 90s, the Indian and Nepalese Governments regularly used it in a very different way to the traditional British English meaning.

Incidentally, those of you who use Twitter might be interested in the various tweets last night from the Theos think tank and it's launch of it's report - 'The Problem with Proselytism'.

[ad_orientem]

It's often understood in a negative way, usually by unbelievers, but I don't see any reason why it should be understood in such a way. As with nearly all things there's a right way to do something and a wrong way.

[Sriram]

The words 'proselytism' and 'proselytise' have been used on a number of occasions over the months on this board.

Whilst there is a very precise dictionary definition of the terms I wondered how posters here understand the term.

Without trying to skew the debate, I will simply state that whilst working in the Subcontinent during the 80s and 90s, the Indian and Nepalese Governments regularly used it in a very different way to the traditional British English meaning.

Incidentally, those of you who use Twitter might be interested in the various tweets last night from the Theos think tank and it's launch of it's report - 'The Problem with Proselytism'.

The first proselytizing religion was Buddhism....long before Christianity. They are at it even now.  Then came Christianity with their missionaries and gospel teachings. St.Thomas was probably the first to begin the process in 52 CE in South India. Then came Islam with the sword and.... the muslim rule for 800 years.

Fortunately nothing much changed in India and muslims are even today only 15% and Christians only about 2%.   

[ad_orientem]

Or maybe you're just scared that you might actually be moved to convert? Maybe or maybe not but as I said, there are right ways to do things and wrong ways to do things and proselytism in that respect is no different.

[ad_orientem]

You definitely have a beef about something. Don't let it betray some insecurity in your own position.

[Rhiannon]

The problem with churches is that they are generally run by people. They should be run by labradors, or computers, or God. Anything but people.

[ad_orientem]

Of course the head of the Church is Christ and the Church on earth is guided by the Holy Spirit, but of course the Church needs people to govern it so that there is order.

[ad_orientem]

Ad O

Just a thought.

Not sure if this is your church but the Orthodox appear to have a different attitude to it.

http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/proselytize.aspx

In which case your church might not have the same history of it that comes with the rest of "Christianity"

Have you ever experienced it from other denominations?

If you haven't, because perhaps they see no reason to convert you, then maybe that is why you don't grasp the negativity in it.

Even the next link has a differant attitude on the subject.

http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/MathewesGreenProselytize.php

The first link quotes a passage from the "Panheresy of Ecumenism" and I would agree with it.

"What is the greatest expression of true love? The salvation of man in Christ. God became man in order to save mankind from the eternal death of falsehood and sin. Our Lord Jesus Christ, after the Resurrection, said to his Disciples: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded" (St Matthew 28:19-20). Not only the Holy Apostles, but their disciples, that is, the Orthodox, consider proselytism the most essential work of love In Christ: indeed, the return of heretics and other deluded people of this world to the truth of right belief and the Grace of Orthodoxy!"

[ad_orientem]

This is a link to a newspaper cutting showing Eastern Orthodox leaders want to stop other forms of christians doing that.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1696&dat=19920508&id=hPgaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mEcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3178,3138053&hl=en

In this one a Greek evangelist went to prison for it.

Apparently the Orthodox Church there is protected

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/october/greek-evangelist-faces-prison-time-for-proselytizing-/?mobile=false

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error. If only they had looked to the East. Orthodoxy should be protected in Orthodox countries.

[floo]

Proselytising, in my opinion, is a person forcing their faith down the throats of others using threats if people don't convert. That brand of 'preaching' is highly unpleasant and abusive. I think it should be illegal if aimed at kids and the vulnerable!

[Owlswing]

This is a link to a newspaper cutting showing Eastern Orthodox leaders want to stop other forms of christians doing that.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1696&dat=19920508&id=hPgaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mEcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3178,3138053&hl=en

In this one a Greek evangelist went to prison for it.

Apparently the Orthodox Church there is protected

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/october/greek-evangelist-faces-prison-time-for-proselytizing-/?mobile=false

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error. If only they had looked to the East. Orthodoxy should be protected in Orthodox countries.

I am truly glad that I am not as blinkered as you.

And no! NO! NO! i do noi agree that yours is the one true way - there is no way anyone can know if ANY religious belief is the ONE TRUE way - not even my own. It is a belief, a faith - it is NOT a fact!

In fact - your atitude to your own beliefs and to those of others are one of the reasons why so many are anti-religion.

[Hope]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

[Hope]

Proselytising, in my opinion, is a person forcing their faith down the throats of others using threats if people don't convert. That brand of 'preaching' is highly unpleasant and abusive. I think it should be illegal if aimed at kids and the vulnerable!

Hi Floo, thanks for actually answering the question which so far everyone else has skirted around.  However, I would disagree with your definition of the term.  The Oxford dictionary defines it as the act of

Converting or attempting to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another

From a Christian perspective, no human can convert another human; all they can do is introduce them to God.  It is the person, in conjunction with God, who chooses to convert.

What you describe is nothing more than abuse, and should have no place in a Christian's reportoire.

Interestingly, many developing nations use the term in the following way

encouraging a person to convert by offering inducements, such as food, a job or change in status

.  This is how the Indian and Nepalese governments used to use the term, and the Christian missions in the countries were more than happy to accept such a ban.

[ad_orientem]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low view of to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for instance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

[Owlswing]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

[ad_orientem]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

Not at all. "Fundamentalism" is a reductionist term, reductionism being something I would reject.

[Owlswing]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

Not at all. "Fundamentalism" is a reductionist term, reductionism being something I would reject.

You can reject it all you like - virtually every reference you make to your beliefs show an attachment to a set of rules that are totally inflexible and that is my definition of Fundamentalist!

[ad_orientem]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

Not at all. "Fundamentalism" is a reductionist term, reductionism being something I would reject.

You can reject it all you like - virtually every reference you make to your beliefs show an attachment to a set of rules that are totally inflexible and that is my definition of Fundamentalist!

Then you're using it incorrectly.

[Owlswing]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

Not at all. "Fundamentalism" is a reductionist term, reductionism being something I would reject.

You can reject it all you like - virtually every reference you make to your beliefs show an attachment to a set of rules that are totally inflexible and that is my definition of Fundamentalist!

Then you're using it incorrectly.

And your opinion of my use of the term means zip to me! You call it what you like - Orthodoxy, presumably - I call it Fundamentalism - so much more appropriate considering what a "fundament" is, and me considering that most hide-bound Christians talk out of theirs. 

[ad_orientem]

Good! I have a low opinion of Protestantism especially, who went from error to deeper error.

What would those errors be, ad_o?

An inherent rationalism, iconoclasm, a low viewof to even outright rejection of the sacraments, scripture alone, to name just a few, all reasons why some went even so far as to adopt many of the ancient heresies such as Arianism (for insance some of the rebaptisers did just that).

Ad O - you are the perfect example of a Christian Fundamentalist.

Not at all. "Fundamentalism" is a reductionist term, reductionism being something I would reject.

You can reject it all you like - virtually every reference you make to your beliefs show an attachment to a set of rules that are totally inflexible and that is my definition of Fundamentalist!

Then you're using it incorrectly.

And your opinion of my use of the term means zip to me! You call it what you like - Orthodoxy, presumably - I call it Fundamentalism - so much more appropriate considering what a "fundament" is, and me considering that most hide-bound Christians talk out of theirs.

Then you're an idiot. Fundamentalism is about stripping the faith down to the bare minimum on which Christians should agree but you can't reduce the faith in such a way. It is there to be accepted in its entirety.

[Owlswing]

Then you're an idiot.

Ah-ha! Another member of the Bashful Anthony School of Debating!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There seems to be a down on the sharing of faith.
I actually think there are sinister underlyings in not sharing.
In Christianity there is the idea that sharing one's religion is like a begger showing other beggers trying to find food.
Not sharing one's religion in that model is therefore like not sharing the goodies.

Otherwise not sharing food betrays it's disposability.

[Rhiannon]

But what to do when the evidence says that talking to non-believers about Jesus puts them off? Perhaps the way to bring people into your church would be through how you live and not what you say?

[Owlswing]

But what to do when the evidence says that talking to non-believers about Jesus puts them off? Perhaps the way to bring people into your church would be through how you live and not what you say?

This has been my argument against all sects of Christianity. They have a lot of people who, in private and in public - the proselytisers - can talk the talk with remarkable skill; what they lack is the ability to walk the walk.

As has been shown upon this forum more times than you could poke a stick at - even the street preachers, manic and otherwise, cannot admit that their beliefs are matters of faith and not fact.

Many are also, apparently incapable of following the tenets of their relgion, some pious (verbally) Christians are some of those who act in the most un-christain ways.

I am seriously glad that one of the tenets of Pagan belief is that followers are not permitted to engage in proselytism.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

But what to do when the evidence says that talking to non-believers about Jesus puts them off? Perhaps the way to bring people into your church would be through how you live and not what you say?

Yes People learn about things in different ways but I think there is the fact that Christianity is as big and as comprehensive a commitment as you can get.
It is so big I think that if people feel antipathy towards it they need to be asking themselves why.