Proselytism

[Hope]

The drive to 'modernise' church music has come from two quarters.

Again a slight misunderstanding, Rhi.  It has also come from a third quarter - younger members of the congregation who grew up with first rock, then disco, then more modern forms of music, including World music.  Your points are perfectly legit. but probably have a lesser impact than you like to think.

Remember that Church music has always been in flux.  The Wesleys' hymns used styles of music that were popular at the time; many of the hymns written by Moody and Sankey are set to music borrowed from the music-halls of the time.

By the way, trying to be 'more relevant' to the young was bound to fail, because it never matcjhed the music of the youth - it was always the music of the 20- and 30 year-olds, not youth.

[Shaker]

Precisely, Udayana, it was looking at the best way to reach non-believers.

Start offering something believable, perhaps?

[Udayana]

The "Talking Jesus" survey was supposedly from a representative sample. It was conducted by an organisation trying to find the best ways to evangelise Christianity.

"This piece of research has been conducted with the hope and prayer that it will
be a major catalyst for effective and focused evangelism in the decades to come. "

http://www.talkingjesus.org/research/upload/Perceptions-of-Jesus-Christians-and-Evangelism-Executive-Summary.pdf

Precisely, Udayana, it was looking at the best way to reach non-believers.  After all, with the exception of ultra-fundamentalists, Christians don't try to 'evangelise' other Christians.  One doesn't 'evangelise Christianity'; one evangelises people.  You can have a perfectly good representative sample of any sub-group - one doesn't need the whole population to provide that.

By the way, if you look at the introduction, you will notice that there was second, separate, survey carried out amongst some 1500 practising Christians.  Whilst the original survey was carried out on a balanced group of 2500-odd it would, in the circumstances, seem odd to include Christians in the first one as well as it could provide a skewed outcome.  I assume the second survey was designed as some sort of control group.

It wasn't a sample of non-Christians but supposed to be nationally representative. 57% self-identified as Christians (with 9% practicing). To look at some aspects in depth they had the additional survey of practicing Christians. 

Anyway, it's somewhat moot at this point.

I had two women call this morning. "Ah" they said when I opened the front door, one started pulling on a corner of "Good news" (?) . "err no ... thanks" I said. Another "Ah" and off they went.

[ProfessorDavey]

But another has been the cost and state of many church organs and the lack of decent organists, and a shortage of choir members. My local churches couldn't dream of having decent choral music on a regular basis. Much easier and cheaper to have a bloke with a guitar or even just a praise CD downloaded and played through a speaker.

You are almost certainly right, but oh how short sighted.

Sure restoring a church organ is a huge cost (but often now that can be subsidised through various charitable foundations), but actually even if you don't have the original organ a decent quality modern electric instrument costs perhaps £1k and may need amplifying (some already include sufficient amplification for most churches), but that's a single instrument. Of course traditional choirs don't need amplifying at all - they are capable of filling a church with music and of course many churches are designed to naturally amplify that sound through natural resonance.

So we've replaced that with excruciating 'folk/rock' groups involving loads of instruments that individually need amplifying and also singers who couldn't fill a shed with sound, let alone a church and need amplifying too. And what happens - the churches end up needing complex PA systems to deal with their new approach to music. I know of a number of local churches that have spent literally tens of thousands on such PA systems.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Precisely, Udayana, it was looking at the best way to reach non-believers.

Start offering something believable, perhaps?

Apparently the number of hits on the Dawkins websites is declining.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I've often wondered why the mainstream UK-based Christian sects actually bother with evangelising in this day and age.

After all, anyone not already involved but wanting to find out more isn't exactly going to struggle to find a point of contact, which I'd imagine is about as easy as checking out where the local golf clubs are.

Do you know I imagine you as Gordon as a cross between Alex Salmond and Bruce Forsyth. I bet you have got Bruce's political acumen and Alex's twinkle toes.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Christian proselytism ...

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article4602163.ece

"Christians who speak openly about their faith with friends and colleagues are three times more likely to put them off God than attract them, research carried out privately by the Church of England has found.
The study found that 59 per cent of people “did not want to know more about Jesus Christ” after speaking to a practising Christian about their faith.
The survey of more than 2,500 adults discovered 42 per cent “felt glad” they did not share their friends’ faith after talking with them and 30 per cent felt “more negative” towards Jesus.
The stark findings will challenge the church, which is wrestling with the problem of declining and ageing congregations, with a quarter of churches in England having a weekly attendance of fewer than 16 worshippers.
The study, Talking Jesus: Perceptions of Jesus, Christians and evangelism in England, was commissioned by the Church of England and faith groups the Evangelical Alliance and Hope."

It merely demonstrates that the ego does not want to be challenged with any view which suggests it is not as ''in the pink'' as it would like to view itself.

Do you have any idea how egotistical that sounds?

To you maybe, but I can assure you there is no space for the ego when it's your ego which  is being challenged..........
I don't think you actually get What the call to repentance entails.

[Shaker]

Precisely, Udayana, it was looking at the best way to reach non-believers.

Start offering something believable, perhaps?

Apparently the number of hits on the Dawkins websites is declining.

1. No idea.

2. Says who or what?

3. I understand that your obsession with the man is overwhelming to the extent that you have to drag him into everything, but what does this have to do with the discussion?

[Outrider]

I've often wondered why the mainstream UK-based Christian sects actually bother with evangelising in this day and age.

They do it because it's the Church's only raison d'etre, Gordon.

That rather makes it sound like a Pyramid Scheme...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Of course. I'd expect nothing less 

Yes we know there is a gargantuan shitfeast on five year cycle.

[Shaker]

Of course. I'd expect nothing less 

Yes we know there is a gargantuan shitfeast on five year cycle.

What on earth are you on about?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Precisely, Udayana, it was looking at the best way to reach non-believers.

Start offering something believable, perhaps?

Apparently the number of hits on the Dawkins websites is declining.

1. No idea.

2. Says who or what?

3. I understand that your obsession with the man is overwhelming to the extent that you have to drag him into everything, but what does this have to do with the discussion?

We are talking about organised forms of worship and their declining success in spreading the word. The RDF fits that model surely?

[Outrider]

We are talking about organised forms of worship and their declining success in spreading the word. The RDF fits that model surely?

The only person who seems to see him as a figure of worship, Vlad, is you, adding him to Satan and Jesus in your monotheistic pantheon.

Perhaps traffic on his site is down - nothing on his site suggests it, but then I can imagine they wouldn't advertise the fact - maybe that's because the people that were going to learn either already have, or have realised that they never will?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

We are talking about organised forms of worship and their declining success in spreading the word. The RDF fits that model surely?

The only person who seems to see him as a figure of worship, Vlad, is you, adding him to Satan and Jesus in your monotheistic pantheon.

Perhaps traffic on his site is down - nothing on his site suggests it, but then I can imagine they wouldn't advertise the fact - maybe that's because the people that were going to learn either already have, or have realised that they never will?

O.

Nah mate, apparently when the great man turned up at the BBC to read his few lines for a Dr Who special one young actress reported her party were emotionally overcome by his presence and that she nearly fainted. It was in Radio Times passim.

[Gordon]

Do you know I imagine you as Gordon as a cross between Alex Salmond and Bruce Forsyth. I bet you have got Bruce's political acumen and Alex's twinkle toes.

I'll take that as a complement, Vlad.

To get into character(s), I'm guessing that you've noticed how easily I can soft-shoe shimmie around the steaming jobbies (Scottish word for 'turd') that you leave all over the Forum 

[Outrider]

Nah mate, apparently when the great man turned up at the BBC to read his few lines for a Dr Who special one young actress reported her party were emotionally overcome by his presence and that she nearly fainted. It was in Radio Times passim.

I can't help but think that you protest a little too much... you're secretly a Dawkins fan-boy, aren't you...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Do you know I imagine you as Gordon as a cross between Alex Salmond and Bruce Forsyth. I bet you have got Bruce's political acumen and Alex's twinkle toes.

I'll take that as a complement, Vlad.

To get into character(s), I'm guessing that you've noticed how easily I can soft-shoe shimmie around the steaming jobbies (Scottish word for 'turd') that you leave all over the Forum 

Come off it Gordy, You're famous for your deepfried antitheist Toelies.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What do you call it when Gordon's arguments come underfire?

Battered Keich.

[Outrider]

What do you call it when Gordon's arguments come underfire?

Battered Keich.

Depends on who they come under fire from - in this instance I'd call it 'an insight into a delusional attention-whore's fevered rantings, equal parts cringingly embarressing, desperately sad and slightly lacking, unusually, in references to popular evolutionary scientists'...

Not as pithy as your answer, I'll grant you.

O.

[Hope]

Possibly - probably, even - but not definitively so. Certainly I can imagine that perfectly devout Hindus, Muslims or Anglicans could be unhappy at overt proselytising from their Catholic friends, for instance.

Must say I've never met an Anglican, or Protestant for that matter, who has been unhappy at overt proselytising from Catholics - they usually simply argue back.  As for Muslims and Hindus, when were they believers in the sense I use the word - ie followers of Christ?

Genuinely, here, I wasn't aware that the law made a judgement on what was a Christian faith and what wasn't, do you have a reference source I could look at regarding that?

Sorry, O, I was working on outdated info., which I should have remembered changed in 2012.  Until then all churches/
Christian places of worship were 'excepted' in terms of charity status and some other tax issues, and came under the auspices of their denominational organisation - the Baptist Union of Great Britain, the Church of England, etc..

In 2012, each congregation (unless they had an annual income of less than £5K had to register individually).  The JWs and Mormons have never had that 'exception' ruling, something that they have been frustrated by.

The only way I have sourced this is by trawling though the Charities Commission site.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

attention-whore

Attention-whore?

.................Like it!

[Hope]

I had two women call this morning. "Ah" they said when I opened the front door, one started pulling on a corner of "Good news" (?) . "err no ... thanks" I said. Another "Ah" and off they went.

If 'Good News' possibly JWs.

[Hope]

That rather makes it sound like a Pyramid Scheme...

OK, pehaps you could explain your joke.  My brain is somewhat slower than usual at present.

[Outrider]

Must say I've never met an Anglican, or Protestant for that matter, who has been unhappy at overt proselytising from Catholics - they usually simply argue back.

I could imagine the situation, but I freely admit I don't know of any occasions it's happened.

As for Muslims and Hindus, when were they believers in the sense I use the word - ie followers of Christ?

It's entirely possible the writers of the report meant it in that sense as well - I was merely pointing out that it wasn't explicit from the elements reported.

Sorry, O, I was working on outdated info., which I should have remembered changed in 2012.  Until then all churches/
Christian places of worship were 'excepted' in terms of charity status and some other tax issues, and came under the auspices of their denominational organisation - the Baptist Union of Great Britain, the Church of England, etc..

In 2012, each congregation (unless they had an annual income of less than £5K had to register individually).  The JWs and Mormons have never had that 'exception' ruling, something that they have been frustrated by.

The only way I have sourced this is by trawling though the Charities Commission site.

Oh, OK. I knew there were some 'controversial' rulings by the Charity Commission, but I also recall some ruling (I think to do with the Scientologists and a wedding, if memory serves) where the courts set the precedent that charity commission status didn't determine what was a 'real' religion and what wasn't - I'll see if I can dig it up.

O.

[Outrider]

That rather makes it sound like a Pyramid Scheme...

OK, pehaps you could explain your joke.  My brain is somewhat slower than usual at present.

Pyramid schemes are systems where there isn't really a product, as such, people are simply paid to recruit more people, and the fee those people pay to join is split between the person that inducts them, the person that inducted them and so on...

I appreciate money isn't (necessarily - see 'Scientologists'!) changing hands, but as a concept, if the church only exists to recruit members to the church... what's the point?

O.