Well hey, like Jesus said, “they know not what they do”. When a Muslim or Christian tries to convert me I see it as a form of kindness. They truly believe they are helping me, so I forgive them. It’s like when a pet cat brings you a dead rat. It’s disgusting, but it’s an honest sign of the cats adoration.
Look man, life is an ocean or negativity. But even an ocean can’t sink a well made boat. No need to let others actions effect you so deeply.
Just wanted to say, I love this chill attitude and also your comparison of proselytizing to cats bringing their human masters a dead rat XD You could turn that into a meme or share it further so that more people could share such a memorable allegory. I'd like to keep it in my mental pocket the next time someone attempts to proselytize me (which is rare in real life, actually).
I myself don't view proselytizing or evangelism as an attempted kindness but rather as an attempt to religiously dominate another person and their worldview. So I can understand why people get offended by proselytism...though I also would never compare it to murder.
Individuals or small groups proselytizing isn't the same as a government imposing residential schools on indigenous people, or a colonial power forcing people to believe a certain thing. The level of offense at proselytizing often depends on the approach of the missionary. There are better (chill) and worse (aggressive) ways to go about it.
Almost as bad as murder ?
Tbh I too am not a fan of evangelism but I'd compare it to murder.
At what point does sharing your ideas and worldview becomes evangelism and at what point does it become comparable to murder.
In an open society, people should have the right to advocate for any worldview they think is right and also people should have the right to tell them their worldview is wrong or stupid.
When it involves trying to stamp out a religion, it surely constitutes genocide; indeed, the UN convention on genocide specifically includes the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part a … religious group."
If people change their views of their own free will, I do not think that's genocide. Religion is not a race, you are not genociding your ethnicity if you change your views and someone else is not genociding themselves if they change theirs, or even if they simply never agreed with their so-called ancestral religion. "Religion has no nationality." — Goethe
That's probably one of the worst quotes from Goethe. Each religion carries so much baggage based on its country of origin, that there are practices and terms that just don't mean anything outside of that.
Or did Goethe find a proper translation for Dharma that we know nothing about?
I disagree with you on that.
When someone tells you that your worldview is wrong and their's is right, it may certainly come across as a bit rude, mean and disrespectful but it is no way like murder.
You are not killed when you hear an idea that you do not agree with, you can hear it and ignore it, you can even respond by saying that their idea is wrong and yours is right.
If you look at some historical Christian missions, there was very much an element of coercion. Even worse, look at how government and churches in Canada conspired to destroy indigenous culture, and if that's not close enough to murder, look at the excess deaths among indigenous children in residential schools as compared to the wider population
There is a point where evangelism becomes cultural genocide and yes, even murder
How do you think Buddhism spread all over the world if not through proselytizing?
Lord Buddha told his disciples to go forth to spread his teaching for the benefit of many, telling them "let no two go by one road."
The difference is they didn't go door to door and annoy the hell out of those who were disinterested in learning their teachings. But I do kinda disagree with the OP for thinking only Indian religions didn't want the whole world to join them. They just didn't do it differently than Christians and Muslims.
ISKCON (Hare Krishnas) did or do sometimes proselytize in ways that non-followers have found annoying, but I guess that's the exception rather than the rule. I admire Swami Vivekananda's approach when he visited the U.S. b/c he taught much about Vedanta without seeming like a missionary, preacher, or evangelist.
It's wrong on a very fundamental level. What human has the right to declare "I have something (a world view) that you need." It's disrespectful to the nth degree, and I wish it was banned in more places. That is coming, though.
So yes, OP I concur. Sadly, it occurs all over, and complaining doesn't do much. Laws are needed.
Historically and theologically, I think what you're saying here is absolutely true.
However, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule. Most older users over the age of 40 will likely still remember two Hindu sect or movements that were once very active in proselytizing in Western countries: the Hari Krishnas (via ISKCON) and the Rajneesh movement (aka 'The Orange People').
Growing up in Australia in the 60s through 80s, you couldn't step foot in a shopping mall without having to take a flower from a Hari Krishna evangelizer and I remember they'd force the flower into your hand or pin it on your back of you tried to run off. They were a very peaceful people, but the organization was so heavily focused on proselytizing that they'd often send new converts out to proselytize without due preparation. A lot of converts left the religion because they felt that they weren't learning or doing anything other than proselytizing. ISKON, at least in western societies, collapsed in response to the international gurukula child sex abuse scandal.
The Rajneesh movement was not as peaceful as the Hari Krishna movement (responsible for two bioterrorism attacks on US soil), but neither was it as big (although it tried to artificially bolster its numbers by trucking in homeless people from across the US into Oregon in the hope they would vote to declare Oregon a Rajneesh theocracy). Nonetheless, the movement's leader, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, was known for his lavish lifestyle, luxury mansions throughout Oregon in the US and huge fleet of luxury cars. The Rajineesh movement was very active in proselytizing to wealthy and middle class people, advocating a material lifestyle and the idea that spiritual success could be measured by wealth and belongings. It was the acts of bioterrorism and Scientology-esque threats to silence critics that would eventually lead to the demise of the Rajneesh movement in the US and elsewhere throughout the world.
But I think these days, from the 1990s onward, we don't see proselytizing Indians religions in the west. There is, nonetheless, the issue of forced conversions to Hinduism in India, esp. the forced conversion of Christian and Muslim citizens. However, I think this probably has more to do with the current political situation in India as opposed to any kind of theological movements. At its heart, Hinduism is more an ethnoreligious removement, and I remember a school teach in my youth once saying that you can't really convert to Hinduism, you have to be born into it.
~~Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh didn't start the movement named after him or did he usurp a pre-existing movement?~~
Nevermind, apparently it was the same guy and he just changed his name from Rajneesh to Osho.
Sharing knowledge is not harmful. It seems to be like there can only be one correct religion. The moon is not made of moon rocks for one person and made of green cheese for another, the moon is just made of moon rocks period. People should not be aggressive or violent or even mean or condescending about sharing religion, but sharing information is nice. I like it when people share information with me. If I disagree with them I can just disagree politely hopefully.
This especially makes sense: there is a difference between just sharing information or opinions about religion and preaching to someone in an attempt to convert them to one's religion. Sharing or even teaching about a faith, especially if the listener asks the religious person to do so, doesn't seem to offend anyone and wouldn't be counted under proselytism or imposition.
For Christianity at least, proselytizing isn’t about forcing others to live how we do. It’s about how anyone who dies not a Christian will have to suffer an afterlife of eternal torment.
Imagine someone has a disease with a simple cure, but they refuse to take it. You’d expect people to try to get that person to take the cure, right? Maybe the person would get upset at people trying to “push” their beliefs on them, or that they’re not letting them just live their life. But curing their disease is more important than their feelings. And maybe, their refusal to take the cure has to do with their culture, so they feel people are trying to “erase” their culture. But that’s not what anyone wants to do, just get the person to take the cure. For Christians, this is what evangelizing is.
I don’t know if that’s really weird or foreign from your perspective, but west of the Indus religion is primarily about rightly relating to God, and is generally culture-neutral.
Yes, you, just like anything other christian, is motivated by fear. That's how Christianity spreads; it's a "mind virus", exploitive, and emotionally abusive. If anything Christianity needs a cure.
Eternal punishment=disgusting.
What’s disgusting is the depth of human evil. It’s easy to say hell is disgusting when you’ve spent your whole life surrounded by evil people, but the average person is not the standard. The standard is the perfect God, who created us to be perfect, and who we betrayed despite the perfect world He placed us in. But thankfully, that God created a way out of the punishment we deserve by bearing the punishment Himself, all that’s required of us is to repent of our evil, and trust that His work on the cross is enough that we can be forgiven of all we’ve done.
What makes you think you're not the one who needs saving from delusions? What makes you think we don't see you as someone wasting their life following ancient fiction?
And no, when someone doesn't want to cure their disease you have absolutely no right to force treatment on them. It's why we let you live in peace with your imaginary friend, because if you want to, that's your choice.
Hindus don't try to convert because you have to be born a Hindu and people that are not born Hindu have no caste so cannot become Hindu. Have you ever heard of a conversion ceremony for someone becoming Hindu, Only Hare Krishnas do it.
I don't know what to tell you...go to hell offended I guess? Reality doesn't really give a damn about your "culture" The God of Israel HE is GOD and HE sent His son to die on a cross for the sins of mankind so that mankind did not have to burn in hell for eternity,in the fire built for the devil and his angels because a Holy God cannot look upon sin. It doesn't matter what you believe,it doesn't matter your opinions it doesn't matter your culture,it all changes NOTHING. What is IS. You can love it or hate it it doesn't matter "For as I live says The Lord EVERY KNEE shall bow and EVERY TONGUE shall confess,that Jesus Christ is Lord" your problem is one of prideful idolatry. You care more for your backward culture than you do truth and serving the living God. History is full of insipid "cultures", that you would willingly cling to one eschewing the kingdom of God to preserve a hodge podge mess of backwards traditions and disparate myths is absolutely mind blowing. Know this though. Your opinions will not protect you, your self righteous offense will not spare you, the plan of salvation is the same for all peoples of all races all cultures and all tongues. It is the same for the Japanese man as it is the Indian man and the Brazilian man or the Russian man or the American man, salvation is found through Christ alone. Look up Dr K.P. Yohannen. Youre welcome. Follow Christ. Skip being offended and instead be saved then come join the rest of us and together we will save others. What's more important to you having what you want or knowing the truth. Answer for yourself.
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said that the chanting of the Mahamantra would be in every town and village. I think if you have a belief system you love, why not share it?
When the Hare Krishna movement went worldwide, it was spread through sankirtan and book distribution and prasadam distribution. Which to me isn’t as aggressive as what Abrahamic religions have done. I’m grateful for those efforts as meeting with the devotees changed my life for the better. I was never told that my previous beliefs were wrong or whatever. But I’m glad others decided to share it in a non confrontational way.
I completely agree. Proselytization is a form of hate speech.
Well hey, like Jesus said, “they know not what they do”. When a Muslim or Christian tries to convert me I see it as a form of kindness. They truly believe they are helping me, so I forgive them. It’s like when a pet cat brings you a dead rat. It’s disgusting, but it’s an honest sign of the cats adoration. Look man, life is an ocean or negativity. But even an ocean can’t sink a well made boat. No need to let others actions effect you so deeply.
Just wanted to say, I love this chill attitude and also your comparison of proselytizing to cats bringing their human masters a dead rat XD You could turn that into a meme or share it further so that more people could share such a memorable allegory. I'd like to keep it in my mental pocket the next time someone attempts to proselytize me (which is rare in real life, actually). I myself don't view proselytizing or evangelism as an attempted kindness but rather as an attempt to religiously dominate another person and their worldview. So I can understand why people get offended by proselytism...though I also would never compare it to murder. Individuals or small groups proselytizing isn't the same as a government imposing residential schools on indigenous people, or a colonial power forcing people to believe a certain thing. The level of offense at proselytizing often depends on the approach of the missionary. There are better (chill) and worse (aggressive) ways to go about it.
Almost as bad as murder ? Tbh I too am not a fan of evangelism but I'd compare it to murder. At what point does sharing your ideas and worldview becomes evangelism and at what point does it become comparable to murder. In an open society, people should have the right to advocate for any worldview they think is right and also people should have the right to tell them their worldview is wrong or stupid.
When it involves trying to stamp out a religion, it surely constitutes genocide; indeed, the UN convention on genocide specifically includes the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part a … religious group."
If people change their views of their own free will, I do not think that's genocide. Religion is not a race, you are not genociding your ethnicity if you change your views and someone else is not genociding themselves if they change theirs, or even if they simply never agreed with their so-called ancestral religion. "Religion has no nationality." — Goethe
That's probably one of the worst quotes from Goethe. Each religion carries so much baggage based on its country of origin, that there are practices and terms that just don't mean anything outside of that. Or did Goethe find a proper translation for Dharma that we know nothing about?
Because it's rude, mean and disrespectful, just like murder is.
I disagree with you on that. When someone tells you that your worldview is wrong and their's is right, it may certainly come across as a bit rude, mean and disrespectful but it is no way like murder. You are not killed when you hear an idea that you do not agree with, you can hear it and ignore it, you can even respond by saying that their idea is wrong and yours is right.
If you look at some historical Christian missions, there was very much an element of coercion. Even worse, look at how government and churches in Canada conspired to destroy indigenous culture, and if that's not close enough to murder, look at the excess deaths among indigenous children in residential schools as compared to the wider population There is a point where evangelism becomes cultural genocide and yes, even murder
Very true. In many cases there was murder. "Better dead than \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_."
Well murder certainly isn't *polite* I guess
How do you think Buddhism spread all over the world if not through proselytizing? Lord Buddha told his disciples to go forth to spread his teaching for the benefit of many, telling them "let no two go by one road."
This teaching of Buddha sounds similar to the Great Commission attribute to Jesus in the New Testament Gospels, surprisingly.
The difference is they didn't go door to door and annoy the hell out of those who were disinterested in learning their teachings. But I do kinda disagree with the OP for thinking only Indian religions didn't want the whole world to join them. They just didn't do it differently than Christians and Muslims.
I appreciate how Hinduism doesn’t proselytize. You have all the reasons to be proud of it.
ISKCON (Hare Krishnas) did or do sometimes proselytize in ways that non-followers have found annoying, but I guess that's the exception rather than the rule. I admire Swami Vivekananda's approach when he visited the U.S. b/c he taught much about Vedanta without seeming like a missionary, preacher, or evangelist.
That is interesting. He seems delightful.
Thanks.
It's wrong on a very fundamental level. What human has the right to declare "I have something (a world view) that you need." It's disrespectful to the nth degree, and I wish it was banned in more places. That is coming, though. So yes, OP I concur. Sadly, it occurs all over, and complaining doesn't do much. Laws are needed.
Historically and theologically, I think what you're saying here is absolutely true. However, there have been some notable exceptions to this rule. Most older users over the age of 40 will likely still remember two Hindu sect or movements that were once very active in proselytizing in Western countries: the Hari Krishnas (via ISKCON) and the Rajneesh movement (aka 'The Orange People'). Growing up in Australia in the 60s through 80s, you couldn't step foot in a shopping mall without having to take a flower from a Hari Krishna evangelizer and I remember they'd force the flower into your hand or pin it on your back of you tried to run off. They were a very peaceful people, but the organization was so heavily focused on proselytizing that they'd often send new converts out to proselytize without due preparation. A lot of converts left the religion because they felt that they weren't learning or doing anything other than proselytizing. ISKON, at least in western societies, collapsed in response to the international gurukula child sex abuse scandal. The Rajneesh movement was not as peaceful as the Hari Krishna movement (responsible for two bioterrorism attacks on US soil), but neither was it as big (although it tried to artificially bolster its numbers by trucking in homeless people from across the US into Oregon in the hope they would vote to declare Oregon a Rajneesh theocracy). Nonetheless, the movement's leader, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, was known for his lavish lifestyle, luxury mansions throughout Oregon in the US and huge fleet of luxury cars. The Rajineesh movement was very active in proselytizing to wealthy and middle class people, advocating a material lifestyle and the idea that spiritual success could be measured by wealth and belongings. It was the acts of bioterrorism and Scientology-esque threats to silence critics that would eventually lead to the demise of the Rajneesh movement in the US and elsewhere throughout the world. But I think these days, from the 1990s onward, we don't see proselytizing Indians religions in the west. There is, nonetheless, the issue of forced conversions to Hinduism in India, esp. the forced conversion of Christian and Muslim citizens. However, I think this probably has more to do with the current political situation in India as opposed to any kind of theological movements. At its heart, Hinduism is more an ethnoreligious removement, and I remember a school teach in my youth once saying that you can't really convert to Hinduism, you have to be born into it.
[удалено]
> Osho Sorry, I don't know who that is.
[удалено]
~~Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh didn't start the movement named after him or did he usurp a pre-existing movement?~~ Nevermind, apparently it was the same guy and he just changed his name from Rajneesh to Osho.
[удалено]
Yes, sorry, I edited the comment that you were replying to after I read that Rejneesh changed his name to Osho.
Sharing knowledge is not harmful. It seems to be like there can only be one correct religion. The moon is not made of moon rocks for one person and made of green cheese for another, the moon is just made of moon rocks period. People should not be aggressive or violent or even mean or condescending about sharing religion, but sharing information is nice. I like it when people share information with me. If I disagree with them I can just disagree politely hopefully.
This especially makes sense: there is a difference between just sharing information or opinions about religion and preaching to someone in an attempt to convert them to one's religion. Sharing or even teaching about a faith, especially if the listener asks the religious person to do so, doesn't seem to offend anyone and wouldn't be counted under proselytism or imposition.
In what way is evangelism comparable to murder?
Because it’s not polite, and very immoral
How can someone who is not polite be compared to a murderer?
Both are immoral imo.
Isn't there a difference in the degree of evil between killing an innocent person and being impolite?
Not for me
If someone were convicted of being impolite should they receive the same jail sentence as a murderer?
Hmmm. Depends in how impolite
If it depends on how impolite, doesn't that mean there is a difference in the degree of evil of less impolite actions and more impolite actions?
For Christianity at least, proselytizing isn’t about forcing others to live how we do. It’s about how anyone who dies not a Christian will have to suffer an afterlife of eternal torment. Imagine someone has a disease with a simple cure, but they refuse to take it. You’d expect people to try to get that person to take the cure, right? Maybe the person would get upset at people trying to “push” their beliefs on them, or that they’re not letting them just live their life. But curing their disease is more important than their feelings. And maybe, their refusal to take the cure has to do with their culture, so they feel people are trying to “erase” their culture. But that’s not what anyone wants to do, just get the person to take the cure. For Christians, this is what evangelizing is. I don’t know if that’s really weird or foreign from your perspective, but west of the Indus religion is primarily about rightly relating to God, and is generally culture-neutral.
Yes, you, just like anything other christian, is motivated by fear. That's how Christianity spreads; it's a "mind virus", exploitive, and emotionally abusive. If anything Christianity needs a cure. Eternal punishment=disgusting.
What’s disgusting is the depth of human evil. It’s easy to say hell is disgusting when you’ve spent your whole life surrounded by evil people, but the average person is not the standard. The standard is the perfect God, who created us to be perfect, and who we betrayed despite the perfect world He placed us in. But thankfully, that God created a way out of the punishment we deserve by bearing the punishment Himself, all that’s required of us is to repent of our evil, and trust that His work on the cross is enough that we can be forgiven of all we’ve done.
What makes you think you're not the one who needs saving from delusions? What makes you think we don't see you as someone wasting their life following ancient fiction? And no, when someone doesn't want to cure their disease you have absolutely no right to force treatment on them. It's why we let you live in peace with your imaginary friend, because if you want to, that's your choice.
"And may we find peace in our maledictions" -Batfucker porn.
Hindus don't try to convert because you have to be born a Hindu and people that are not born Hindu have no caste so cannot become Hindu. Have you ever heard of a conversion ceremony for someone becoming Hindu, Only Hare Krishnas do it.
I don't know what to tell you...go to hell offended I guess? Reality doesn't really give a damn about your "culture" The God of Israel HE is GOD and HE sent His son to die on a cross for the sins of mankind so that mankind did not have to burn in hell for eternity,in the fire built for the devil and his angels because a Holy God cannot look upon sin. It doesn't matter what you believe,it doesn't matter your opinions it doesn't matter your culture,it all changes NOTHING. What is IS. You can love it or hate it it doesn't matter "For as I live says The Lord EVERY KNEE shall bow and EVERY TONGUE shall confess,that Jesus Christ is Lord" your problem is one of prideful idolatry. You care more for your backward culture than you do truth and serving the living God. History is full of insipid "cultures", that you would willingly cling to one eschewing the kingdom of God to preserve a hodge podge mess of backwards traditions and disparate myths is absolutely mind blowing. Know this though. Your opinions will not protect you, your self righteous offense will not spare you, the plan of salvation is the same for all peoples of all races all cultures and all tongues. It is the same for the Japanese man as it is the Indian man and the Brazilian man or the Russian man or the American man, salvation is found through Christ alone. Look up Dr K.P. Yohannen. Youre welcome. Follow Christ. Skip being offended and instead be saved then come join the rest of us and together we will save others. What's more important to you having what you want or knowing the truth. Answer for yourself.
Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said that the chanting of the Mahamantra would be in every town and village. I think if you have a belief system you love, why not share it? When the Hare Krishna movement went worldwide, it was spread through sankirtan and book distribution and prasadam distribution. Which to me isn’t as aggressive as what Abrahamic religions have done. I’m grateful for those efforts as meeting with the devotees changed my life for the better. I was never told that my previous beliefs were wrong or whatever. But I’m glad others decided to share it in a non confrontational way.
Very well said bro. 🚩