I’m sure I’m not the first one to ever come up with this line of thought, and no doubt it’s been posted on the dope before. I am not a bible scholar, or an expert on religious history, so some of these ideas may be erronous. I was reading an excerpt from Gibbons about Christians destorying pagan temples after Rome outlawed paganism and it started the following train of thought in my mind.
According to christian thought, one can only be a christian and go to heaven if they accept and have faith in Jesus(and if you’re catholic, you have to take communion and confess as well, to my knowledge). But Jesus is the big thing here. God’s love supposed to be a gift, freely given, and the choice upon each person to accept that or not.
Well, a lot of missionaries seem to be a bit more agressive then that. Often they try to guilt or shame one into converting. They beat people over the head with the threat of eternal hellfire. They make non-believers social outcasts.
And in a number of cases, it’s “Convert or we kill you and burn down your house”.
In the US and I suspect Europe as well, Contracts agreed to under duress are not considered valid and binding. You’re not agreeing of your own free will. You’re agreeing because you have no choice(except for the communist choice). At least, contracts aren’t supposed to be valid under said condiitons.
So, if you convert to Christinaity because a gang of heavily armed men came into your town and starting killing, torturing and/or robbing everyone who didn’t convert, isn’t that duress? And should one convert under said conditions, are they really a christain in the eyes of God/Jesus? After all, they probably had no interest in conversion until thier life and family were threatened and did it only because of fear of punishment rather then any feeling for God or Christ.
They may not actually believe at all, but rather, do just enough to make others believe they believe. Go to church, then go home and pray to Odin. Or maybe pray to Odin in church, just in their mind.
Related, and more murky, is agressive missonizing. Say someone converts because of peer pressure or to keep the missionaries from harassing them every time they walk down the street. The same applies. People who convert may not be converting because they see the truth in the message and want what is offered in the religion, but rather, because they just want to be left alone. It seems like it misses the point entirely. Sure, they’re christians in the eyes of the community, but if they don’t really believe, does it matter in the eyes of God?
If childern are raised in church but never know anything else, do they actually have a choice in the matter? Can they really be christians because they never have actually make the choice to believe, but have belief thrust upon them?
So my point is: If you convert for the wrong reasons, are you no better off then if you hadn’t converted at all? If christinaity is supposed to be about choice, then can people who never have the choice actually be christians? If one is never given the proper choice, are they damned?
And does agressive missionizing become counterproductive because people aren’t actually believing and converting in their heart and soul, and because the sellers of christinaity come off looking like supreme jackasses, are likely never to, in essance, being damned because the missionaries made it hard or impossible to ever willingly have the faith?
In converse, if you fail to convert because the missionary you meet is a total dick and you find that is a non sequiter to the “God is love” message, have you been given a choice?
I’m already a weak christian and I’m having a hard time reconciling these questions with what little faith I have left.