OK, then that’s what we’ll go with here.
[QUOTE]
**
One could also count Bibles in hotelrooms among that. Although when done in a secular nation I wouldn’t recommend this and I find it rather irritating, seen the fact that no other religious works are put available at the same time. Yet it is done. I have even seen it in Belgium.**
I assume it’s kosher to quote that here (no pun intended)…
Oops! Sorry about the screwed up coding. I meant to hit preview and hit submit instead… :smack:
I think we’ve been through this before a few times, but here goes:
Nobody is denying that there are people with a lust for power or a mercenary nature who use religious means to advance their own egos.
However, there a lot of people who sincerely believe that, e.g., if they don’t get through to you that you need to accept Jesus as savior, or proclaim the Ijmah (do I have that right, Aldebaran?), you will be sent to Hell by a vengeful God. (My own beliefs, and AFAIK Aldebaran’s, regarding the nature of God, are not these, but I am quite well acquainted with people who do believe that.)
Probably there’s a tinge of the desire for power in any leader of an organized religion – but for many it’s no more than a tinge. Jack Spong, for example, would never take the stances he does without being convinced that he’s right; he’s not looking for money. (From being part of the group organizing one of his speaking engagements, I know that he and his wife live on his pension, and money he earns from speaking goes to a foundation promoting his teachings, which he does not control.)
We (our soul) is still in the process of being fully created. Everything good we do is for improvement and growth of the soul. It has nothing to do with PR for G-d and everything to do with our own progress.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Aldebaran *
**hypno
No, I didn’t mean that God needs proselytizers to convince other to “follow him”. (Who can ever “follow” God?)**
Follow in the normal, every day sense of worshiping Him and obeying His commandments. Good heavens, is this the level to which this discussion is stooping? Nitpicking this kind of diction? If so, I’m done.
I meant that God doesn’t need humanity to be known by humanity, so why would there be a command to go around and advertize for God.
God doesn’t “need” humanity for any purpose whatever. It is a relationship of love, not need. Humanity was created for purposes of love, not for purposes of need. I mean, why on earth would you think that the Lord of the Universe would need humanity for anything whatever? Why would you start the analysis of “need” for any purpose, let alone this one?
By the way: How can you “learn more about God” when talking to others?
Have you really never had the experience of learning more about the subject by explaining it? Have you never entered into a relationship by teaching someone? As I said, your view is much too narrow.
**I agree that you can learn from others and that you may think you “serve” them with your talking without being asked for it. (I disagree on that point).
I also don’t assume that God would “suffer” if you didn’t proselytize. I say that with doing that, you act as if God depends on you to be known.
So the question is:
How can God be God if He depends on humans to be known.
And when you say that you learn more about God while proselytizing on people who didn’t ask you to do that, I think you are saying that in fact you abuse those people for your own good (sorry).
You claim that proselytizing isn’t done to gain converts. **
No, I claim that the method may have more meaning than just to gain converts – that more may be going on than the simple gaining of converts — that the act of evangelism may have more than one purpose. Evangelism is a full situation, not simply a goal oriented activity, that affects the evangelist, the recipient, and the bystander. It is not the only possible method that God could use to make Himself known to the world; it is a way by which He can use to spread His love, in many ways.
If you find it distasteful (as you seem to), then that is your problem. And if it is sometimes done badly, this should not be a surprise; sin infects evangelism as it infects all human activities. There will be evil evangelism as there will be evil lovemaking, evil medicine, and even evil parenting. There is no human activity that will not be infected by evil. We are human, and human activities are infected by human evil.
I think I’m done with this, given the kind of pedantic nitpicking I have seen above. The final word is yours; unless I see somthing of more substance than “how can you follow God”, I see nothing to respond to.
hypno, do you always tend to jump to such quick conclusions?
As I explained already since the very first posts I made on this board: English doesn’t belong to the languages I studied.
I don’t know how to explain what I meant with the sentence
" who can ever follow God"
if you don’t understand what I mean… And instead prefer to make a painting of me as if I’m behaving as some 12 year old trying to be witty.
As for your other comments:
You have every right to be convinced that “evangelisation” serves humanity.
I am convinced it is not, unless you see the charity done by religoius people as some form of evangelisation.
I can come into that reasoning, on condition that they don’t try to influence their “clients” to change their beliefs by accepting theirs.
The main reason why I have so many objections against the urge of people to porselytize, is exactly that they try to tear people away from their religion by telling or mirroring them that their is so much better.
Sorry, but no religion is “better” then any other one.
God is God, and He wouldn’t be God if He didn’t accept the prayers and honest whorship of A just because he follows other methods of worshipping then B.
And if you want to argue now that Atheists have no belief and need to be proselytized on for their own good…
They do. First of all they believe there is no God.
Secondly: They are capable themselves to discover the truth about that belief.
Thirdly: Maybe they honour God and obey His commands and guidelines to humanity in a way we (and they themselves) don’t directly distinct as such, but which God finds good enough.
You can’t say there are no good, kind, honest, decent, moral atheists who wouldn’t harm a fly and would give the last thing they have to someone in need… Can you?
To me that is worshipping God by honouring and caring for His creation.
Salaam. A
Polycarp
What has that answer to do with my post? I talk of a religious school advertizing among people of the same religion to get students. That is only the normal competition between schools of the same religion.
All what you describe falls under porselytizing, except for the sermon, since that is directed by a religious authority to people who are already following that religion.
Giving religious education to people of your religion can hardly be “proselyting” on them. If you follow a religion already, learning more aobut it and this become a better follower is what you do from the minute you accept that religion as being yours, no? So I should say that every help is a welcome one.
Salaam. A
That was asrivkin not me. But looking at your answr, it’s not a one-dimensional issue. Are there not four orthodox schools of theology in Islam? Would a devotee of one calling on a person holding another to change his perspective be considered as trying to make him a better, or worse, follower of God?
For Christians, spreading the Word is a priority, so the faith will grow. For those faiths that do not think spreading the faith is important, they will find a comfortable place in a history book, possibly, along with greek mythology.
I hope you succeed in convincing your Muslim brethren that testifying to what they believe is not necessary.
It is not MY OWN view, it’s the Catholic Church’s based on the fact the Christians are to follow Christ who is King, Prophet and Priest.
Come on!!! The Vatican is the size of my bathroom and it is not Jesus’ Kingdom, nobody’s said that. It is a HQ for the administrative parts of the Church, and thus, in theory, disposable.
Peace with you
(is it a good translation of “salaam alaikum”? (sp?))
For me, living as G-d would want me to is my priority. Helping people in need is my witness. Spreading the “Word”, when the word is that only your religion is sanctioned by G-d and only your message will give people eternal life; just doesn’t sound like a just G-d’s will. There is no church that is “right” with G-d, only people can be and that is not a religion. It is an attitude.
Well, what do you consider “the same religion”? Perhaps I went off on a tangent that was only obvious to me (and Polycarp, I suppose). I suspect Christians would consider Eastern Orthodox, Catholicism and Protestantism different “religions” for these purposes, but there really is only one “Judaism”. I am curious, though, where you draw the line for Islam.
After all, if you want a debate on proselytizing, I’m going to want to know what you mean by the word.
**
Not necessarily. If the idea is to become closer to God, the search may lead one away from ones current religion. I suppose there’s also the question of whether a parent inculcating a child in religion counts as proselytizing, but I suspect you’d think not.