Is Evangelization equal to Cultural Genocide?

real life wrote:

Are you opposed to any attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold to a different opinion in religious matters?

No i am not.

So far i am concerned, one can persuade another to hold to a DIFFERENT opinion in religious matter, AS MUCH AS HE/SHE wants.

But assuming your question actually was, "Are you opposed to ALL attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold a SAMILAR/SAME opinion in religious matters?"

Yes i am opposed to the attempts made to convert others to one's own religion.

real life wrote:

Then what are you doing on this board?

saying that. (^).

which is different from trying to convert others to what ever religion it is that i follow.

0 Replies

brahmin wrote:

real life wrote:

Are you opposed to any attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold to a different opinion in religious matters?

No i am not.

So far i am concerned, one can persuade another to hold to a DIFFERENT opinion in religious matter, AS MUCH AS HE/SHE wants.

But assuming your question actually was, "Are you opposed to ALL attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold a SAMILAR/SAME opinion in religious matters?"

Yes i am opposed to the attempts made to convert others to one's own religion.

So exactly what is the difference between "persuading" one to hold to a different religious opinion and the person being "converted" to believe differently than what he does now?

It seems to me that it is a distinction without a difference.

What this really sounds like to me is that you may be in favor of free speech for some, but not in favor of it for others--depending on the CONTENT of the speech.

Which means you are not truly in favor of free speech at all, if that is the case.

------------------------------------

When I ask "So what are you doing on this board?" It should be obvious that we all are engaged in debate, persuasion and articulation of our ideas with the idea that others should see it the way we see it.

A message board would be very boring if the only response you got back was "Hmmmm how interesting. Thanks for sharing."

Everyone here is engaged in persuasion whether they will admit it or not.

0 Replies

The word evangelism has always had a scary connotation to me.

Thank God I haven't been exposed all that much, but it sure wasn't due to others lack of trying.
but as i mentioned in another thread, I'm not much of a sheep.

I very much see evangelism as an attempt at gentrification.
I mean, the very nature of it is so black and white.

Jews don't proelytize, but people choose to convert to that relegion.

The idea of persuading someone to convert is just so 1984ish, but with a God..
It's like, what's the alternative?

Today, with various christian demoninations becomeing more visual/vocal in government, I don't think it's entirely science fiction that certain people could be rounded up to live in a certain area, identified in a certain way, maybe by a patch worn on your clothing, so the christians will know who failed to accept their "persuation"

0 Replies

real life wrote:

brahmin wrote:
real life wrote:

Are you opposed to any attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold to a different opinion in religious matters?

No i am not.

So far i am concerned, one can persuade another to hold to a DIFFERENT opinion in religious matter, AS MUCH AS HE/SHE wants.

But assuming your question actually was, "Are you opposed to ALL attempts by individuals to persuade others to hold a SAMILAR/SAME opinion in religious matters?"

Yes i am opposed to the attempts made to convert others to one's own religion.

So exactly what is the difference between "persuading" one to hold to a different religious opinion and the person being "converted" to believe differently than what he does now?

It seems to me that it is a distinction without a difference.

What this really sounds like to me is that you may be in favor of free speech for some, but not in favor of it for others--depending on the CONTENT of the speech.

Which means you are not truly in favor of free speech at all, if that is the case.

i am opposed to the idea of trying to convert people into one's own religion. ie. proselytising.

i am not opposed to the idea of discussing matters, including religious matters, even if that means converting another person into having my kind of take/stand about any subject, including religious subjects.

if i convinced you or someone else that proselytising is bad - then i would only be changing that persons view point to that of mine.

not changing his religion to mine.

conversely if someone could convince me that his view about anything , including religious issues, is right and mine wrong, i dont mind at all - just as long as it dont come with a string attached that says i got to chuck my religious beliefs and adopt his.

clear now?

0 Replies

Chai Tea wrote:

I very much see evangelism as an attempt at gentrification.
I mean, the very nature of it is so black and white.

The idea of persuading someone to convert is just so 1984ish, but with a God..

yeah.

enangelism = implicit slighting of another religion --> a religious version of racism.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Active proselytizing should be considered hate speech and considered a crime.

Goodbye, Land of the Free (speech). Hello, 4th Reich.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

Active proselytizing should be considered hate speech and considered a crime.

Whoa! Whoa! Let's not go overboard.

Freedom of speech is a very precious thing. We mustn't limit their rights, even if they can be annoying, ignorant bastards. (Not all of them, but experience shows me that most of them are).

0 Replies

but do you at least agree that sometimes, like in this case - proselytizing, "freedom of speech" comes with a price tag - the permanent loss of some of the richest, oldest, most colourful, religio-socio-cultural heritage of the world?

and just because a nice rule/law like total "freedom of speech" is there, dont mean its not very often abused and misused - you wouldn't believe some of the hogwash and gobbledygook that missionaries cook up and spew - just because spewing IS allowed.

maybe a handle is needed somewhere ? maybe "free speech" isn't all that good when its too "Free".

0 Replies

au wrote

Quote:

Active proselytizing should be considered hate speech and considered a crime.

That was written with tongue in cheek. Since there are no restrictions in the US regarding hate speech. We are constitutionally endowed with free speech.

0 Replies

brahmin wrote:

but do you at least agree that sometimes, like in this case - proselytizing, "freedom of speech" comes with a price tag - the permanent loss of some of the richest, oldest, most colourful, religio-socio-cultural heritage of the world?

and just because a nice rule/law like total "freedom of speech" is there, dont mean its not very often abused and misused - you wouldn't believe some of the hogwash and gobbledygook that missionaries cook up and spew - just because spewing IS allowed.

maybe a handle is needed somewhere ? maybe "free speech" isn't all that good when its too "Free".

Yes we know. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.

You bemoan "loss of heritage" when people change their minds and believe something different than they believed before. A fine Clintonian phrase !

Your Thought Police are numerous but you will not succeed in forcing people to continue believing what they do not believe any longer.

Exactly what Final Solution are you proposing to prevent this loss of "rich culture"?

Let us hear how you would deny free speech to some, but not to others. Come on. Out with it.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

brahmin wrote:
but do you at least agree that sometimes, like in this case - proselytizing, "freedom of speech" comes with a price tag - the permanent loss of some of the richest, oldest, most colourful, religio-socio-cultural heritage of the world?

and just because a nice rule/law like total "freedom of speech" is there, dont mean its not very often abused and misused - you wouldn't believe some of the hogwash and gobbledygook that missionaries cook up and spew - just because spewing IS allowed.

maybe a handle is needed somewhere ? maybe "free speech" isn't all that good when its too "Free".

Yes we know. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.

You bemoan "loss of heritage" when people change their minds and believe something different than they believed before. A fine Clintonian phrase !

Your Thought Police are numerous but you will not succeed in forcing people to continue believing what they do not believe any longer.

Exactly what Final Solution are you proposing to prevent this loss of "rich culture"?

Let us hear how you would deny free speech to some, but not to others. Come on. Out with it.

yes because the animals in the jungles eat other animals, humans need not replicate them.
most dont - but some do - the humans who arnt too different from animals in their ruthlessness and narrowmindedness and tunnel vision.

when peopel change "ON THEIR OWN", no one stops them ... the opposition is when its induced by active proselytising (which is a nice & handy euphemism for PERSECUTION - think of the "cathocalypse" in latyin america, in africa in phillipines and also by islamic barbarians - all converted by the sword, or by alluring with "free medicine, food, education, free horse ****" etc).

i made it very clear in my first post to the thread that a handful of people changing from X to Y on their own, doesnt really result in a loss of heritage. when people convert "on their own", its always in handfuls or thereabout and en-mass conversions always have a sword or two hidden somewhere.

and thats what causes a loss of the socio-cultural heritage, causes social genocide and depletes the world's beliefs and practices. irreversably.

i have no doubts that christians and muslims have caused more deaths to non christians and non muslims than mayans have caused to non-mayans and aztecs have caused to non aztecs etc etc.

so the crap theory of "they had evil practices which needed to be weeded out and they needed to be civilized" wont fly.

what was so damned civilized about the inquisition and the criusades and the many many massacres of natives eh?

the final solution is for the uno to ban proselytisation.

free speech wont be denied to some while being available to others.

a SORT OF free SPEECH would de denied to all, but they should ofcouse be allowed to express themselves in every other way.

just like you can expres yourself here anyway you want - but you arnt free to make racial comments and post how you think blacks are good only for beating tom toms and athletics and other racist crap.

a line needs to be drawn EVERYWHERE.

in iceland, if a person makes a single racial comment, he/she can be jailed.

its not like they dont have free speech there. but they draw a line at racism.

a similar line needs must be drawn about "religion-ism" (ie. the idea that X religion is better than Y.... hence the people of Y need to convert to X).

we live in a free world - we are free to do anything we wish to - can we indulge or participate or watch CHILD PORN ??

there's a line there.

another one needs to be drawn.

0 Replies

Brahmin--

Why don't you go first hand to Iceland or to any of the Nirvana societies that you so much admire and see what life is really like.

There is a good reason that Americans do not want to replicate European society. That is why they left Europe and came here.

That is why so many still want to come here.

How many Americans do you see saving every last dime for a plane ride to Iceland so they can live in "the land of the free"?

Your Final Solution, for the UN to "ban proselytisation" is of course only a first step in global goverance and control including loss of liberty for all peoples.

Did you ever stop to think that your forced ban on free speech is nothing less than forced proselytisation to YOUR way of thinking? The very thing that you CLAIM to be against.

So you would use the power of the sword to force conformity to your political and ideological agenda. The very thing you decry others for doing.

How are you any better than the people that you despise and try to demonize?

(And try broadening your horizons by a little reading until you figure out the allusion to some animals being more equal than others. You apparently are clueless on that as well.

Hint: It's in a well known book, but I won't tell you which one. )

0 Replies

brahmin wrote:

like i said, those lunatic aspects would get weeded out sooner or later.

these unacceptable aspects ALWAYS creep in isolation, are are CENTRAL to NO religion or way of life, (except perhaps the out and out cannibals in intermost jungles, certainly not to the religions of civilizations that produced the machu pichu and such like) - after some interection with other cultures they'd realise that they were doing something generally held unaceptable by himans all over and chuck the practices of cutting out hearts and similar.

My question to you is this: if something such as cutting out a heart is part of my belief system, and I value what my god says above any thing any man could tell me, why would I change it?

I will start by letting all readers know, I am a Christian. Though I struggle with being obedient, my goal in life is to be "Christ Like". Moving right along, it is what seems to me as common sense to say, not all beliefs can be right, though it is possible for all to be wrong. That being said, evangelism is not so much as committing cultural genocide as it is an attempt to save a person from the results of a life without God, in my case, hell. To say that it is committing cultural genocide is as extreme as saying giving the death penalty to murderers is committing hobby genocide. When I talk to someone about Christ, I don't convert them, I present them with information based on what I know to be true so they can make their own educated decision. As far as God wanting someone to be an X or Y then they would be born that way, the bible talks about people planting seeds and watering, but God ultimately makes things grow. God has set the picture so that we can be used by Him, but ultimately, his desire is for people to be ministered to. Hence, "Go forth and make disciples of the nations."
I don't believe evangelism is cultural genocide, I believe we can still have a diverse society, yet still believe in the one true God. We can worship Him in different ways as long as those ways are aligned with the standard God set in his word. No cutting out another persons heart or drinking red kool aid with nikes on to worship God. At that point, people are worshiping something else. God made us all different for a reason, He doesn't not want to eliminate our uniqueness, only get us out of the darkness of the world so we can really appreciate it.

0 Replies

When I talk to someone about Christ, I don't convert them, I present them with information based on what I know to be true so they can make their own educated decision.

BULL'S-EYE, Joshman! Very Happy

0 Replies

Joshman wrote:

My question to you is this: if something such as cutting out a heart is part of my belief system, and I value what my god says above any thing any man could tell me, why would I change it?

cos that part of your belief system needs to be changed. the rest still rocks.

Joshman wrote:

I will start by letting all readers know, I am a Christian.

lmao anyone could have surmised that without your wearing it on your sleeve.

Joshman wrote:

Moving right along, it is what seems to me as common sense to say, not all beliefs can be right, though it is possible for all to be wrong.

beliefs/religions are not a science.
in science 2 and 2 make 4 and all other answers barring 4 are wrong.

religion is more like painting. there's no perfect painting of a land scape. yours could be different from mine, could have 20 trees to my 1 could have 2 houses to my 25 - and we would both be right and your landscape painting would be just as much a painting as mine.

and just like thre isnt a "perfect" 2+2=4 kind of painting, there isnt a perfect religion either.

Joshman wrote:

That being said, evangelism is not so much as committing cultural genocide as it is an attempt to save a person from the results of a life without God, in my case, hell.

so a life without your concept of god = hell ? how tunnel visioned can you be!!

you ever saw doctors trying to treat patients without patients aproaching the doc or seeking advice?

if i fear hell, i will approach the necessary person, read the necessary books.

yout because you fear something, dont give u the right to assume that all others have the same fear, in the same way your having concept X or Y about gog dont guarrantee to assume that others see god similarly .

Joshman wrote:

To say that it is committing cultural genocide is as extreme as saying giving the death penalty to murderers is committing hobby genocide.

no. wrong.

about 1/10000 peopel in society are murderers.
if all murderers are given death penalty, the other 99999 people would still be alive and kicking.

but in latin america and phillipines the people were made to chuck their religions and beliefs by the spanish, portouguese and other inquisitions and converted en-masse.

thats called a cathocalypse and/or cultural genocide and other descriptiosn are euphemisms.

Joshman wrote:

When I talk to someone about Christ, I don't convert them,

if you are trying to tell that all the cultural genocide in the world happened by merely "talking to someone about ...", then go read history.

there's been enough blood spilled to fill many seas.

not to mention the non-butcher-like "tactics", including the all out vilification of all concepts non-christian, total disrespect to existing beliefs, rampant destruction of places of worship of the originals, the many m,any "carrots" devised by the religious mercenaries aka missionaries etc.

Joshman wrote:

I present them with information based on what I know to be true so they can make their own educated decision.

firstly its unsolicited.
secondly going to someone and saying XYZ belief is better than his implicitly means his religion is in some way inferior to yours.
which isnt different from hitler explaining why whites were superior to jews, to negroids to gypsies and other similar horse ****.

finally when there's a gun (real or other) pointed up my arse, its difficult
to make educated decisions.
a more untrue claim about missionaries cant be made - they always induce the victim and doctor his decision - its neither his "own" nor "educated" - he is painstakenly brainwashed and his mind id poisoned by mis-information about his own existing religion and goggledegook about the new one.

Joshman wrote:

As far as God wanting someone to be an X or Y then they would be born that way, the bible talks about people planting seeds and watering, but God ultimately makes things grow. God has set the picture so that we can be used by Him, but ultimately, his desire is for people to be ministered to. Hence, "Go forth and make disciples of the nations."

there are other bibles in the world. dont assume yours to be THE 2+2=4 version, cos thats not what bibles ar supposed to be.

there's a bible that says when necessary man should take the course of violence. osama bin laden felt that it was necessary, and he brought the wtc down. his bible said , it was allowed if the situation demanded.

see?

what may be perfectly acceptable to you cos your bible says so, may not be acceptable to others.

if you disagree, - then 9/11 was one of the best acts of faiths ever and perfectly acceptable.

Joshman wrote:

I don't believe evangelism is cultural genocide,

if you believed that the holocaust isnt genocide, that the occupation of usa, canada and australia by europeans did not cause a genocide on the natives, if you believe that muslims did not kill more than twice the number of hindus in india as germans killed jews - it still wouldnt change the fact that those genocides did occur.

similarly if you believe that no cultural genocide occured in the parts where it did occur, it still wouldnt make fiction out of fact.

Joshman wrote:

I believe we can still have a diverse society, yet still believe in the one true God.

one true god eh?
all others are false?
you are right, the rest are morons?
your landscape is "perfect", others are all halfwits?

see how narrow minded the tunnel visioned (& plagiarised) secondary abrahamic religions actually are !!!

Joshman wrote:

We can worship Him in different ways as long as those ways are aligned with the standard God set in his word.

god sent different words to different people.
they can worship in any which way they want, or not worship at all.
they live in a free world.

yor saying that they got to comply with your yardsticks is as nazi a statement as i ever heard, and confirms what i always suspected (that the religious intolerance of those who proselytise are no lesser than the racial intolerance of the nazis) and explains why the vatican tacitly supported the jewish holocaust
cos they arnt too different.

Joshman wrote:

No cutting out another persons heart or drinking red kool aid with nikes on to worship God.

add no inquisition, no genocide, no persecution, no holocaust, no pogrom, no teutonic knights hacking their way across europe to conversion.

christians and muslims have killed more people in trying to convert them to their religions than the top 5 (other) bloodiest wars in the world put toghether.

what sort of religions are those eh? that believe in hacking all in sundry in continent after continent? noreligions in the world are more blood thirsty than these 2. if i didnt say it, it this post was deleted, if no one else said it - HISTORY STILL WOULD.

if the aztecs cut the hearts out of a few missionaries and threw it to the dogs- its only fair. if they had carried on the good work, we would still have had the aztecs around. but alas, they have been all culturally-genocided.

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/inquisition/
http://www.apol.net/dightonrock/inquisition_goa.htm
http://www.atributetohinduism.com/European_Imperialism.htm
http://www.geocities.com/hindoo_humanist/goa1.html

Joshman wrote:

At that point, people are worshiping something else. God made us all different for a reason, He doesn't not want to eliminate our uniqueness, only get us out of the darkness of the world so we can really appreciate it.

its the missionaries who need to get their heads out of darkness and stop the bastardy that they have been carrying out all over the world for centuries under the patronage of the colonial countries and the powers that be. same applies for the taliban brigade.

god e-mailed you to tell you that sweety?

well the e-mail i received says different.
it said, since he created us all, he didnt create anyone in darkness. we all have his light as it is. no need to feel an inferiority complex to others who come out of the blue and declare that they have the magic wand up their ass which we dont.

the only ones in the dark are those who have entered the tunnel of narrow minded, straight jacketed single track "my way or the highway" kind of thinking.. ie. the criminals who hide behind the book.

r.i.p. missionaries and all attempts to proselytise.

0 Replies

diagknowz wrote:

When I talk to someone about Christ, I don't convert them, I present them with information based on what I know to be true so they can make their own educated decision.

BULL'S-EYE, Joshman!

aha .. so an almost-missionary after all !!!

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Brahmin--

Why don't you go first hand to Iceland or to any of the Nirvana societies that you so much admire and see what life is really like.

There is a good reason that Americans do not want to replicate European society. That is why they left Europe and came here.

That is why so many still want to come here.

How many Americans do you see saving every last dime for a plane ride to Iceland so they can live in "the land of the free"?

Your Final Solution, for the UN to "ban proselytisation" is of course only a first step in global goverance and control including loss of liberty for all peoples.

Did you ever stop to think that your forced ban on free speech is nothing less than forced proselytisation to YOUR way of thinking? The very thing that you CLAIM to be against.

So you would use the power of the sword to force conformity to your political and ideological agenda. The very thing you decry others for doing.

How are you any better than the people that you despise and try to demonize?

(And try broadening your horizons by a little reading until you figure out the allusion to some animals being more equal than others. You apparently are clueless on that as well.

Hint: It's in a well known book, but I won't tell you which one. )

i read that book at 15.
stop preassuming.

and read my post again.
iceland was just an example of a society from where the rest of the world could do well to take a leaf out of, to prevent and put an end to racial slander.

proselytising = religions slander. no two ways about it.

and lets not get into why europeans went to usa - that belongs in a different thread, and needs more than a few opinions from the likes of Dee Brown and Ward Churchill and Leonard P. - for the real reasons to come out.

and again, read my post again, preferrably with an open mind this time.

i never said there shoudl be a ban on free speech. there should be a ban on SOME KINDS OF SPEECH - like racial and religions slander and slighting and viollification.

just like there should be a ban on the things we are free to do - we live in a free world dont mean we should be free to murder and rape and use kids to shoot child porn videos.

we are free to do anything else barring those and similar.

equally, there is an urgent need for a parallel set of laws that say we can have all the free speech we want but arnt allowed to abuse that freedom (ie. proselyise and/or abuse racially).

0 Replies

BRahmin, your most recent post starts out with the phrase "stop presuming". Practice what you preach brother. You seem to have made quite a few presumptions about me. From your posts I deduce that you are not really here to have questions answered, rather to argue your point that spreading God's word is wrong. I have a question for you, when is the last time a Christian put a sword or gun or any other weapon to your head and forced you to convert? I'm willing to say that it has never happened. Youre right about the stuff you said about Christians in the past, some groups did make some huge mistakes, but God will be just in the end, those people will deal with the consequences. As far as telling others they are inferior, don't presume that I run around telling others they suck. You will never hear me bad mouth anothers religion like that. Like I said, I explain what I know to be true, and I'd hat to break it to you hero, but there is only one truth. I may be wrong about what that truth is, maybe the nation of islam has it right and I am wasting time, but the fact of the matter is, this is what I truly know to be absolute truth, and as with your 2+2 analogy, there is only one 4. Weather or not you believe in gravity, it is there, go jump a cliff if you don't believe it, you'll learn truth quite rapidly.

0 Replies

well u preassumed that i didnt read animal farm

0 Replies

I have a question for you, when is the last time a Christian put a sword or gun or any other weapon to your head and forced you to convert?

[/quote]
not to me. but to my brethern in goa. not to speak of to non indians all over the world esp phillipines and aouth america.http://www.geocities.com/hindoo_humanist/goa1.html

should i wait for it to happen to me?

please read my member description.

I'm willing to say that it has never happened.

>>>>>>>>which (if "it" means conversion by the gun) isnt very far from saying the holocaust never happened.

Youre right about the stuff you said about Christians in the past, some groups did make some huge mistakes, but God will be just in the end, those people will deal with the consequences.

>>>> doesnt change the fact that it did happen. also doesnt reverse the histories of the mayas and incas and all those who feell to christian violence.
you arnt sonding too different from those mulims who disown the muslim teorists saying they arnt true muslims.
the damage they do, stays tho, real muslims or not.

As far as telling others they are inferior, don't presume that I run around telling others they suck. You will never hear me bad mouth anothers religion like that.
>>>> not you.. but missionaries.. all of them. its implicit.

Like I said, I explain what I know to be true, and I'd hat to break it to you hero, but there is only one truth.
>>>>>> and that folks confirms that i was right all along about the intolerance the 2ndary abrahamic religions have towards the rest.

and u just said that you never said my beliefs are inferior !!! hahahha

I may be wrong about what that truth is, maybe the nation of islam has it right and I am wasting time, but the fact of the matter is, this is what I truly know to be absolute truth, and as with your 2+2 analogy, there is only one 4.
>>>>>>>>>>>> in science there indeed is one 4.
but
religion isnt a science, even by a long stratch.

Weather or not you believe in gravity, it is there, go jump a cliff if you don't believe it, you'll learn truth quite rapidly.
>>>>>> with gravity and 2+2 i havent a choice but believe it.
i need not believe your landscape is better than the mayan or mine.

0 Replies

Is Evangelization equal to Cultural Genocide?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know