Ethics of Proselytization

[zippy2006]

In hindsight perhaps I focused too much on my personal experience...

Most of us are looking at your OP and saying, "I see nothing wrong with what they did." The onus is on you to explain why this encounter was noteworthy. If you didn't think it was noteworthy and problematic, then why would you have written the OP at all?

I am especially adverse to duplicity and deception;

The difficulty is that you are trying to object to what your coworker did while at the same time not objecting to what your coworker did. If they did something that you believe was objectionable or even noteworthy, then you need to say what that is. If they did nothing that you believe was objectionable or noteworthy, then it seems that you agree with us and the thread will have been a bit of a dud. Whether the scenario is taken as a hypothetical or as a personal event doesn't change any of these points. If you had written up the OP as a fictional scenario we would be in the exact same place.

This is almost certainly going in the direction of you explaining why the way you were taught to evangelize in your youth was an insincere way to evangelize.

 

[Fervent]

This is something I've put quite a bit of thought into, and I think it takes having been exposed to the hyper-evangelistic protestant churches that objectify non-Christians by calling them things like "mission fields" and similar dehumanizing terms to appreciate. There is definitely a fine line between reaching out and sharing the gospel and reducing people to objects while lionizing oneself as bringing them salvation. In the case you're discussing, it doesn't necessarily seem to be much to indicate that is the case, but its not out of the realm of possibilities.

 

[RDKirk]

In hindsight perhaps I focused too much on my personal experience. That wasn't really my intent, that was intended more as an opener for further conversation.

Allow me to clarify some things.

I don't dislike the person I mentioned in my OP. We aren't close, we just speak occasionally at work. I don't believe they are a bad person. I didn't feel offended by anything they did. I may have used choice words that overstated: The most negative emotion I felt was suspicion/wonder--I indulged a curiosity: Were previous interactions part of a deliberate tactic, or did our already established previous interactions mean she felt comfortable reaching out with this?

Most importantly, and I think I haven't stressed this enough I think; this isn't really about me. That is, how I feel about the situation isn't really the issue. The focus I had was really more on me contemplating how other people feel about proselytizing efforts. I wanted to put myself in the shoes of other people, I wanted to explore the ethics of specifically religious outreach with the tone of how others experience it, how as a Christian I can learn from that, and digest ways to be considerate of others while remaining faithful to what I believe is a general Christian calling in bearing witness to my faith in Jesus.

As a person who inhabits a complex and highly pluralistic world, who is called to love my neighbor, treat others as I want to be treated, and to be bold in my confession of Jesus as Lord and Messiah; it matters to me the shape of evangelism. And ethical concerns here are deeply important to me. I have, on a few occasions already mentioned my background and--if it wasn't clear--my very real rejection of gimmick based "evangelism" (I would go so far as to say it's not evangelism at all, it's mere proselytizing, and as I indicated in an earlier post I do distinguish between the two). I am especially adverse to duplicity and deception; when I talk about my faith with others I make an effort to be frank, honest, and also respectful. St. Peter writes that when we "give answer" to our hope we are to do so with gentleness and respect; as such I desire a level of sincerity, authenticity, and desire to make an attempt to be myself in such interactions. I'm not here to give a sales pitch, my religion isn't a consumer product to be marketed; it's a real belief in a good Creator God who made heaven and earth, who, through the real Jesus Christ, comes down to mend the broken and heal the hurt of a world fractured by sin and death. And that's what I want to communicate. And that's why I think having a frank and open conversation about this subject matters. Not just in an explicitly inter-Christian dialogue; but in a more "open house" setting. That's why I chose to have this conversation here, open to non-Christians to participate and share their thoughts, their grievances, their experiences, perhaps to also help those of us who are Christians hear, learn, consider, and contemplate.

I wanted something frank, open, honest. Because to me being faithful to Jesus does involve establishing bridges of communication with those with whom I do not share a religious agreement. Christianity isn't a tribe and I take up my spear against the next tribe over, it's who and what I am in the context of being a human among other humans.

-CryptoLutheran

At this point, though, you don't seem to know whether that person was trying to proselytize you, evangelize you, or just seeing if you aren't already a brother in Christ who wouldn't mind having occasional friendly chats about Jesus.

Over my life, I have found it so highly enriching to have someone in Christ to talk to at work that I'd "risk" that kind of invitation to find one. If she's only interested in proselytizing you into "her" kind of Christianity, you can just move on. Otherwise, you've found a friend: "Whenever two or more of you come together in My name...."

That gain is worth the risk.

If the person were trying to evangelize you...what do you think she should have done differently beyond getting to know you first and showing herself to be friendly on a long-term basis?

 

[Larniavc]

That someone cares enough about you and the faith to take it all seriously.

In the UK many people view those people who stand in the street trying to engage people about God in the say way as those charity or survey people who lurk in similar high traffic areas.

But in my experience the former are far less intrusive. I have been hailed by the latter many times but never by the former in the street.

Edit: now that I think about it I have never been approached in the street by a religious person.

 

[Larniavc]

What's interesting here is that friendships without challenges actually lack integrity, and to avoid all serious topics and disagreements (religious, political, etc.) is actually a sign of a shallow friendship. Nowadays there's easily as much danger of banal, mutually-affirming "friendship"* as forms of objectification.

* Friendships of pleasure but not virtue, according to Aristotle.

I disagree. Knowing that my friends and I disagree on many things (and therefore don’t discuss those subjects) is a sign of friendshipsual strength.

 

[zippy2006]

If she's only interested in proselytizing you into "her" kind of Christianity, you can just move on. Otherwise, you've found a friend: "Whenever two or more of you come together in My name...."

That gain is worth the risk.

Indeed.

 

[Meowzltov]

@ViaCrucis

To all the Christians here. I think this has been a wonderful topic and I've enjoyed reading the many comments.

What little I have to add as an outsider is this: everything, EVERYTHING gets measured by "Love your neighbor as yourself." If it's something hateful to you, don't do it to others. Treat others the way you want to be treated.

Via had an important insight when he/she realized that being made a mark for conversion brought into questions the motives why this person had been friendly in the first place. Were they smiling and nice because they genuinely like you and wanted to be your friend? Or was their kindness merely manipulation to get close enough to evangelize? Via felt betrayed, because the odds of deception had significantly risen, and no one likes being deceived. Now apply the golden rule.

Another way you might explore the same issue is to imagine yourself being similarly approached by someone of a different faith. What if someone had been friendly, and then passed you an invitation to their Mosque? Or to a Talmud study? Or passed you a pagan blessing? Because if that makes you uncomfortable even in the slightest, you should have warning red lights going off in your mind that it is NOT okay for you to be evangelizing others in this way.

The Law of Reciprocity is so simple, so basic, so foundational that it is taught in every major world religion. Every child learns it. Yet adults routinely neglect to apply it to our own personal actions. Every one of us needs to spend more time reflecting on our lives. Where have I not loved my neighbor as myself?

 

[RDKirk]

@ViaCrucis

Another way you might explore the same issue is to imagine yourself being similarly approached by someone of a different faith. What if someone had been friendly, and then passed you an invitation to their Mosque? Or to a Talmud study? Or passed you a pagan blessing? Because if that makes you uncomfortable even in the slightest, you should have warning red lights going off in your mind that it is NOT okay for you to be evangelizing others in this way.

It actually wouldn't bother me at all. And it's happened to me before.

So, how should evangelism be done in a way that would offend absolutely no one?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

@ViaCrucis

To all the Christians here. I think this has been a wonderful topic and I've enjoyed reading the many comments.

What little I have to add as an outsider is this: everything, EVERYTHING gets measured by "Love your neighbor as yourself." If it's something hateful to you, don't do it to others. Treat others the way you want to be treated.

Via had an important insight when he/she realized that being made a mark for conversion brought into questions the motives why this person had been friendly in the first place. Were they smiling and nice because they genuinely like you and wanted to be your friend? Or was their kindness merely manipulation to get close enough to evangelize? Via felt betrayed, because the odds of deception had significantly risen, and no one likes being deceived. Now apply the golden rule.

Another way you might explore the same issue is to imagine yourself being similarly approached by someone of a different faith. What if someone had been friendly, and then passed you an invitation to their Mosque? Or to a Talmud study? Or passed you a pagan blessing? Because if that makes you uncomfortable even in the slightest, you should have warning red lights going off in your mind that it is NOT okay for you to be evangelizing others in this way.

The Law of Reciprocity is so simple, so basic, so foundational that it is taught in every major world religion. Every child learns it. Yet adults routinely neglect to apply it to our own personal actions. Every one of us needs to spend more time reflecting on our lives. Where have I not loved my neighbor as myself?

For some reason, whenever Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons knock on the door and offer to talk with me about their religion, they refuse to enter when I invite them in and instead scurry away.......

 

[RDKirk]

For some reason, whenever Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons knock on the door and offer to talk with me about their religion, they refuse to enter when I invite them in and instead scurry away.......

I lock 'em down with my favorite bible passages.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I lock 'em down with my favorite bible passages.

That certainly is one way to do it, but I find that defining Critical Thinking and running through the rudiments of various forms of Analysis offered by Philosophy to be my first resort; citing the Bible in succinct and proper Exegetical form is my second.

 

[zippy2006]

Another way you might explore the same issue is to imagine yourself being similarly approached by someone of a different faith. What if someone had been friendly, and then passed you an invitation to their Mosque? Or to a Talmud study? Or passed you a pagan blessing?

I would be gratified that they wanted to share with me something that they find valuable. If we want to follow the Golden Rule then we shouldn't impute bad motives for no good reason. The real insult would be if someone cares about you but does not wish to share good things with you.

 

[RDKirk]

That certainly is one way to do it, but I find that defining Critical Thinking and running through the rudiments of various forms of Analysis offered by Philosophy to be my first resort; citing the Bible in succinct and proper Exegetical form is my second.

Not nearly as much fun.

 

[RDKirk]

If we want to follow the Golden Rule then we shouldn't impute bad motives for no good reason.

I think that's an important way to apply the Golden Rule. We wouldn't want people to pre-judge that we're operating with bad motives, so we shouldn't pre-judge such upon them.

The real insult would be if someone cares about you but does not wish to share good things with you.

That, too. There is a comedian (an atheist, from the way he speaks) who relates that he used to be angry with Christian friends who tried to give him the gospel until he realized that in their minds they liked him enough to want his benefit.

 

[stevevw]

I think all the different denominations including new versions that believe going out and proselytizing have given a bad name to Christians lol. Its almost an inhouse joke, quick pretend your not home as theres some bible bashers coming lol.

In some ways its like sales. When you are walking by a sales display you want to avoid the sales pitch. Or the cold canvassers who ring or visit trying to get sales. It seems everyone wants to sell you something. Maybe its more a cultural thing and not just a religious thing.

Todays hyper consumerism, materialism, alternative ideas being promoted, companies and bloggers trying to get clicks and likes. Its coming at us left right and center.

I think back to the early Christian church and how I guess it was fairly new and there was a clear destinction. You knew another Christian. They often met in secrecy and had secret symbols like the 'fish' to let other Christians know. Paul would preach a destinct message that Christians and non Christians could know was different.

Its hard today to know whats going on. Theres not just religious ideas but all sorts of ideas about finding the answers to a better life. I think thats the problem. Maybe he should have just given you a card with a 'fish' symbol. Just a simple well known Christian symbol to say we are the same.

But also communication is fundemental. Its a two way communication. Someone makes a communication to the reciever. But they may not fully understand exactly what the senders actually trying to communicate.

So the reciever has to then find out from the sender. Get feedback. Each time it helps clarify exactly whats going on. Often we read into stuff that may not be there and the best way to find out is ask the sender. Or rather make another communication towards finding out.

 

[bèlla]

What's interesting here is that friendships without challenges actually lack integrity, and to avoid all serious topics and disagreements (religious, political, etc.) is actually a sign of a shallow friendship. Nowadays there's easily as much danger of banal, mutually-affirming "friendship"* as forms of objectification.

* Friendships of pleasure but not virtue, according to Aristotle.

Color me different but that has little appeal. I don’t expect to befriend doppelgängers but at this point we’re going to be well aligned where it matters most before the connection would progress. I find people who need to challenge differences of opinion pretty insufferable in that respect. I don’t want to debate everything I think or feel with my friends. Accepting the reality of difference is a must for me.

~bella

 

[zippy2006]

Color me different but that has little appeal. I don’t expect to befriend doppelgängers but at this point we’re going to be well aligned where it matters most before the connection would progress. I find people who need to challenge differences of opinion pretty insufferable in that respect. I don’t want to debate everything I think or feel with my friends. Accepting the reality of difference is a must for me.

~bella

Yes, well I would say that there is a great deal of space between "avoiding all serious topics and disagreements," and, "needing to challenge differences of opinion." Yet this thread is about evangelization and the faith, and that strikes me as a serious topic that true friends would discuss.

It could be put this way: if one believes that some reality (e.g. God) is central to human life and human happiness, then true friendship requires that this reality be discussed with their friends, at least occasionally. This is because friends care for one another.

...Anecdotally, I know a woman who was trying to keep her wedding costs down, and decided not to invite many of her friends. The friends who were not invited were insulted, and her response was, "If they were really my friends, then they wouldn't care whether I invited them to my wedding." She had it exactly backwards. It was precisely because they were her friends that they wanted to be at such an important event in her life. The same sort of thing is happening in cases such as these. "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ."* This is precisely backwards. The truth is rather, "If they were really my friend, they would share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ." And again, this doesn't mean that one must be pushy or "preachy," but the point stands, and in my experience non-religious friends really do understand this fact, and may even begin raising the topic themselves.

* Or more generally, "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me what they see to be of ultimate importance."

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, well I would say that there is a great deal of space between "avoiding all serious topics and disagreements," and, "needing to challenge differences of opinion." Yet this thread is about evangelization and the faith, and that strikes me as a serious topic that true friends would discuss.

It could be put this way: if one believes that some reality (e.g. God) is central to human life and human happiness, then true friendship requires that this reality be discussed with their friends, at least occasionally. This is because friends care for one another.

...Anecdotally, I know a woman who was trying to keep her wedding costs down, and decided not to invite many of her friends. The friends who were not invited were insulted, and her response was, "If they were really my friends, then they wouldn't care whether I invited them to my wedding." She had it exactly backwards. It was precisely because they were her friends that they wanted to be at such an important event in her life. The same sort of thing is happening in cases such as these. "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ."* This is precisely backwards. The truth is rather, "If they were really my friend, they would share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ." And again, this doesn't mean that one must be pushy or "preachy," but the point stands, and in my experience non-religious friends really do understand this fact, and may even begin raising the topic themselves.

* Or more generally, "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me what they see to be of ultimate importance."

...Anecdotally, I know a woman who was trying to keep her wedding costs down, and decided not to invite many of her friends. The friends who were not invited were insulted, and her response was, "If they were really my friends, then they wouldn't care whether I invited them to my wedding." She had it exactly backwards. It was precisely because they were her friends that they wanted to be at such an important event in her life. The same sort of thing is happening in cases such as these. "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ."* This is precisely backwards. The truth is rather, "If they were really my friend, they would share with me about the life of grace and Jesus Christ." And again, this doesn't mean that one must be pushy or "preachy," but the point stands, and in my experience non-religious friends really do understand this fact, and may even begin raising the topic themselves.

* Or more generally, "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me what they see to be of ultimate importance."

This rather controls friendships in an oblique manner.

One pastor has said that you can determine the most important thing in your life by how willing and able and eager you are to talk about it. If, given the freedom to discuss what you want to discuss, what you would most often choose to discuss is what is most important to you.

If for Christians that's Jesus (and it should be Jesus), then Christians would tend to be drawn to people with whom they can freely talk about Jesus.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Does Romans 12 fit into this conversation? Must every Christian be an evangelist in word?

For just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. 6We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your a faith; 7if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; 8if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, b do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.

 

[bèlla]

It could be put this way: if one believes that some reality (e.g. God) is central to human life and human happiness, then true friendship requires that this reality be discussed with their friends, at least occasionally. This is because friends care for one another.

I share my experiences with the Lord and let my walk do the talking. If someone’s going through a difficult time I’ll offer to pray for them of course. But this isn’t something I confront because my friends are believers. I’ve ministered to acquaintances in the past and that was my approach.

* Or more generally, "If they were really my friend, they wouldn't share with me what they see to be of ultimate importance."

Evangelism is a gift of the spirit for a reason and if you want to share your faith you need to learn how to communicate effectively and that includes listening and emotional intelligence. The bulk of the complaints are related to that and I’ve been on the receiving end myself. I think there should be less emphasis on making disciples and more on improving their communication. That’s the starting point. Just because you believe in God doesn’t mean you can influence someone. There’s an art to persuasion.

~bella