Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to IF ONLY CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER RELIGIONS WERE MORE LIKE BUDDHISM
Boy jackie_o -- talk about speaking from a position of bias.
and to top it off you are trying to put words in my mouth. I have never used the words sinister or have referred to the actions of missionaries as some type of conspiracy. Their actions are decidedly well intentioned at least as an ideal but it is the consequences of those actions that are completely overlooked. Christianity single handedly decimated native spritualism which is as legitimate a belief system as Christianity right on the very soil you live on yet you refuse to see my point.
Someday one can only hope you will understand a "command" from your lord and master is only your belief and nothing more than a conveniant means of trampling on other belief people's systems.
posted by
gomedome
on January 1, 2005 at 1:19 PM
| link to this | reply
Gome. Jesus, who is the founder of Christianity
commanded His disciples to preach to every nation( I know you are well aware of this, forgive the redundancy) So it is not a self righteous origination that we "impose" on indigenous people out of a need to control and violate a people, it is simply obedience to the command of Jesus. You seem to lose sight of the fact that true Christians desire to obey their Lord and Master, not carry out a sinisiter, self righteous human agenda of brainwashing a pure untouched people.. Also, earlier in a post you said something to the effect( I think it was you) of how can God condemn people to hell eho have never heard? Then you imply Christian missionaries are "imposing" what they think is better spirituality on indigenous people and what right do they have to do that?. It seems a lose lose situation with you. Sowhat are we to do? Tell them so they have a chance, or leave them to their own spirituality and be blamed for not giving them a chance so not to "impose'.
Missionaries are not taking away any ones right to choose their spirituality, they are giving them a chance to believe in Jesus. They dont have to accept any more than you do.
posted by
calmcantey75
on January 1, 2005 at 12:56 PM
| link to this | reply
jackie_o -- you are correct in saying that
all human endeavours will be corrupted by humans. It is a fact of our shortcomings as a species but what I am putting forth is a lot broader than simply demonstrating bias. Where you applaud any one who is making an effort to carry what you believe is an important spiritual word to people that may not be exposed to it any other way, I am throwing up a cautionary note from something I have witnessed first hand. Who has the right to determine if an indigenous spiritual belief system is less worthy than what you believe? In today's world if we are to accept all people's and extend the rights we demand for ourselves in sovereignty and freedom of religion simply no one has that right.
posted by
gomedome
on January 1, 2005 at 12:28 PM
| link to this | reply
this is a case of personal bias
that has caused both sides to generalise. In ALL endeavors, professions and missions in life, there is a sector of corruption.
posted by
calmcantey75
on January 1, 2005 at 12:04 PM
| link to this | reply
westwend -- there is one thing worth mentioning that a lot of people do
not consider. I agree with you completely as I have witnessed some unbelievable things in my limited experience with modern day missionaries as well. For example, I am routinely drawn into the business affairs of a local church my mother attends as a volunteer for their charitable programs. One day not to long ago we discovered that a large sum of money they had sent to Malawi, Africa was spent not on food and medical supplies as intended but on Yamaha dirt bikes for the children of the missionaries to "get around". When experiencing something like this however one must take a philisophical approach. Only churches and religious organizations have the will and the infra-structure to initiate such aid programs. The choice simply becomes allow the risk of brainwashing and the misuse of resources or have no aid at all.
It will probably take decades before the well entrenched practice and historically common notion of serving up the word of God with the staples of life become seperated. Most people do not view it as spiritual black mail but instead somehow feel that they are doing something worthy by obliterating indigenous belief and faith systems in return for food.
posted by
gomedome
on January 1, 2005 at 11:44 AM
| link to this | reply
my experience
is that evangelical and missionary types can be very dishonest in what they relate to others in attempting to fulfill their mission.
I mean VERY dishonest.
If I were to choose between someone telling me that Christian missionaries are so upright and honest and such
and what I've experienced.
I'd choose what I've experienced every time.
faith is evidence
and the evidence I have disagrees with what a lot of Christians have testified.
posted by
Xeno-x
on January 1, 2005 at 11:01 AM
| link to this | reply
I am sure there are missionaries that are off
but on the positive side of this, I know of very kind, good brilliant men and women who do a great service in taking the Message to the corners of the world. They are vibrant and animated, and I guess some can perceive that as being scary or threatning. But really they are just exited about Jesus.
posted by
calmcantey75
on December 31, 2004 at 11:04 AM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives -- I was leading up to a posting on this subject but you are
covering most of the points here. The notion of missionaries strolling into a an underdeveloped country to "save" people from themselves is a dangerous relic of the past. As you allude to, quite often aid is conditional to attending services. In other words spiritual blackmail. There are other considerations as well. When one considers that no one religion has it completely right who is to say that the local form of spirituality or belief system is not as valid as Christianity? Then there are political ramifications that we as members of western societies do not even consider. Maintaining sovereignty becomes a serious issue for the local government just as it would if any political body established themselves within it's borders. In this case political influence can be levied by the pope or the arch bishop of canterbury or a person like the late Reverand Jones (of Jonestown fame). I like the way they handled the first missionaries that strolled onto Canadian soil some 400 years ago. They killed them and ate them. Solved the hunger problem immediately and the native residents didn't have to sit through one sermon.
posted by
gomedome
on December 31, 2004 at 8:19 AM
| link to this | reply
jackie
Consider some of the tactics I have ahd used against me in trying to get my to 'see the light', I can not imagine how 'aggressive' missionaries can get if they choose to. Now I personally know a missionary and some of his views are very much off. He sees Buddhism as being evil and has more or less admitted to using fear to get people to convert. He has also mentioned just how crazy religious beliefs can be in that part of the world, and how people do get into shooting matches over religious beliefs. Even if it is not the missionaries doing the fighting, the fighting is still happening because they are there forcing their beliefs on others. Also a very common tactic is for missionaries to offer people help, but make it a condition of that help that those people attend Christian services and stop going to the temples of their own religion. The people are made to feel guilty for believing their beliefs.
I am sure there are those who convert fully of their own free will. But from what I understand missionaries use many questionable tactics to get converts.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 31, 2004 at 7:47 AM
| link to this | reply
you find that the basics of the message
when you read it in the gospels
has nothing to do with the way Christianity is today.
I'm not the first, last, or only one on Blogit who has said that.
It's obvious.
And it doesn't take a Christian to be Christian.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 31, 2004 at 7:39 AM
| link to this | reply
missionaries
if they are anything like those I've encountered on the streets of St. Louis
can be pretty persistent
can finagle their way into homes
and, I would imagine, can tell pepole that theirs is the only way -- "it's their way or the hell way" -- and people believe them.
I've seen the "enthusiasm" of missionaries.
sometimes you don't have to burn people at the stake.
you just have to pester them to death.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 31, 2004 at 7:37 AM
| link to this | reply
honestly, I really dont know anything about it
but I do know we are not living in the Dark Ages where they burn people at the stake and kill them if they do not embrace Christianity. Missionaries simply venture out into countries and preach to a people, and they believe. Its that simple. THey dont force them to do anything. anyway, time will tell if it is good or bad.
posted by
calmcantey75
on December 30, 2004 at 7:42 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives -- no Buddhist nation has ever started a war
They have been warred upon and have defended themselves but they are mostly as you say. They however, like any other group of humans have had incedents of bastardizing their own ideals but for the most part Buddhism is a solid basis to build a belief system on. When asked, I do state that my personal belief system is Buddha as Avatar. At least that is the closest I can come to describing what I believe in.
posted by
gomedome
on December 30, 2004 at 6:53 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka
I like that logic over emotion idea, yes, that sounds like something better to follow than most other things.
Happy New Year hoss
posted by
WileyJohn
on December 30, 2004 at 6:42 PM
| link to this | reply
jackie
In my experience Buddhism is much more of a peaceful way of life than Christianity ever has been. Honestly looking at e New Testament and what we are told is Jesus' teaching, it would seem that Christianity was an attempt to mix Buddhist ideas with Old testament teachings. Of course the result has been a very violent and confused set of beliefs.
Also, I see no proof that the Buddhist went willingly into Christianity. I would not be one bit surprised to learn that there was a high level of force involved.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 30, 2004 at 5:59 PM
| link to this | reply
I disagree
I think it is a good thing. These people are not being corerced or brainwashed. They are simply making a decision on their own in response to hearing the message of the gospel. Just because you dont approve of it does not mean it is a bad thing. These are intelligent human beings and I think they are capable of deciding what is best for them. And they have chosen Jesus Christ. Christianity is not evil, it is peace and love. Maybe this is an opportunity for a society of people to get it right.
posted by
calmcantey75
on December 30, 2004 at 4:18 PM
| link to this | reply
well many think that Yeshua learned Buddhism
There are similar premises, they way.
It is possible.
There is at least one hint that some teachings came out of Damascus (Paul's pursuit of followers of The Way when he was blinded "on the road to Damascua").
Galilee's being so close to Damascus -- it's possible that Yeshua could have received teaching there. It probably was a crossroads and a meeting place of several cultures.
If you do a little comparison -- you can see some similarities between contemporary Christian beliefs and Greek Mythology -- such as Hell and so forth --
between the original teachings of Yeshua and what we have today much of men's beliefs have intervened -- didn't long for it to start either -- about 150 C.E. is when what we have today began to coalesce. Much was pretty well set in stone by about 450. A lot, though, was added between 1400 and 1700, particularly the Via Dolorosa and the Stations of the Cross and the Shroud of Turin --mythology upon mythology.
we don't have original Christianity.
we have greco-roman myth.
posted by
Xeno-x
on December 30, 2004 at 4:03 PM
| link to this | reply
Shavonne
I think that is coming from the simple fact that Buddhist are non aggressive and are not trying to push their faith on anyone. So in comes the Christians using fear and such and pushing their faith greatly on others getting them to believe that they are sinners and other such ideas, and so they convert the passive beliefs by being aggressive. Many might still believe, but they are scared by the ideas presented by the Christians and so stay in line ot play it safe. There is also from my understanding a large level of violence often directed to various religious groups in that area of the world, and so the Buddhist might feel safer having the aggressive Christians on their side. The basic Buddhist ideas however will allow for one to practice another religion on top of Buddhism, unlike how the main body of the Christian faith and many other religions believe.
It is something troubling and would be interesting to see just what the causes of it are.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 30, 2004 at 3:52 PM
| link to this | reply
jackie
Yes, that is a very bad thing.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 30, 2004 at 3:46 PM
| link to this | reply
shavonne
thats a bad thing?
posted by
calmcantey75
on December 30, 2004 at 3:02 PM
| link to this | reply
When I was in Korea, I noticed a lot of Koreans abandoned the Buddhist religion for Christianity. I don't understand why. They still have thousands of Buddhist temples throughout Korea, but I never met any practicing Buddhist.
posted by
Shavonne
on December 30, 2004 at 2:16 PM
| link to this | reply