• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Christianity - A Failing Religion?

Mythopoeika said:
I have seen old men standing on streets in places like Slough, Peterborough, Reading and parts of London, holding leaflets and copies of the Koran - ready to speak to anybody who is interested in Islam.
That seems like evangelism to me.
Plus, Islamic Student Societies are very much in the business of picking up the same sort of waifs and strays as their Christian counterparts.

The attraction of a radical alternative to the Western belief system, that comes complete with a fairly rigid set of disciplines and observances, of a type found in Christian communities, nowadays, only in religious cloisters, should not be underestimated.

For young people, perhaps already feeling insecure and isolated, living in a World where they could easily find themselves deemed second class, by dint of race, or religion, such a solid seeming structure and community to belong to, would have huge attraction.
 
I have seen old men standing on streets in places like Slough, Peterborough, Reading and parts of London, holding leaflets and copies of the Koran - ready to speak to anybody who is interested in Islam.
That seems like evangelism to me.


Asking me to concede a point conceded a couple of posts back: some do, but there is no systematic tradition of evangelism given the lack of a theological imperative to possess one.

As for student societies - show me one that doesn't dedicate time to enlarging itself.
 
My ex employer wanted to convert me, but that was because of personal interest in the welfare of my soul.

Not many employers are like that.
 
More Bishop Spong (Damn, you Lopaka!)

Merrit via the Internet writes:
"I am dismayed by poll results that show consistently that people who attend church regularly are more likely to support the war in Iraq and the people conducting it, than people who are not associated with a religious organization. How can this be? What message are they hearing? Where do they hear it or read it?"

Dear Merrit,

You touch a strange dilemma but everything I see agrees with your finding. It is also true that people who attend church regularly are more racially prejudiced, prejudiced against equality for women and prejudiced against homosexual persons. Since all of these things seem inconsistent with the Gospel that I understand, I find this reality embarrassing. But that does not mean that I do not seek to understand it.

Perhaps the clue lies in the fact that people in the South and non-urban parts of the Midwest and the West tend to be churchgoers more than people who live in the Northeast and on the West coast. These regions of our country also tend to be more conservative and perhaps this is reflected in their churches and their church going people.

I was raised in Charlotte, NC, in a very conservative Episcopal Church. That church was not only segregated, its leaders taught me that segregation was the will of God and quoted the Bible to prove it. That church taught me that women were second-class citizens who could not possibly be priests or bishops and its leaders quoted the Bible to prove that patriarchy was the will of God. That church taught me that homosexuality was either a mental illness that needed to be cured or a moral depravity that needed to be converted, and of course, its leaders quoted the Bible to prove that homophobia was blessed by God.

Religious figures have frequently taken very prejudiced stands. Early in his life, Jerry Falwell started a segregated academy and called Nelson Mandela a communist, who ought to be imprisoned. He championed Apartheid South Africa as a bulwark against communism in the continent of Africa.

Television evangelist Pat Robertson regularly attacks the feminist movement as family breakers and suggests a high correlation between feminists and lesbians. Some of his anti homosexual rhetoric surely feeds the prejudices that are abroad.

The South has always had a strong military tradition. Southern senators have historically used their seniority to locate military installations in the South. Military schools like Virginia Military Academy and the Citadel are admired Southern institutions. Every old line Southern democrat from Richard Russell to Huey Long to George Wallace to Lyndon Johnson to Strom Thurmond (he was once a democrat) combined racism with patriotism to build a political majority. Religion under girded both. Remember that even the KKK was a semi-religious organization who had official chaplains, that they always spelled 'khaplains' and whose major symbol was a burning cross.

Historically, Christianity has been a barrier breaking religion. In Christ, Paul once asserted, there is neither Jew nor Greek, male or female, bond or free. Yet Christians throughout the ages have encouraged tribalism with its blessing of war, patriarchy with its denigration of women and slavery and segregation of the races. We have also participated in and blessed wars of religious intolerance despite the fact that Jesus enjoined us "to love our enemies and to bless those who persecute us."

Perhaps the old adage is correct. Christianity has not failed. It simply hasn't yet been tried.

-- John Shelby Spong

Amen, Brother Spong! Amen!
 
Alexius said:
To reiterate: Islam lacks a systematic tradition of evangelism, and those few who advocate it are unrepresentative and ineffective.

Really? I looked on the internet (because of what I dimly remembered from history class and definitely recalled from historical fiction and non-fiction more recently read) and found:

What Muhammad said:
"I have been ordered by God to fight with people till they bear testimony to the fact that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is his messenger, and that they establish prayer and pay Zakat (money). If they do it, their blood and their property are safe from me" (Bukhari Vol. I, p. 13)

Okay, maybe that wasn't exactly evangelism. More on a similar vein:

What the Qur'an says:

"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good)." (3:85)

"And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere." (8:39)

"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (9:5)
 
The reference to reducing other communities to obedience refers to the initial phase of Islamic history in the Arabian peninsula - they are deemed to conflict with other, universal injunctions to tolerate other faiths, and so are deemed superceded.

The interpretation of verses depends upon a knowledge of the time and place of their reception and the audience to whom they were spoken. Many of them address very particular situations, which are deemed inappropriate subject matter for decision making based upon analogy.

So, not such a contradicton, after all, when viewed in context.
 
Alexius said:
The reference to reducing other communities to obedience refers to the initial phase of Islamic history in the Arabian peninsula - they are deemed to conflict with other, universal injunctions to tolerate other faiths, and so are deemed superceded.

Yes but Islamic fundamentalists seem to pick the parts they like and disregard the parts they don't.
 
Attempt To Get Thread Back On Topic...

Pete Younger said:
Yes but Islamic fundamentalists seem to pick the parts they like and disregard the parts they don't.
So, quite similiar to Christian fundamentalists in that respect, then?

And all the while, claiming that their's is the only correct and definitive interpretation. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Attempt To Get Thread Back On Topic...

AndroMan said:
So, quite similiar to Christian fundamentalists in that respect, then?

And all the while, claiming that their's is the only correct and definitive interpretation. :rolleyes:

I couldn't agree more but they tend not to murder people in the name of religion.
 
What you are talking about is abstracting material to justify an end (yes, fundamentalists do that. Other people do it as well).

I'm talking about relating the parts to the whole, so as to attain a coherent picture (emphasis on 'a', as more than one interpretation can be derived).

There is an enormous difference.
 
This may have been addressed earlier, but how does one judge whether any religion is "failing"?

By the number of followers? And whether the trend is towards MORE followers, or less?

Shadow
 
Just curious. The thread starter seemed to suggest Christianity might be seen as 'failing' based on numbers of adherents. IF that is the basis... strictly numeric... the "discussion" would be over relatively soon (assuming we got a set of numbers most could agree on... if that is possible).

Shadow
 
Are we talking about Christianity world-wide or just in the Western world? I think you would get two widely differing numerical answers.
 
Fastest growing religion in the west is alleged to be the Bahia faith...

Don't know where the rest of the world stands on Christian uptake. I know a lot of evangelical initiatives have been scaled down in the main churches, since its now largely viewed for what it always was- social engineering by colonialists.
 
Sorry, genuine question - is that the same thing as the Baha'i faith?
 
Re: Re: Attempt To Get Thread Back On Topic...

Pete Younger said:
I couldn't agree more but they tend not to murder people in the name of religion.
Pete, check out how Charlemagne spread the Christian faith or for that matter the Conquistadors.
 
Re: Re: Re: Attempt To Get Thread Back On Topic...

intaglio said:
Pete, check out how Charlemagne spread the Christian faith or for that matter the Conquistadors.

Which is why I don't subscribe to any religion, but I was talking about now, lets face it, if you go back far enough you'll find a pope who had a string of concubines.
 
Mythopoeika said:
Sorry, genuine question - is that the same thing as the Baha'i faith?

That's the chap...my spell-checker 'corrected' it! :hmph:
 
Slightly OT observation...

Not to belabor the obvious, but "fastest growing" is often a semi-misleading category, because to achieve that title one pretty much has to start from a fairly low number. I'm not suggesting it's meaningless, but if 500,000 people move to New York City (8 million residents) over the years 2000-2009 it still has almost no chance of being the "fastest-growing" US city, that title goes to places like Henderson, Nevada which are considerably smaller to begin with.
 
L,

I was working on the dP/dT where P is population. Pretty Newtonian.

Year on year compounded increase... Since when have you known me to be sloppy with stats?:cool:
 
but then again - do we take 'failing' as a decrease in membership or as 'failure' to live up to its own doctrine?
 
Hugo Cornwall said:
L,

I was working on the dP/dT where P is population. Pretty Newtonian.

Year on year compounded increase... Since when have you known me to be sloppy with stats?:cool:

You? Self-described "Detective of the Arcane"*? Never. ;)

To be honest I'm a little cranky of late. Didn't mean to seem demeaning to anyone.

*Speaking of titles, I'm sorely tempted to adopt "Pretty Newtonian" as my current one. :D
 
Meanderer said:
but then again - do we take 'failing' as a decrease in membership or as 'failure' to live up to its own doctrine?

I think that's a very key question, meanderer. I'll do my best to offer my take on it a bit later today.
 
Back
Top