Can Christian evangelizing ever be "non-aggressive"?
So I found this blurb, titled "Good words come in small packages," in the "Religion" section of The Dallas Morning News, Saturday, Feb. 12, 2005, p. G1. (The paper was lying in the grad student lounge, and I just happened upon this story.) The story is about miniature Bibles being distributed by "A groupd of Kansas evangelicals trying to communicate their message in a non-aggressive way." So, they leave these little Bibles "on restaurant tables, in the handles of gas pumps, near pay phones and on chairs in airports."
Now, I put forth the following question: Can Christian evangelizing ever be "non-aggressive"?
The answer I would posit is, "No, it cannot be."
Why? Because Christian evangelizing is based on the idea that Christianity is the one true religion, and without it--without believing in Christ as your personal Lord and Savior and without (supposedly) following all of Gods laws--non-believers are condemned to a life of misery and suffering here on earth with an even more miserable life burning in the fires of Hell in the hereafter. Now, of course, one *some* Christian evangelicals do not believe in Hell or eternal suffering, or that they believe in the equal validity of all religions. But, I would argue that evangelicism as a movement is based in the belief that people need to be "saved" and brought to belief in Christ, and that all those who refuse to be "saved" are lost and condemned to eternal damnation. So, I would problematize anyone's self-appellation as an evangelical Christian if they did not believe in such dogma.
This dogma of the necessity for salvation for happiness and to avoid eternal damnation is at least implicit in Christian evangelizing, even in the guise of leaving tiny little Bibles in non-descript places. One could say that evangelicals are simply placing Bibles out there so that people can see them, and that, therefore, they are only putting information out there for those who choose to take it. However, I would counter that the tacit message is known well enough in the popular imagination to carry the tacit message of damnation with it. Thus, a gay person seeing a Bible in the restroom, for example, immediately recognizes it as a emblem of his/her "sinfulness" and need for redemption." Perhaps a practicing Buddhist or agnostic or whoever sees it and recognizes the same implicit message. Perhaps these people are in a state-of-mind where this message has power over them. Then the message becomes a wielding of power over the weak--of kicking people when they are down, in other words.
So, no, evangelicism is never non-aggressive. It prays on "the weak." Not people who are inherently weak, but people who, due to societal pressures are strained, who must fight every day to maintain their self-confidence in the face of a culture that tells them that they are worthless at best and, at worst sinful, abnormal, deviant, and damned.
I'd love to write more, but my parking meter is expired already. Gots to head out. Maybe I'll update later on...
Now, I put forth the following question: Can Christian evangelizing ever be "non-aggressive"?
The answer I would posit is, "No, it cannot be."
Why? Because Christian evangelizing is based on the idea that Christianity is the one true religion, and without it--without believing in Christ as your personal Lord and Savior and without (supposedly) following all of Gods laws--non-believers are condemned to a life of misery and suffering here on earth with an even more miserable life burning in the fires of Hell in the hereafter. Now, of course, one *some* Christian evangelicals do not believe in Hell or eternal suffering, or that they believe in the equal validity of all religions. But, I would argue that evangelicism as a movement is based in the belief that people need to be "saved" and brought to belief in Christ, and that all those who refuse to be "saved" are lost and condemned to eternal damnation. So, I would problematize anyone's self-appellation as an evangelical Christian if they did not believe in such dogma.
This dogma of the necessity for salvation for happiness and to avoid eternal damnation is at least implicit in Christian evangelizing, even in the guise of leaving tiny little Bibles in non-descript places. One could say that evangelicals are simply placing Bibles out there so that people can see them, and that, therefore, they are only putting information out there for those who choose to take it. However, I would counter that the tacit message is known well enough in the popular imagination to carry the tacit message of damnation with it. Thus, a gay person seeing a Bible in the restroom, for example, immediately recognizes it as a emblem of his/her "sinfulness" and need for redemption." Perhaps a practicing Buddhist or agnostic or whoever sees it and recognizes the same implicit message. Perhaps these people are in a state-of-mind where this message has power over them. Then the message becomes a wielding of power over the weak--of kicking people when they are down, in other words.
So, no, evangelicism is never non-aggressive. It prays on "the weak." Not people who are inherently weak, but people who, due to societal pressures are strained, who must fight every day to maintain their self-confidence in the face of a culture that tells them that they are worthless at best and, at worst sinful, abnormal, deviant, and damned.
I'd love to write more, but my parking meter is expired already. Gots to head out. Maybe I'll update later on...