Article: Real vs Fake Persecution CC

[Catwoman]

I think this only happens when Christian opinion is used as a euphemism for expressing bigotry and misogyny.

 

I don't think that's necessarily the case.

 

There are people out there (and even on this forum) who poke fun of or insult those who say they believe in God or religion. If you look hard enough, you can always find someone who will seize any opportunity to start talking about how believing in any religion or deity is just as silly as believing in Santa and the Tooth Fairy, even in threads where the OP has asked for like-minded people to respond. I'm not saying they shouldn't believe that, but I don't think it's very nice to come right out and berate someone in that way.

 

That said, there are plenty of people who call themselves Christian who can be pretty darned insulting to anyone who doesn't believe exactly as they do, too, and I think they need to learn to be more tolerant and kind, as well. So what if someone is an atheist? Why is it any of your business, and why do you think you get to judge that person?

 

Of course, I am of the belief that when it comes to things like religion and atheism, it's usually best to agree to disagree if you can't be civil and polite about it. I don't really care what anyone else believes when it comes to highly personal things like that, so as long as they don't try to convert me to their way of thinking, I'm not going to worry about it.

[Rosie_0801]

Now that's an interesting question -- if Protestants were a minority, and needed stores that catered to their religious needs, what would they sell?

 

 

The Protestant shops I'm aware of have Bibles, Christian lit, other devotionals and inspirational products, nativities, kids picture books, dvds both for adults and kids and generally not what I went in there looking for. :p

 

The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox bookshops sell less inspirational products, fewer kids bibles and a lot of pictures of saints. The Catholic bookshop has a surprisingly bad range of kids books and the Eastern Orthodox has a quite a good one.

[Rosie_0801]

If you're genuinely confused, I'll honor the question with a basic answer. The essential theology of Christianity is inherently offensive to the fallen, sinful world. Friendship with the world is described as enmity with God, and we cannot serve both - it's one or the other. If you look, act, preach, and speak so much like those you are supposed to be witnessing to that they see nothing at which to be affronted or contest, essential biblical truth is likely missing and the gospel is likely not being preached. This has nothing to do with the manner in which the witnessing or preaching is done, but the content alone.

 

If nobody could tell I was a Christian except by my verbal label as one, that means my words, interactions, manner of living, and basic comportment all deserves examination to see if I am truly saved. I John would be my recommendation for the short version of what a believer should be preaching through their words and deeds. A quick read if you are interested in what the life and faith of a saved believer should look like.

 

That is the quickest way I can clarify that for you. Read 1 John, or study Romans if you're interested in deeper exposition on the topic with dialectics included.

 

If we ever meet, it's not you, it's me. I'm not easily shocked.  :biggrinjester:

[poppy]

1) it's a reference to a specific scripture, though reiterated throughout the body of the Bible that believers are to be set apart in their conduct, which comes from the change of their fundamental nature wrought by the Holy Spirit. Works to glorify God come from a changed heart, not the other way around - that's a really common pitfall. The scripture, specifically, that I was referencing is this one:

 

James 4:4-11 ESV

4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. 5 Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, “He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us� 6 But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.†7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8 Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9 Be wretched and mourn and weep. Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10 Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will exalt you.

 

While this chapter is discussing breaks in fellowship and issues within the body, the underlying issue is that you cannot be of the world and of God, both. If you're of one, you're apart from the other. Quite to the contrary, we are to be in the world and witnessing and loving our fellow man, but not of the same nature or conduct as them. Being redeemed means we are fundamentally different on a heart level and that outgrowth shows in numerous ways in a converted life. But 2 Corinthians and Romans both cover fairly extensively that believers are to be very strict with false believers and teachers within the body, but very generous and loving toward the world outside the church doors. Keeping divisions and enmity out from among believers is a separate issue from witnessing to unbelievers. A bit of a separate issue from what I think you're asking.

 

2) No man knows the heart of another. If one claims to be a believer we are called to judge this by their works to see if they are living out what they claim, but that is no guarantee of salvation.

 

1 Corinthians 5:12-13 ESV

For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.â€

 

As for self examination, the book of I Peter covers this extensively and gives assurance of salvation to believers. I'm saved, and I still go through it fairly regularly to examine my own heart and repent in areas The Lord shows me I'm slipping up and failing miserably. Addressing these issues in practice and praying for wisdom and strength to help fight these sin tendencies is definitional to the life of a believer. It's progressive and we work at it our entire lives (the process of sanctification), but we can never be perfect or sinless until we are glorified with God for eternity. That's a promise to believers that isn't fulfilled immediately upon justification (being saved, made right in the eyes of God through the covering of Jesus, confessing his name and believing in our hearts that he was who he said he was and did what he said he did, etc) but one to come.

 

It's so much more complex than I can easily distill down in a post, but that's the bare bones gist of what I think you're asking. Assurance is something many believers struggle with, even those who would appear to the world to be saved. It's very much between the believer and God, and we cannot know even the depths of our own hearts as completely as he does. However part of being saved is seeing ourselves and our sin more clearly, through the lens of Scripture and supernaturally with the help of the Holy Spirit. So while it is an ongoing, lifelong process and by no means easy for a believer, we become capable of seeing our sin rightly and responding properly through the transformative process of salvation.

 

I hope I helped more than I confused you! This is hard to communicate while cooking dinner, on a forum, with a headcold. And when in doubt always go to the bible before men - test everything by scripture to see if it lines up, because that's the ultimate authority.

 

Good night :)

 

So -- I am trying to think of a way to word this and failing - but, it seems to me, in this theology, being persecuted is almost the goal, and a measure of success?  Obviously there is a lot more to it, too, but still. That really helps explain the article in the OP. 

[Greta]

So -- I am trying to think of a way to word this and failing - but, it seems to me, in this theology, being persecuted is almost the goal, and a measure of success?

I've always interpreted the scriptures' passages on this topic to be saying, basically, "IF you are persecuted, take heart! Do not be discouraged, because you will get your reward in the eternal love and fellowship with Christ that is heaven." It absolutely NEVER occurred to me to interpret it as "persecution is the yardstick by which your faith is measured."

 

That's not to say that others have not interpreted it in the latter way. Just to express my surprise at that interpretation. It never would have occurred to me. (Prior to reading this thread.) But it does explain why people would be quick to label their experiences as persecution.

[marbel]

So -- I am trying to think of a way to word this and failing - but, it seems to me, in this theology, being persecuted is almost the goal, and a measure of success?  Obviously there is a lot more to it, too, but still. That really helps explain the article in the OP. 

 

I was always taught that persecution may happen and that we are not to lose heart if it does.  But Christians are to be different from the prevailing culture and may suffer in large and small ways because of that.

 

So, say a group of kids decides to do some stupid/wrong thing, if there is a Christian kid in the group, he or she would be expected to either try to convince the other kids not to do it, or to risk being shamed/ostracized by them by leaving the group and refusing to engage in the activity, perhaps to tell parents or other authorities what they are doing.   That is not persecution.  And certainly I am not saying that only Christian kids would do the right thing.  But they are expected (I might even say commanded) to do the right thing even if it means losing friends, etc.   They should be prepared for that.

 

I think I read upthread, or maybe I'm remembering from somewhere else, about people who have refused to be friends with others who are not Christians or are the "wrong" type of Christian.  It really should not work that way.   We don't reject people based on their beliefs but we may reject, or be rejected by, people because of behavior.   If someone came over to play Xbox and my son brought out a game that the boy wasn't allowed to play, I would hope the boy would just say "do you have something else, I can't play that game?" and they'd do something else.  We wouldn't expect the family to cut off the friendship.  I wouldn't expect my son to call the kid names and try to convince him to play the forbidden game.  

 

I also would expect to be rejected by people if I was overbearing in witnessing to them.  If you invite me to your house I'm not going to bring my Bible and harangue you about your sinful unbelieving ways.  I  may look for an opportunity to talk about the gospel but it is more likely that I will just try to be a good friend.  

 

Again I want to emphasize that I am not saying only Christian kids are expected to and will do the right thing even if it means losing friends, being harmed, etc.  Just saying that that expectation is part of being Christian and I think part of the persecution thing. 

 

Kind of rambly here, sorry, but I've been thinking a lot about persecution lately and the impression that nonchristians are getting.  Reading the article in the OP, I just had to laugh because to me the examples of persecution were so ridiculous.  I can't imagine anyone really calling that persecution. It really reads like satire to me.

 

ETA: Wow, while I was typing away GretaLynne answered it better and in fewer words. :-)

[Greta]

ETA: Wow, while I was typing away GretaLynne answered it better and in fewer words. :-)

You said it far better than I did! And your specific examples were very good.

[Reefgazer]

Now I'm hungry....

If you're ever going to convert to Islam, do so during the next two weeks.  It's Ramadan…which means, multi-cultural awesome potluck every single night at many mosques.  Plus, insanely good sweets.   Oh…and for those who are bothered about men and women eating separately, I can tell you at least where I am…the women tend to make something extra for their "sisters". ;)

 

(Total honesty, though, you don't have to convert to enjoy the food.  Mosques welcome any and all people, especially during Ramadan.  It's also a tradition in many Muslim countries to put out banquets for those who are hungry, so many see it as an extra blessing to feed people in need.  If you like yummy things made with phyllo dough, stop by.  It's also the time for qataif…which are little pancakes filled with cheese or nuts and deep fried.  Oh, and little date filled cookies called mamoul. )

 

[SadieMarie]

One of the things that I learned from my MIL is to make baklava with a custard filling instead of nuts. (Of course, there is no bad baklava). It's really easy….and very good. I think it's best a little warm, but DH thinks it's best for breakfast the next day.

You can either make it with the phyllo sheets or the shredded phyllo dough.

 

Start by making your sugar syrup. The rule is hot syrup…cold baklava…or vice versa. I usually just do one cup sugar, one cup of water, and a squeeze of lemon on the stove….and then add in some vanilla near the end. You can also add rose water or orange water if you prefer them.

 

Easy way…mix up a batch of Jell-o vanilla pudding, following the instructions for pie filling. Buy the kind that you have to heat.

 

Next easiest way….make your own vanilla pudding from scratch. I usually do it in the microwave. 2 cups of milk, 1/2 cup sugar, 3 tablespoons of cornstarch… nuke for 2 minutes…whisk…nuke another 2 minutes….whisk. Keep nuking until thick….maybe a minute at a time. Then stir in vanilla extract. (Make it in a much larger bowl as the milk can go everywhere.)

 

Hard core…make up vanilla pastry cream.

 

You can add a little cinnamon to the pudding if you like that as well.

 

 

Now melt some butter. Butter a pan, ideally one which fits your phyllo size or close to it.

 

If using the shredded phyllo, you simply add it to a bowl with the melted butter and mix it with your hands. Usually about 1 stick is enough. Put half in the pan….spread it around…top with vanilla pudding….then put the rest down. Bake. In DH's culture, it's called kunafa.

 

If using sheets, then put down two sheets, brush with butter, put down two more. Use about half….then don't put butter on the last set of sheets….and put your vanilla filling down. Try to keep it away from the edges, as it will burn. Cover it with two more sheets of phyllo. Press gently. Butter…repeat until you finish the sheets.

 

If the sheets are too big for your pan, fold them over as you place them down. Alternate which side you fold over (so I fold over the top extra one time….and then the next time, I position it, so the extra is at the bottom.)

Now take a serrated knife and cut the phyllo dough (yes, before you bake it). You can find fun designs online. I'm not fancy, I do squares.

 

Pour any remaining butter on top (or at least brush it on).

 

Bake in a 350 oven until golden…usually about 40-50 minutes, but it depends on your oven.

 

When it comes out of the oven, pour the syrup on top.

 

Try and wait a few minutes so you don't get burned by the syrup before eating. :)

Ok, but how many weight watcher points would a serving, or two, or maybe the whole pan, be?

[idnib]

So -- I am trying to think of a way to word this and failing - but, it seems to me, in this theology, being persecuted is almost the goal, and a measure of success?  Obviously there is a lot more to it, too, but still. That really helps explain the article in the OP. 

 

This is what I was trying to understand above, in my post which ArcticMama kindly took the time to respond to. I took a walk after dinner and spent time thinking about it but  I don't think I'm going to understand this.

 

If the message is one that is hated by the fallen world, and if one is not being persecuted, one is not "doing it right" then why complain about being persecuted? Isn't that the inevitable outcome of bringing a hated message to a fallen world? And if you do complain, and people agree that you have been persecuted (through their own idea, not through conversion), and they stop, what does that mean for the message? Does it mean you're not doing it right again? Does it assume their hearts have softened to the message?

 

I'm confused as to why people who expect to be persecuted are complaining about persecution, and what it all means if, after they complain, the perceived persecution stops.

 

I'm not talking about anyone in the thread, necessarily, but rather people who think like the author of the article I quoted above. I'm not sure who in this thread agree with the author.

[Greta]

This is what I was trying to understand above, in my post which ArcticMama kindly took the time to respond to. I took a walk after dinner and spent time thinking about it but  I don't think I'm going to understand this.

 

If the message is one that is hated by the fallen world, and if one is not being persecuted, one is not "doing it right" then why complain about being persecuted? Isn't that the inevitable outcome of bringing a hated message to a fallen world? And if you do complain, and people agree that you have been persecuted (through their own idea, not through conversion), and they stop, what does that mean for the message? Does it mean you're not doing it right again? Does it assume their hearts have softened to the message?

 

I'm confused as to why people who expect to be persecuted are complaining about persecution, and what it all means if after they complain the perceived persecution stops.

 

I'm not talking about anyone in the thread, necessarily, but rather people who think like the author of the article I quoted above. I'm not sure who in this thread agree with the author.

 

Interesting questions!  The only "answer" (and I'm not saying that it's the right one) that I can come up with -- well, to understand where I'm going with this I have to back up.  Christ said we might face persecution for righteousness.  He didn't say it would be just for what we think or believe, but for what we ARE (or at least are meant to be):  righteous.  And how did he say that the righteous person should respond to the persecution?  "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven."  So a truly righteous person who is being persecuted for righteousness' sake is going to be joyful because they know their reward lies in heaven.  They are not going to complain about the temporary, unimportant sufferings of this world, because this world is not what matters to them.

 

Conclusion:  I am not a righteous person.  But that's another matter.   :D

[TeacherZee]

Here is the thing though, I can't think of anyone who HATES the Christian message. I know people who don't believe it to be true, and who find it very problematic when the messages is used to influence things that affect them, but hate it? No.

[Mom-ninja.]

Doesn't this depend on the nature of your interaction with people?  There's a very nice librarian in our local library who dresses in a contemporary, quietly stylish way, but over time I've noticed that she always wears long skirts and long-sleeved cardigans.  (Fashion-wise, her outfits don't call attention to themselves in the way Amish dress or Islamic dress would.)  It crosses my mind that she may dress this way for religious reasons, but there's nothing in the nature of our interaction that would indicate that she follows a particular religion, or which religion she follows.  She may be dressing this way out of conservative beliefs of Christian modesty, or following Jewish dress customs, or just because she likes the look.  If she is Christian, how would I tell?  What would be the difference between a nice Christian librarian and a nice Jewish librarian or a nice something-else librarian?

I've had women assume I'm religious because of the way I dress. I like to wear a lot of dresses and skirts.

 

I've also had people express shock when they find out I'm atheist. I don't fit their profile of atheist. My manners, speech, clothes, and some parenting values cause people to assume I'm religious. Usually, when people find out I'm atheist they stop contact with me even after their good impression they have of me. Persecution I say. ;)

 

 

Here is the thing though, I can't think of anyone who HATES the Christian message. I know people who don't believe it to be true, and who find it very problematic when the messages is used to influence things that affect them, but hate it? No.

Depends on the message as I've heard of many messages, that are called Christian by those espousing them, and not only do I not agree but yes, hate. So, we'd have to agree on just what exactly is the Christian message. You know, the right one. :)

[Greta]

Here is the thing though, I can't think of anyone who HATES the Christian message. I know people who don't believe it to be true, and who find it very problematic when the messages is used to influence things that affect them, but hate it? No.

 

I don't know anyone who would use the word "hate".  I do know people who are turned off, disgusted, repulsed by it.  BUT I would also say that in many, many of those cases, the person is actually disgusted by what *I* would view as a misrepresentation of the Christian message, and not the true gospel of Christ. The gospel of Christ is one of love, light, hope, and peace.  When it gets twisted into something condemnatory, hateful, oppressive, and suffocating, it's only natural that good people will be repulsed and "stumbled" as the saying goes.  

 

I'm not saying that about anyone on this board or this thread.  But I have known people IRL who have twisted the gospel message as I described, and turned people away from Christ because of it.

[SemiSweet]

I've had women assume I'm religious because of the way I dress. I like to wear a lot of dresses and skirts.

 

I've also had people express shock when they find out I'm atheist. I don't fit their profile of atheist. My manners, speech, clothes, and some parenting values cause people to assume I'm religious. Usually, when people find out I'm atheist they stop contact with me even after their good impression they have of me. Persecution I say. ;)

 

 

Depends on the message as I've heard of many messages, that are called Christian by those espousing them, and not only do I not agree but yes, hate. So, we'd have to agree on just what exactly is the Christian message. You know, the right one. :)

Yep, I've had way more "persecution" as an atheist than I ever did as a Christian. One of dd's friends mom told dd that atheists hate god. And dd has lost about 4 friends because she is atheist. Our new neighbor is Christian and I'm just waiting for it to come up, dd asked me lie if it did, I told her I couldn't do that. :( Breaks my heart for her though.

 

There are definitely some aspects of the Christian message that I hate, no doubt about it.

[idnib]

I have met many. They react viscerally with fury and disgust, sarcasm, even trying to cover up with one liners and nonsense slogans (because, "You ain't got no pancake mix!" is such a witty response to the gospel, you know).

 

There's evidence all over Youtube if you need it. Even the most mellow street preaching, like Todd Friel or Ray Comfort, can inspire fairly shocking amounts of ire in almost no time flat. And it isn't because they've got their finger up someone's nose in attack.

 

I understand what you're talking about, although the pancake mix thing went straight over my head.

 

I think it's important to differentiate between people who specifically don't like the Christian message and people who don't like any religion. I think a lot of people who react against things like street preaching are against religion in general, but their public target is someone like a street preacher because other religions don't seem to have street preachers. If Muslims started sending street preachers out to stand on street corners, or door-to-door, I doubt they would fare better and would probably fare much worse.

 

Out of people I know who are really against religion, there are basically two categories: 1) people who feel any religion, not just Christianity, is holding back humanity; and 2) people who have been spiritually abused.

 

Other than that, there are a lot of people who don't like religion or are ambivalent to it, but to really hate it and have a visceral reaction to it is another level and is not just limited to Christianity. Usually there's a history.

[fraidycat]

Many people aren't against "the message", so much as the PREACHING.

 

I don't care who you are or what your message is - christianity, vegetarianism, holes in the ozone, ...whatever. I may or may not agree with your opinion, but I'll definitely hate your approach if you are preaching at me.

[Χά�ων]

Hm. I mean this gently and I hope it comes out right.

 

Given that the biblical command is to go forth and preach the gospel to all men, you can see the conundrum here. If that inspires hatred in you, should we fear your response more than we fear breaking a command of God? I mean this seriously. Is your comfort and approval more important?

 

If simple obedience, no matter how sweetly delivered or kindly meant, inspires hatred in you because your autonomy and opinion dictates you don't want to hear it, is your hatred wrong or our obedience wrong? Who 'wins' this in the public square? A Believer's command from God to obey on this point, or your comfort and preference in being approached with it?

 

It's a shoot the messenger situation if you're looking at it through our perspective. Because we have an eternal impetus to obey, despite your desire to hear it or not, the conflict becomes obvious. And not obeying isn't an option on our part, just as your reaction isn't really an option on your part, it's a visceral response to preaching, as you said.

 

This isn't a criticism, but it is something to turn over in your head from the opposite perspective. I know exactly why you don't want me giving you the gospel, do you understand why I feel I have to?

 

We're obviously not going to agree on this point, but it is something to think about nonetheless.

Where I live there is a church on every block. Each convinced they are right. If only 9 out of every 10 people I encounter (trust me that is a conservative number) feels commanded to share the good news. Day in and day out. You can bet I am going to be get snippy after a while. Imagine for every 10 people you interact with 9 are commanded to share the good news with you. And pretend there good news is Buddhism. Day in and day out. Even though you confindent in your religious beliefs. They all have to share with you. There is no break unless you stay home 24/7. They are really believe they have to do that.

 

It is exhausting. It is annoying. It is invasive. Even if it is your first time sharing it has been done a done again. At some point even the most patient person is going to snap.

[poppy]

Hm. I mean this gently and I hope it comes out right.

 

Given that the biblical command is to go forth and preach the gospel to all men, you can see the conundrum here. If that inspires hatred in you, should we fear your response more than we fear breaking a command of God? I mean this seriously. Is your comfort and approval more important?

 

If simple obedience, no matter how sweetly delivered or kindly meant, inspires hatred in you because your autonomy and opinion dictates you don't want to hear it, is your hatred wrong or our obedience wrong? Who 'wins' this in the public square? A Believer's command from God to obey on this point, or your comfort and preference in being approached with it?

 

It's a shoot the messenger situation if you're looking at it through our perspective. Because we have an eternal impetus to obey, despite your desire to hear it or not, the conflict becomes obvious. And not obeying isn't an option on our part, just as your reaction isn't really an option on your part, it's a visceral response to preaching, as you said.

 

This isn't a criticism, but it is something to turn over in your head from the opposite perspective. I know exactly why you don't want me giving you the gospel, do you understand why I feel I have to?

 

We're obviously not going to agree on this point, but it is something to think about nonetheless.

 

If you feel you have to aggressively proselytize, I respect that.  It is not anti-Christian to not like being preached to. It sure as heck is not persecution. 

[TeacherZee]

Hm. I mean this gently and I hope it comes out right.

Given that the biblical command is to go forth and preach the gospel to all men, you can see the conundrum here. If that inspires hatred in you, should we fear your response more than we fear breaking a command of God? I mean this seriously. Is your comfort and approval more important?

If simple obedience, no matter how sweetly delivered or kindly meant, inspires hatred in you because your autonomy and opinion dictates you don't want to hear it, is your hatred wrong or our obedience wrong? Who 'wins' this in the public square? A Believer's command from God to obey on this point, or your comfort and preference in being approached with it?

It's a shoot the messenger situation if you're looking at it through our perspective. Because we have an eternal impetus to obey, despite your desire to hear it or not, the conflict becomes obvious. And not obeying isn't an option on our part, just as your reaction isn't really an option on your part, it's a visceral response to preaching, as you said.

This isn't a criticism, but it is something to turn over in your head from the opposite perspective. I know exactly why you don't want me giving you the gospel, do you understand why I feel I have to?

We're obviously not going to agree on this point, but it is something to think about nonetheless.

I agree with Fraidycat that it is the preaching that is the problem for me. My grandmother was a devoutly Christian woman. She never once preached at me our anyone else in the family. The closest she came to preaching was requiring Grace to be said at meals. Yet we all knew she was devout. She LIVED her faith. She is the ONE and ONLY reason I keep wishing I could believe. She is the reason I keep reading the Bible. She is the reason I keep wanting. Now I am sure some will say that I keep failing because I am focusing on her and not God, but my point is that I wouldn't even be trying if it wasn't for her. She never once preached at me. Maybe spreading the word through preaching isn't what God meant when he asked you to spread the word?

[TeacherZee]

Depends on the message as I've heard of many messages, that are called Christian by those espousing them, and not only do I not agree but yes, hate. So, we'd have to agree on just what exactly is the Christian message. You know, the right one. :)

Good point :)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

As others have pointed out, churches vastly outnumber mosques.

 

I'd be willing to bet that most church vandalism isn't done as a religious protest. It's just seen as another community building for those bent on destroying something. I don't think those who vandalize schools (which vastly outnumber church vandalisms) are doing it to protest the state of education either. It's just an easy target, found in every community, and one that will draw a lot of attention.

 

Exactly.  Those trying to use church vandalism as a sign of persecution are grasping for straws.

[marbel]

I agree with Fraidycat that it is the preaching that is the problem for me. My grandmother was a devoutly Christian woman. She never once preached at me our anyone else in the family. The closest she came to preaching was requiring Grace to be said at meals. Yet we all knew she was devout. She LIVED her faith. She is the ONE and ONLY reason I keep wishing I could believe. She is the reason I keep reading the Bible. She is the reason I keep wanting. Now I am sure some will say that I keep failing because I am focusing on her and not God, but my point is that I wouldn't even be trying if it wasn't for her. She never once preached at me. Maybe spreading the word through preaching isn't what God meant when he asked you to spread the word?

 

Quote attributed to St Francis: 

“Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.â€

 

So, I am a pretty quiet Christian.  I am not going to come around and preach to people.  But I don't feel it is my job to "save" anyone.  That is God's job. My job is to be the face of Christ to people.  That means being kind, and helping people who need it, and being a friend to people.  Cooking for new moms, driving a disabled man to get his prescriptions, taking someone who is standing alone at church aside and asking "how are you really?" and not expecting to hear "fine."   It means hanging out in the booth my church has at an art festival every summer, inviting people to sit down, have a drink of water, talk while their kids get their faces painted or do a craft.   I've had some great conversations with people that had nothing to do with God.  But if they walk away thinking "wow, the people from that church weren't too weird, were they?" and are happy to see us again.... that's spreading the word. 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It's funny how when someone says anything negative about Christians or disagrees with their beliefs, that's persecution, but when Christians actually try to deny gay people their rights and outright slander them, it's not persecution, just Christians exercising their religious freedom.

 

Pot, meet kettle.

 

Quoting because liking this isn't enough.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think you'd be pleasantly surprised, nobody I know carries a gun and discharges it without serious provocation. And nobody I know would fire without a clear shot. I thought it was kind of obvious but duck and cover, and only the closest to the perpetrator firing a shot, are kind of basic firearms safety givens in such a scenario.

 

Maybe I'm taking fundamental defensive firearm safety education for granted, but even my children know you get low to the ground and hide if you cannot easily flee a dangerous situation. That goes for wild animals as well as human attackers. And a bear getting into the building is more likely than an armed gunman, since the armed gunman would probably see the volume of lifetime membership NRA stickers on windshields in the parking lot and likely think twice about this church being the low hanging fruit/easy target.

 

Fortunately two of the best shots in the church also sit in the back row. Lucky us :)

 

If you have as many former military in the congregation as you claim, then it is is possible.

 

In general, I find the CCW crowd not the most reliable at judging their own ability to actually operate under pressure.  And if you are in an area where half of the congregation feels threatened enough to walk around armed, I would consider moving.

 

[*Lulu*]

Hmm. What if you toss a slurpy on the individual? Key their car? Call the police and try to have them removed from public property? Cuss them out? Throw a brick through the door of the offending church? Vandalize their home?

 

 

Where in the heck do you live that people are doing this?

 

The only time I've known churches around here to be vandalized is by teens or someone high. Even then it is often with no mor malice than the vandalism of a warehouse, train car, etc. in other words, they were being jerks, but not because they felt the need to persecute some Christians.

 

As for the other stuff......

 

I've only ever seen that sort of behavior in fights involving intimate partners and thier family members. Again, crappy behavior, but not linked to religious ideology.

 

BTW- I've got no problem with asking the police to remove someone from public property if they are being a public nuisance. If the police show and the person is not breaking any laws they can go on about thier merry way. If they are in violation of some local ordinance I don't see how asking law enforcement to enforce the local law is persecution.

[Caroline]

And I don't know, is handing you a DVD or asking a few questions with you having any chance to walk away, at any time, aggressive proselytizing?

 

.

Yes it is.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Is it persecution to vote against anything that would benefit some group of people? If I vote against a new school bond, am I persecuting students or teachers? If I vote against legalizing pot am I persecuting pot users? If I vote to raise property taxes am I persecuting home owners? If I vote for the legal definition of marriage that I believe to be most beneficial to society am I persecuting those who want a different definition?

 

With respect to verbal abuse and name-calling, I would be comfortable calling it persecution regardless of who it is aimed at. It is hurtful, it is meant to be hurtful, it is just as abusive in the context of a public forum as it is in the intimate context of personal relationships. I stand adamantly against the "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me" concept. And on this forum I have seen significantly more name-calling, derision, and bullying aimed at Christians and people who espouse traditional values than at others.

 

The fact you try to make an analogy between voting for a school bond and denying basic rights to other citizens just shows that you are missing the point of the discussion.

 

[KarenNC]

I've had women assume I'm religious because of the way I dress. I like to wear a lot of dresses and skirts.

 

I've also had people express shock when they find out I'm atheist. I don't fit their profile of atheist. My manners, speech, clothes, and some parenting values cause people to assume I'm religious. Usually, when people find out I'm atheist they stop contact with me even after their good impression they have of me. Persecution I say. ;)

 

 

Depends on the message as I've heard of many messages, that are called Christian by those espousing them, and not only do I not agree but yes, hate. So, we'd have to agree on just what exactly is the Christian message. You know, the right one. :)

 

I'm also regularly assumed to be very conservative Christian due to the way I dress. I tend in general to long skirts (often denim) and shirts with at least short sleeves. It doesn't help that I have long gray hair and have been known to wear sneakers and socks with my skirts ;). For me, it's because I've seen my rear end in pants and no thanks. Long skirts are just more comfortable and flattering for me. I have definitely had many homeschoolers cool significantly toward me when they find out I am not what they expected. I also evidently don't fit the expected profile of a Neopagan UU homeschooler in their minds, being totally incapable of unschooling and what some would call more old-fashioned in the way I raise my daughter.:)

 

As for the message: "Preach the Gospel at all times and, when necessary, use words." ---St. Francis of Assisi

[*Lulu*]

As for cussing out those "sharing" the good news.......

 

The only time I have personally witnessed it was when the sharer was acting more like Balaam's ride than an ambassador of Christ.

 

When you stand on a street corner yelling at people who pass that they are going to hell you shouldn't be surprised if they yell back- KWIM?

 

 

And I get that most people don't preach the gospel quite like that.....but there is more than one way to share the message of God's love. If the only way you are doing it is causing you to get cussed out regurally than I would suggest moving on to a different method that is not so intrusive as to make those you want to reach want to cuss.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

As for cussing out those "sharing" the good news.......

 

The only time I have personally witnessed it was when the sharer was acting more like Balaam's ride than an ambassador of Christ.

 

When you stand on a street corner yelling at people who pass that they are going to hell you shouldn't be surprised if they yell back- KWIM?

 

 

And I get that most people don't preach the gospel quite like that.....but there is more than one way to share the message of God's love. If the only way you are doing it is causing you to get cussed out regurally than I would suggest moving on to a different method that is not so intrusive as to make those you want to reach want to cuss.

 

There was a local "street preacher" who would call some women "Jezebels" if he though they were dressed inappropriately, and then would start praching on modesty and immoral behavior. He did it once to a coworker of DH when the group was out for lunch, and may have gotten a cussing for the ages. DH can weave some fine fabric with his words, but he said what his coworker did had him in awe.

 

If you have to preach your message by yelling on the street corner or harassing people and handing the DVDs. you are doing your religion very, very wrong.

[Caroline]

As for cussing out those "sharing" the good news.......

 

The only time I have personally witnessed it was when the sharer was acting more like Balaam's ride than an ambassador of Christ.

 

When you stand on a street corner yelling at people who pass that they are going to hell you shouldn't be surprised if they yell back- KWIM?

 

 

And I get that most people don't preach the gospel quite like that.....but there is more than one way to share the message of God's love. If the only way you are doing it is causing you to get cussed out regurally than I would suggest moving on to a different method that is not so intrusive as to make those you want to reach want to cuss.

Yes. Exactly.

[Haiku]

Hmm. What if you toss a slurpy on the individual? Key their car? Call the police and try to have them removed from public property? Cuss them out? Throw a brick through the door of the offending church? Vandalize their home?

If these types of things are happening to one specific individual or group of people, then that individual or group is obviously doing something obnoxious to provoke it. Cause and effect. I'm not saying it's right, but it's not surprising. I have met countless truly obnoxious proselytizers.

 

And honestly, I don't care what your god or bible tells you to do. I never have had and never will have any desire to be Christian, and proselytizing only makes me more averse to Christianity.

 

The types of responses to proselytizing that you are reporting should be ample evidence to you that it doesn't work.

[poppy]

Hmm. What if you toss a slurpy on the individual? Key their car? Call the police and try to have them removed from public property? Cuss them out? Throw a brick through the door of the offending church? Vandalize their home?

 

Where is the line where not liking being preached to and responding becomes persecution? I agree that simply disliking it isn't persecution, and isn't even surprising. But when do responses become aggressive, and aggression become an issue? And I don't know, is handing you a DVD or asking a few questions with you having any chance to walk away, at any time, aggressive proselytizing?

 

Again, just look at this from the opposite perspective. And keep it in context. Nobody here has said disagreeing is persecution, but it can easily become so depending on what the response to the person or belief is.

 

There is civil disagreement and that doesn't qualify, but I do think we have to carefully watch the progression and recognize it can become so quite quickly.

 

Most of the things in your first paragraph are illegal. Even throwing  a slurpy is assault.  Any violence or threat of violence or hyper aggressive behavior is not OK.

 

But a lot of this thread has been about how 'Christians'  not even able to put out an opinion without getting persecuted and bullied.  My point is, being disagreed with is not persecution.  

[justasque]

 

Quote attributed to St Francis: 

“Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.â€

 

So, I am a pretty quiet Christian.  I am not going to come around and preach to people.  But I don't feel it is my job to "save" anyone.  That is God's job. My job is to be the face of Christ to people.  That means being kind, and helping people who need it, and being a friend to people.  Cooking for new moms, driving a disabled man to get his prescriptions, taking someone who is standing alone at church aside and asking "how are you really?" and not expecting to hear "fine."   It means hanging out in the booth my church has at an art festival every summer, inviting people to sit down, have a drink of water, talk while their kids get their faces painted or do a craft.   I've had some great conversations with people that had nothing to do with God.  But if they walk away thinking "wow, the people from that church weren't too weird, were they?" and are happy to see us again.... that's spreading the word.

Arctic Mama, I'd be interested to hear your take on this. I'm trying to understand your perspective. I've always believed that living a quiet Christian lifestyle, rather than in-your-face proselytizing, was actually more effective in winning hearts and minds for Christ, and therefore the more appropriate and desirable way to go about it.

 

How does that fit with the things you've posted, about Christianity being inherently offensive? If marbel is acting in this "quiet Christian" way, those to whom she is witnessing will, as you put it, "see nothing at which to be affronted or contest". Do you feel that, for folks who live this kind of quiet Christian lifestyle, "essential biblical truth is likely missing and the gospel is likely not being preached"?

 

If you're genuinely confused, I'll honor the question with a basic answer. The essential theology of Christianity is inherently offensive to the fallen, sinful world. Friendship with the world is described as enmity with God, and we cannot serve both - it's one or the other. If you look, act, preach, and speak so much like those you are supposed to be witnessing to that they see nothing at which to be affronted or contest, essential biblical truth is likely missing and the gospel is likely not being preached. This has nothing to do with the manner in which the witnessing or preaching is done, but the content alone.

 

If nobody could tell I was a Christian except by my verbal label as one, that means my words, interactions, manner of living, and basic comportment all deserves examination to see if I am truly saved. I John would be my recommendation for the short version of what a believer should be preaching through their words and deeds. A quick read if you are interested in what the life and faith of a saved believer should look like.

 

That is the quickest way I can clarify that for you. Read 1 John, or study Romans if you're interested in deeper exposition on the topic with dialectics included.

[poppy]

I said as much, I agree with you that simple disagreement isn't persecution. And yet all the things I listed have happened, and have happened in this country, to individuals doing nothing illegal or even morally reprehensible. Peaceful individuals, not dealing with captive or coerced audiences.

 

The entire point of this thread was that persecution doesn't happen in this country. It does. And it happens quickly and subtly, often perpetrated by folks who claim they're tolerant and would never persecute anyone. It happens on street corners, college campuses, schools, businesses, all over the place. And someone doesn't have to bleed and die, or even wield a megaphone, to experience it.

 

No, that was not the point of this thread. The point of this thread is to communicate how tiresome it is to hear the most privileged religious group in America complain about being the most persecuted.  

[KarenNC]

Thanks, this is helpful and makes sense. It's different from my worldview, but I understand the idea, kind of. It's difficult to reconcile that with the other thing I've heard about how God so loved the world He sent his only son with the idea that a person cannot serve the world and  God at the same time. I'll have to think on that one.

 

We recently bought a Bible after I saw a list similar to this one and I realized I need to learn more about the Bible's place in literature, history and everyday life. I will read the sections you told me about. Thanks for the direct pointers; it probably would have taken me forever to find what I'm looking for otherwise. 

 

We did a Biblical literacy course with my daughter last year using "The Bible and Its Influence" which is a text designed to be used in public high schools. I felt like it was a good way to help her see the influences on art, literature, culture, etc and I highly recommend it. Along with it we listened to the Great Courses lectures from Dr. Amy Jill Levine---"The Old Testament" and "Great Figures of the New Testament"--that helped give historical context to the text.

 

You may also not realize that there is not just one version of the Bible used by all Christians (speaking what material is included, not just different translations of the same material). There is a set of writings often called the deuterocanonical texts or Apocrypha. The Roman Catholic Bible includes this material as part of the regular sacred text, Anglicans have it in a separate section and consider it useful for teaching but not as authoratative as the rest of the Bible, and Protestant Bibles leave it out entirely. I don't know about Orthodox or other sects like JW or LDS. You will also find that the Christian Old Testament (in all three instances) is not arranged in the same manner as the Jewish Tanakh (the same scriptures), and so head to a very different message. Dr. Levine's lecture on "Reassessing Jewish and Christian Relations" touches on this. For the literacy course, my daughter read the Tanakh, a Protestant New Testament, and the deuterocanonical material from a Roman Catholic Bible.

 

There are so many different denominations within Christianity and so many sometimes radically different interpretations, even when the scriptures are held in common, that sometimes they can seem to verge on entirely different religions from the outside. 

[chiguirre]

Even the most mellow street preaching,

That's a world class oxymoron! There is absolutely nothing mellow about standing in a public space yelling or using a megaphone. The preachers that like to single out people in the crowd walking by are particularly odious. Why they feel they can comment on someone or get in their face as they're walking by minding their own business is beyond me. It's the antithesis of mellow.

[Catwoman]

Hm. I mean this gently and I hope it comes out right.

Given that the biblical command is to go forth and preach the gospel to all men, you can see the conundrum here. If that inspires hatred in you, should we fear your response more than we fear breaking a command of God? I mean this seriously. Is your comfort and approval more important?

If simple obedience, no matter how sweetly delivered or kindly meant, inspires hatred in you because your autonomy and opinion dictates you don't want to hear it, is your hatred wrong or our obedience wrong? Who 'wins' this in the public square? A Believer's command from God to obey on this point, or your comfort and preference in being approached with it?

It's a shoot the messenger situation if you're looking at it through our perspective. Because we have an eternal impetus to obey, despite your desire to hear it or not, the conflict becomes obvious. And not obeying isn't an option on our part, just as your reaction isn't really an option on your part, it's a visceral response to preaching, as you said.

This isn't a criticism, but it is something to turn over in your head from the opposite perspective. I know exactly why you don't want me giving you the gospel, do you understand why I feel I have to?

We're obviously not going to agree on this point, but it is something to think about nonetheless.

Hypothetically, if you and I met in real life and as part of the conversation, you started talking about your religion, I would find it odd, because no one does that where I live, but I wouldn't be offended. (OK, in all fairness, there's a pair of Jehovah's Witnesses who walk around the neighborhood once a year or so to hand out publications, but they are very gracious when I tell them I'm not interested. They seem like very nice women.)

 

If you talked about your religion every time I saw you, it would get old pretty quickly, and if you kept insisting that I listen to your preaching, I would not view you as a dedicated Christian, but as as an incredibly intrusive pest -- even if you seemed like an otherwise very nice person.

 

You're not going to convert people to your beliefs by badgering them, and strangers on the street simply don't care what you believe or what you have to say about your particular brand of Christianity. I don't think you demonstrate being a good Christian by pushing your beliefs on everyone else. And if you continue to do it after people tell you they're not interested, they may very well begin to perceive all Christians in general as having both a tremendous sense of arrogance and dreadfully poor manners, and that's unfortunate because I'm sure that's not your intention at all.

 

Nobody likes pushy.

 

They just don't.

[Greta]

The essence of Christ's directive to his followers about spreading the gospel was "make disciples". If we present the gospel in a way in which it will not be received, we aren't following Christ's commandment. Considering how prevalent Christianity has been in this country for so many years, I do not assume that people that I meet are unfamiliar with the message. So I believe it's much more likely that I'll offend people than that I'll make disciples out of them by using a "cold call" approach to preaching. And at this point in my life and my spiritual journey, I really feel that the disciples I need to be making are myself and my daughter. St. Seraphim of Sarov said, "acquire inner peace, and a thousand souls around you will be saved." I believe that truly living the faith will make more disciples than mere preaching ever could.

[marbel]

 

 

Arctic Mama, I'd be interested to hear your take on this. I'm trying to understand your perspective. I've always believed that living a quiet Christian lifestyle, rather than in-your-face proselytizing, was actually more effective in winning hearts and minds for Christ, and therefore the more appropriate and desirable way to go about it.

 

How does that fit with the things you've posted, about Christianity being inherently offensive? If marbel is acting in this "quiet Christian" way, those to whom she is witnessing will, as you put it, "see nothing at which to be affronted or contest". Do you feel that, for folks who live this kind of quiet Christian lifestyle, "essential biblical truth is likely missing and the gospel is likely not being preached"?

 

Even though you didn't ask me, I will just jump back in and say that it's likely some people will be offended at some point.  If they ask direct questions about sin or salvation or whatever, or come to church to listen to prayers and preaching, they may find reason to take offense.  If a man thinks he's a fine person because he makes a lot of money and has a good position in his company or community, and thinks it's fine to belittle his wife, or play a little fast and loose with company money, he might be offended if he hears the pastor talking about people like that in the context of a sermon.  People who think p*rn is fine might be offended when they hear him say that it is not and give biblical reasons why this is so.  Organizational leaders who protect child abusers will be offended.  Of course there are other things. 

 

So I didn't mean to imply that offense wouldn't happen, ever.   Hey, everyone is offended when their sins are put in front of them.  If this Sunday the sermon has something to do with wasting time on the internet while there are other things to be done, I'm going to be offended.  But then I should be repentant and come out of church refreshed and ready to begin again. 

 

I just don't, and I guess as a whole my church doesn't, tend to go with the philosophy of preach first.  It's more like befriend first, and then see what happens. 

 

 

[poppy]

Me? I'm confused!

 

Nope, not you.

[poppy]

Well, I've given plenty of evidence to support the assertion that American Christians do face persecution, as have several other posters. Whether or not it is tiresome, it is true.

 

And really, if huge point of the thread was not to deal with the contents of the article but mock Christians and communicate your dislike of them and what they say and do, was it really appropriate for a chat board involving Christians? This proves much of my point, if the purpose of the thread wasn't Patheos but what you stated above.

 

I do not agree that Christians face any sort of systematic persecution.  

 

A man shooting at missionaries is not persecution; it's a nut who is being charged (appropriately) with a crime.

 

The purpose of the thread was not to mock, of course.  I'll just quote the original linked article. You may or may not agree with it, but I found it (and the ensuing discussion) useful.

 

If you are a Christian in America and frequently feel persecuted, please do us both a favor and examine your own behavior and communication style. Are you accosting people with your views? Are you treating friends and co-workers like objects to be converted instead of people to love? If so, you’re doing it wrong– and you are experiencing justified push-back, NOT persecution.

 

And, even if you do face some legitimate persecution, just remember– as long as you still have your head on your shoulders, it’s not as bad as what others face.

[idnib]

We did a Biblical literacy course with my daughter last year using "The Bible and Its Influence" which is a text designed to be used in public high schools. I felt like it was a good way to help her see the influences on art, literature, culture, etc and I highly recommend it. Along with it we listened to the Great Courses lectures from Dr. Amy Jill Levine---"The Old Testament" and "Great Figures of the New Testament"--that helped give historical context to the text.

 

You may also not realize that there is not just one version of the Bible used by all Christians (speaking what material is included, not just different translations of the same material). There is a set of writings often called the deuterocanonical texts or Apocrypha. The Roman Catholic Bible includes this material as part of the regular sacred text, Anglicans have it in a separate section and consider it useful for teaching but not as authoratative as the rest of the Bible, and Protestant Bibles leave it out entirely. I don't know about Orthodox or other sects like JW or LDS. You will also find that the Christian Old Testament (in all three instances) is not arranged in the same manner as the Jewish Tanakh (the same scriptures), and so head to a very different message. Dr. Levine's lecture on "Reassessing Jewish and Christian Relations" touches on this. For the literacy course, my daughter read the Tanakh, a Protestant New Testament, and the deuterocanonical material from a Roman Catholic Bible.

 

There are so many different denominations within Christianity and so many sometimes radically different interpretations, even when the scriptures are held in common, that sometimes they can seem to verge on entirely different religions from the outside. 

 

Thank you for this information. We already had "The Bible and Its Influence" as our plan to move forward. I'll add the GC lectures to my list of things to check out. Thanks!

 

I pretty much did not know any of the information in your second paragraph; I thought I just needed to pick a version like King James or a more modern one. The one we bought at our library sale is KJV. I wanted to stretch DS in terms of reading content in older language.

[Catwoman]

Well, I've given plenty of evidence to support the assertion that American Christians do face persecution, as have several other posters. Whether or not it is tiresome, it is true.

 

And really, if huge point of the thread was not to deal with the contents of the article but mock Christians and communicate your dislike of them and what they say and do, was it really appropriate for a chat board involving Christians? This proves much of my point, if the purpose of the thread wasn't Patheos but what you stated above.

I don't think people are mocking Christians in this thread. I'm not saying it hasn't happened in other threads, but I don't see it here. A few of us have made a few comments that you may not have wanted to read , but I don't think anyone has said they disliked you or any other Christian.

 

I think you also need to consider the fact that while many people identify themselves as Christian on this forum, it appears to me that only a very small minority are actively preaching to everyone they meet or trying to convert their friends and acquaintances to their religion. Maybe it's an accepted thing where you live, but many of us aren't accustomed to it -- and from what I've been reading, those that do have to deal with it on a regular basis are not happy about it.

[KarenNC]

To give some perspective, there are Christian denominations (or at least local churches here affiliated with those denominations) that specifically teach even children that if you do not explicitly witness to every person you meet or that you possibly can, you are personally responsible if they end up in Hell and will be judged by God accordingly, because you may be the only person to ever tell them about Jesus (as unlikely as that is in modern America). They use Ezekiel 33 and apply it to each individual.

 

Another important distinction is that there are many Christian denominations who believe in a very literal inerrant interpretation of their Bible, and, for some Protestants, hold to the doctrine of sola scriptura (the scriptures alone), as opposed to other denominations that teach prima scriptura---the written scriptures are primary, but must be interpreted within the context of the traditions of their denomination/the Church and human reason (Episcopalians talk of the three-legged stool, for instance). The Jewish written scriptures were never intended to stand alone, but always need to be viewed in the context of the Oral Torah as well to get the fullness of the meaning http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/812102/jewish/What-is-the-Oral-Torah.htm. 

[KarenNC]

Thank you for this information. We already had "The Bible and Its Influence" as our plan to move forward. I'll add the GC lectures to my list of things to check out. Thanks!

 

I pretty much did not know any of the information in your second paragraph; I thought I just needed to pick a version like King James or a more modern one. The one we bought at our library sale is KJV. I wanted to stretch DS in terms of reading content in older language.

 

The KJV is certainly the one that is the source of a lot of the allusions and language and is perfectly appropriate for studying literary references. You may find a website like www.biblegateway.org to be useful as you can look up a particular verse in a wide variety of translations. For the Tanakh, you can find it online here http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/63255/jewish/The-Bible-with-Rashi.htm. Dr. Levine (can you tell I'm a fangirl :) ?) has recently put out the Jewish Annotated New Testament, which is interesting.

[Catwoman]

To give some perspective, there are Christian denominations (or at least local churches here affiliated with those denominations) that specifically teach even children that if you do not explicitly witness to every person you meet or that you possibly can, you are personally responsible if they end up in Hell and will be judged by God accordingly, because you may be the only person to ever tell them about Jesus (as unlikely as that is in modern America). They use Ezekiel 33 and apply it to each individual.

Well, isn't that a charming thing for people to teach their children... :glare:

[PeacefulChaos]

I agree with Fraidycat that it is the preaching that is the problem for me. My grandmother was a devoutly Christian woman. She never once preached at me our anyone else in the family. The closest she came to preaching was requiring Grace to be said at meals. Yet we all knew she was devout. She LIVED her faith. She is the ONE and ONLY reason I keep wishing I could believe. She is the reason I keep reading the Bible. She is the reason I keep wanting. Now I am sure some will say that I keep failing because I am focusing on her and not God, but my point is that I wouldn't even be trying if it wasn't for her. She never once preached at me. Maybe spreading the word through preaching isn't what God meant when he asked you to spread the word?

This.  I agree with this.

 

Quote attributed to St Francis: 

“Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words.â€

 

So, I am a pretty quiet Christian.  I am not going to come around and preach to people.  But I don't feel it is my job to "save" anyone.  That is God's job. My job is to be the face of Christ to people.  That means being kind, and helping people who need it, and being a friend to people.  Cooking for new moms, driving a disabled man to get his prescriptions, taking someone who is standing alone at church aside and asking "how are you really?" and not expecting to hear "fine."   It means hanging out in the booth my church has at an art festival every summer, inviting people to sit down, have a drink of water, talk while their kids get their faces painted or do a craft.   I've had some great conversations with people that had nothing to do with God.  But if they walk away thinking "wow, the people from that church weren't too weird, were they?" and are happy to see us again.... that's spreading the word. 

And this.

 

See, here's the thing.  The most important commandment in the Bible is to Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, strength, right?  And there is a second EQUAL to it, which is Love others.  

So really, walking out a 'Christian' walk is all about Loving God and Loving People.  

If we put those two things as the framework for everything we do, we will be doing things right.  People don't become believers because they get browbeaten with Scripture.  They become believers for multitudes of reasons, but that isn't one of them.  

I don't believe that 'witnessing' to people is about telling every person I meet all about my religion.  I believe 'witnessing' happens by me living my life and people seeing it.  I believe 'witnessing' happens when I smile at strangers or strike up conversations with people in checkout lines.  It's volunteering at the soup kitchen or handing out backpacks to underprivileged kids.  Because I'm just loving people.  

Friends and coworkers know what DH and I believe.  If they are interested they ask.  This has happened many times over the course of our adult years.  People who know us know that we're real - that we believe in God and we have strong faith, and that it permeates all aspects of our lives.  But we don't walk around talking over-religiously - we're just normal people.  

 

Anyway, all that to say I think that living out our lives following God is probably the most effective 'witness' out there.  Much more so than yelling at people on the streets.

 

(Oh, and GretaLynne, I've loved everything you've said!!)

[Guest]

Scripture indicates to the contrary - it does work. The teaching and preaching of the Word are the biblically indicated tools for saving anyone. I was saved through the that, as was everyone else in my entire congregation, and every other Christian I've met. It saves the children our missionary friend teaches in Croatia, as well as the Peruvian weaver my FIL showed a gospel projection. It saves heads of State, biologists, nurses, railroad workers, parents, you name it,

 

There is no other means by which men are saved - the Word of God, faithfully preached, is the only way. There are different methods of delivering those words, but it isn't the elegance or artistry of men, natural revelation, or unexplained spirit zapping that does it. Scripture is clear.

 

And whether you believe it or not, doesn't change the obligation of Christians to obey the Bible in that way. Not everyone is a street preacher or Sunday school teacher, but everyone is called to witness to others where they are, with the gifts and talents they've been given. That's our entire purpose for being on earth - the glorify God in our words and actions.

 

I'd say the very persistence of God's word despite fierce persecution is one of many evidences to its validity. Clearly it works, if believers throughout history have devoted time, treasure, and even their very lives to defend it.

 

True.  

 

Not everyone who is preached to is going to be saved, but many are.  That is why we spread the Word.

 

I don't know anyone who yells at people from street corners, or any of the other extreme tactics mentioned in this thread, but I suspect all religions have people who use extreme techniques.  It doesn't make sense to sum up a whole group based on a few individuals.