Saturday, July 28, 2007
The whole Korean saga in Afghanistan is turning out to be pretty interesting. It seems like religion, in particular Christianity, is more than just a belief in Korea; it is also a competition. The prize would be the bragging rights of having the most evangelists and I suppose it will make that church appear to be the most pious.
Well, I have nothing against evangelism but I personally feel that it should done with utmost respect to the other culture. Yes, this in itself is already a contradictory statement because by making one convert religion, it may imply that one will have to play down or criticise the beliefs of the other. What makes the Korean trip to Afghanistan worse is that they blatantly disregard Islam. You really do not need a scholar to tell you that Muslims are pretty sensitive to the notion of converting out of Islam, let alone converting to Christianity. What I understand is that it is considered a grave sin for a Muslim to convert to another religion. So what in the world were the Koreans and other Christian missionaries doing there?
They might argue that they are doing God's work and that God told one of them to go to Afghanistan to preach the word of God. Hmmm, that is an interesting notion. Maybe He did tell one of them, but is it more likely that they had that bragging rights in mind and the thought of all the glory that comes along with it that made them "hear" God's "command"?
The reports about the way the Koreans went about their "objective" and their defence is also pretty weird. On one hand, they claim that they are there solely for humanitarian purposes, but on the other, they are also there to preach God's words. So what really is the objective? To use humanitarian aid as a way to preach God's words? If that is so, the ultimate objective is still to evangelise.
I think one of the most controversial things about evangelism (of any religion) is, as mentioned earlier, the need to play down the beliefs of the other. I cannot speak for other religions but as a Christian, I know how some Christians evangelise. Of course, like all good Christian, they will use the verses in the bible to defend and some fanatics (which I am pretty sure exist in my church) will believe that all religions other than Christianity are considered worshipping a false God. That argument alone is problem because it means total downplaying of the religion of others. How more disrespectful can one get than to tell another person that all their lives, they have been worshipping a false God and that they should repent and believe in Christ? What would happen than if the person that they are evangelising to believes in the same way but only that their religion is the one true one? I think that is the cause of a lot of religious conflict; it is essentially a matter of each believing that their God is better and truer than the other.
I have always found Christian evangelism to be a little odd simply because I think that Christianity is in itself pretty messed up. I am not sure about the other religions (yes, Islam is the Sunnis and Shiites, but are there many more dominations between them), but there are seriously a lot of dominations within Christianity and they do not exactly see eye to eye. The most laughable thing is that they try to convert a person from one denomination to another. How weird is that? So it is not just about believing in Christ, but also in a particular Christ? Or is it due to the difference in teachings? I always thought that the argument about the differences in teachings is nothing more than the differences in opinion. I mean I have been approached by a fellow Christian at an MRT station and he just happily played down my church (yes, literally my church as in the physical church) and insisted that his church was better. He claimed that he been to my church before and that his prayers were not answered as much as that of his church.
By saying that, it seems to me that this guy goes to church to have this prayers answered and it seems to me that if his prayers were not answered as often, he will just go on to another church. That is really akin to buying a calling card, finishing the credits and getting a new one. I find it sad that some people use the term Christianity rather selectively (I have been guilty of that myself). It seems that some people will see Christians are protestants and Roman Catholics as Roman Catholics. That distinction is a tell tale sign that Christianity is pretty divided. What is Christianity? Is it not the termed used to describe people who believe or follow the teachings of Christ? If that is the case, why than must there be distinction and need to evangelise other Christians when in fact, we are all the same, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ, we are all Christians.
Anyway, I have always thought that the best form of evangelism is really through your actions. When people see you leading a decent way of life, they may be won over to your religion. Those of us who are Christians will certainly know some self righteous Christian who believe that he or she is doing the right thing by constantly judging others as being a bad Christian or immoral because of one thing or another. Which is better? A judgmental Christian who bad mouths the religion of others in the attempt to "evangelise" or a Christian who learns to accept others for whom they are and would not hesitate to help others because they want to and not because they have the ulterior motive of "evangelising"? Personally, I would prefer the latter.
he spoke at 6:23 pm
|