Zone1 Do Christians Proselytize out of “Love” - or Arrogance?

[Bonzi]

Having been on the receiving end of Evangelical Christians‘ relentless attempts to get me to abandon my religion (Judaism), I have often heard them say they do it out of love to “share the Truth.” The attempt to convert usually escalates to dire warnings of the hell that awaits and how angry G-d is with Jews.

So is this really love? There are numerous religions in the world, with the majority of people not believing in Jesus, and one‘s religious beliefs are as much the truth to them as Christians beliefs are to Christians.

In this article, it explains how force-feeding one’s religious beliefs onto others, with the insistence that their way and only their way is the path to G-d, is both arrogant and disrespectful. I hope that those who have been aggressively proselytizing will give it some thought.

To Those Proselytizing Out Of Love: You Aren’t

I have something to say to those who are trying to convert me to their religion because they say they love me: that’s not love. That’s arrogance, disrespect, fear, ego, and a lot more.

www.patheos.com

I agree to a point. Some do share out of love. Some share out of obedience to God (there are many reasons beyond this as well)... that being said, my opinion is that you should not try to "scare" someone into a belief system. Even if it works, the person is not becoming a believer for the right reason. I believe people are compelled or are drawn to God. The only way you can be truly drawn to your creator is through correct and Godly messaging.

 

[norwegen]

Absolutely. Pilate considered Jesus a threat to Roman authority.

Can you cite a reference for that?

And Jews didn’t crucify people, anyway.

At least once they did, as a Jew relates.

They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!"​

(Jn 19:15)​

They may not have pulled the trigger, but they sentenced him to that very sort of execution.

I understand, of course, that this is what Christians believe.

 

[Lisa558]

I agree to a point. Some do share out of love. Some share out of obedience to God (there are many reasons beyond this as well)... that being said, my opinion is that you should not try to "scare" someone into a belief system. Even if it works, the person is not becoming a believer for the right reason. I believe people are compelled or are drawn to God. The only way you can be truly drawn to your creator is through correct and Godly messaging.

Thank you.

One thing that you said that is confusing to me, and that is your mention that one is drawn to G-d through correct or Gdly messaging (and that you can’t “scare” someone into it). But Jews are already drawn to G-d, and mindful of His covenant with us. It doesn’t need a proselytizer to get us to that point….we are already there.

 

[Lisa558]

Can you cite a reference for that?

That‘s my opinion, as it is of many others.

At least once they did, as a Jew relates.

They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!"​

(Jn 19:15)​

They may not have pulled the trigger, but they sentenced him to that very sort of execution.

I understand, of course, that this is what Christians believe.

That’s what the gospels teach, I realize, and very unfortunately so. It has been at the root of terrible antisemitism for 2000 years.

 

[norwegen]

That‘s my opinion, as it is of many others.

My opinion is based on history. The Zealots and the Idumeans were a threat to Roman authority in Judea. Pilate and Jesus predated that threat, and I can find no historical reference, not even in the Bible, that says anything about a Jesus of Nazareth being a threat to Rome.

That’s what the gospels teach, I realize, and very unfortunately so. It has been at the root of terrible antisemitism for 2000 years.

The gospels don't say anything about Judaism after the destruction of their temple and the dissolution of their tribes.

The Jews lost their temple and the elements therein. They lost their priesthood, their tribal identities, their political boundaries. They lost their very culture. I don't know why so many Christians (and Jews, from what I've witnessed) insist that the Judaism after the temple is the same as the Judaism before the temple. Certainly after the wars, the surviving Jews continued to propagate, but their culture underwent a radical transformation. Any perceived antisemitism in the gospels or epistles are not directed at modern Jews, but sadly, too many people associate present-day antisemitism with the Bible.

I think the Bible is a great story, a great composite of the life and beliefs of a culture and its struggle to understand and walk with its God, and I hate to see it disparaged.

 

[Meriweather]

He fulfilled it. Fully man and fully G-d, he alone satisfied the Father's wrath for the sins of the world.

Who said God was wrathful for the sins of the world?

 

[Meriweather]

"Truly I say to you, unless a man is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of G-d".

He also said the Kingdom of God was within everyone's reach. It is a matter of discerning the will of God (who is Spirit) and following it.

 

[Lisa558]

My opinion is based on history. The Zealots and the Idumeans were a threat to Roman authority in Judea. Pilate and Jesus predated that threat, and I can find no historical reference, not even in the Bible, that says anything about a Jesus of Nazareth being a threat to Rome.

The gospels don't say anything about Judaism after the destruction of their temple and the dissolution of their tribes.

The Jews lost their temple and the elements therein. They lost their priesthood, their tribal identities, their political boundaries. They lost their very culture. I don't know why so many Christians (and Jews, from what I've witnessed) insist that the Judaism after the temple is the same as the Judaism before the temple. Certainly after the wars, the surviving Jews continued to propagate, but their culture underwent a radical transformation. Any perceived antisemitism in the gospels or epistles are not directed at modern Jews, but sadly, too many people associate present-day antisemitism with the Bible.

I think the Bible is a great story, a great composite of the life and beliefs of a culture and its struggle to understand and walk with its God, and I hate to see it disparaged.

The gospels say plenty about Judaism, or rather Jews, and none of it is very nice. The very last one, John, is the worst in that regard.

 

[Meriweather]

Jews are looking for a political messiah, one that would bring "peace" to the world.

Jews are looking for a leader of their nation that will pull all Jews together to live the Laws of God. They will become a light to all nations; all nations will look to how Jews manage issues. Jesus was adamant that he was not this appointed one (Messiah). He was appointed a different task, the one mentioned by Moses--and Moses lived long before David.

 

[surada]

Absolutely. Pilate considered Jesus a threat to Roman authority.

And Jews didn’t crucify people, anyway.

Nope. Pilate was pretty indifferent to Jesus. Herod Antipas wasn't the least concerned with Jesus. As long as Jesus stayed in the north away from Jerusalem he was perfectly safe.

 

[Lisa558]

Jews are looking for a leader of their nation that will pull all Jews together to live the Laws of God. They will become a light to all nations; all nations will look to how Jews manage issues. Jesus was adamant that he was not this appointed one (Messiah). He was appointed a different task, the one mentioned by Moses--and Moses lived long before David.

Jesus said he was not the Messiah? Let’s explore this, as it of course aligns with how Jews believe. Can you espound?

 

[Meriweather]

Three and a half years into his reign he will begin a wholesale slaughter of Christians AND Jews worldwide and set himself up in the new temple as god.

Who says this? In the time before Jesus, there was a realistic statement that even great rulers with great rules will fall. Mankind cannot maintain such achievements for long. It takes God to bring a lasting peace and a lasting rule.

 

[surada]

Jesus said he was not the Messiah? Let’s explore this, as it of course aligns with how Jews believe. Can you espound?

Jesus wasn't a warrior king and he didn't vanquish the enemies of the Jews.

 

[surada]

Who says this? In the time before Jesus, there was a realistic statement that even great rulers with great rules will fall. Mankind cannot maintain such achievements for long. It takes God to bring a lasting peace and a lasting rule.

It's nonsense.

 

[Lisa558]

Nope. Pilate was pretty indifferent to Jesus. Herod Antipas wasn't the least concerned with Jesus. As long as Jesus stayed in the north away from Jerusalem he was perfectly safe.

Nope. They did not like that he was stirring up the Jews, and that’s why they put a sign up over the cross saying ”King of the Jews” - as a warning to any other Jew who tries to do the same.

Jesus as a Security Risk: Intelligence and Repression in the Roman Empire

Intelligence personnel tend to have a view of events that differs from historians, even other people in government, and certainly from the general public.

warontherocks.com

 

[Meriweather]

Jesus said he was not the Messiah? Let’s explore this, as it of course aligns with how Jews believe. Can you espound?

Messiah means appointed one. The prophecy said that a King like David would rise up. This was the appointed one (Messiah) looked for by the Jews during the time of Jesus. Even some at that time thought he was to be the one who would bring independent rule to the Jews.

Jesus insisted on two things. First, he was sent by God/appointed by God to bring Good News to the lost of Israel. Second, he was not the Messiah people were looking for to bring about their independent rule. He was a Messiah appointed to a different goal.

 

[surada]

Nope. They did not like that he was stirring up the Jews, and that’s why they put a sign up over the cross saying ”King of the Jews” - as a warning to any other Jew who tries to do the same.

Jesus as a Security Risk: Intelligence and Repression in the Roman Empire

Intelligence personnel tend to have a view of events that differs from historians, even other people in government, and certainly from the general public.

warontherocks.com

The Romans put up the King of the Jews sign. Jesus preached non violent resistance to Roman occupation, and he didn't control the Zealots, Herodians, Sicarri, Essenes or Saducees.

 

[norwegen]

The gospels say plenty about Judaism, or rather Jews, and none of it is very nice. The very last one, John, is the worst in that regard.

It says nothing about you or your contemporaries.

The converted Jews, as related in the NT, say some not-so-nice things not about Torah or the Patriarchs, but about those who confounded Moses and the Law and the nature of resurrection, chiefly the Pharisees.

I once or twice have thought of the entire New Testament as being composed after the fact (the temple/tribal peoples' collapse) as an attempt to explain away the culture's demise, but I know that all of Paul's epistles were written before the fact, and all of them except perhaps for Philemon relate a looming end to their age.

Obviously, the age that ended was the temple age, not the age of a people, as Jewish progeny continued.

It saddens me to suspect that evangelical Christians get in Jews' faces. They should interact with Jews no differently than they interact with people of any other faith.

 

[Lisa558]

The Romans put up the King of the Jews sign. Jesus preached non violent resistance to Roman occupation, and he didn't control the Zealots, Herodians, Sicarri, Essenes or Saducees.

Yes, of course the Romana put up the sign. That was to warn off any other Jews from doing the same as Jesus did, or they’d end up the same.

 

[Lisa558]

It says nothing about you or your contemporaries.

The converted Jews, as related in the NT, say some not-so-nice things not about Torah or the Patriarchs, but about those who confounded Moses and the Law and the nature of resurrection, chiefly the Pharisees.

I once or twice have thought of the entire New Testament as being composed after the fact (the temple/tribal peoples' collapse) as an attempt to explain away the culture's demise, but I know that all of Paul's epistles were written before the fact, and all of them except perhaps for Philemon relate a looming end to their age.

Obviously, the age that ended was the temple age, not the age of a people, as Jewish progeny continued.

It saddens me to suspect that evangelical Christians get in Jews' faces. They should interact with Jews no differently than they interact with people of any other faith.

Yes, of course it says nothing about me or contemporary Jews. That doesn’t mean that Christians haven‘t used it to spew antisemitism toward us. I’m sure I wasn’t the only Jew to be called “Christ killer” in middle school. (The Christ-killer label was really bad in the Middle Ages.)

Thank you for your sympathy about how aggressive some of the ECs are to Jews. Some of them are just awful. Hell this, and hell that….