Missionaries should be banned

[Anonymous]

It's sad we live in times where this forum can accrue 7 pages of hatred towards Christian missionaries.

Ironically, it's a sign of nearing of end times, and the faster the message of Jesus is spread to every corner of the earth, the faster this system of things can be over and God's kingdom restored.

So, carry on. I hope God makes haste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's sad we live in times where this forum can accrue 7 pages of hatred towards Christian missionaries.

Ironically, it's a sign of nearing of end times, and the faster the message of Jesus is spread to every corner of the earth, the faster this system of things can be over and God's kingdom restored.

So, carry on. I hope God makes haste.

For their harmful actions, not their beliefs.

Can’t you all go rapture down in Texas or something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I am from South East Asia and was born into one of the eastern religions. It absolutely enrages me to see western Christians come to third-world countries to convert us, trying to destroy our local practices, languages because they think they know better than us. The absolute disdain they have towards us brown people is disgusting. I think they should just be banned by all governments. Want to do humanitarian work - enroll with non-religious AID organizations. Keep your bible and your prejudice to yourself.

Agree 100000%. It is the worst form of conceit and narcissism. Missionary work rarely has anything to do with actually helping the local populations. On behalf of my fellow Americans, I apologize, as they likely never will apologize for the atrocities that they have committed.

Absolute nonsense. Missionaries from various denominations provide education, medical care, water, and numerous other things to people in mission counties. And as for just sending money, money is the easiest thing for corrupt regimes to steal and the least likely to form bonds between people. Hands-on missionary work helping people who have nothing and are treated as disposable by their own societies is life changing, both for the giver and the receiver.

[Anonymous]

What about all the (purportedly) non-religious missionaries acting under the activist label who travel throughout the world promoting and expanding various social movements that go against traditional values in many societies? Should they be banned? Or is what they do OK because people in the developed world think they are right and the traditional values they oppose are outmoded? How is that not cultural imperialism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never met a Muslim proselytizer. Have you?

The Saudis are essentially proselytizing just the same as Christian missionaries. Places like Pakistan didn't use to be so conservative. Saudis poured money into "schools" and "education" (with an agenda), and effed the culture up.

All missionaries and proselytizers of all religions are horrible, horrible people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I am from South East Asia and was born into one of the eastern religions. It absolutely enrages me to see western Christians come to third-world countries to convert us, trying to destroy our local practices, languages because they think they know better than us. The absolute disdain they have towards us brown people is disgusting. I think they should just be banned by all governments. Want to do humanitarian work - enroll with non-religious AID organizations. Keep your bible and your prejudice to yourself.

Most people who agree to get "converted" in this way merely graft their existing religions and beliefs onto Christianity, and take the food, the dental care etc, but go ahead and believe what they want. For all the money they spend, I don't think the missionaries are very successful.

Many missionaries, particularly in the current age, make no effort to make converts beyond their own example of a life well lived. In one major Asian country, for example, all the “best” schools are Christian. They are in high demand. Students of the predominant (pagan) religion come and are educated. Most of them stay the religion they were. But their lives are changed for the better, and they in turn better the society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In my home country in Asia (not third world) I noticed these missionaries and their families always live in very expensive housing (as an analogy, it would be like a missionary family with 4-5 kids living in a SFH in NWDC). Also the churches they plant in each city seems to be in expensive addresses too. When I looked up their home church it was some no-name local ministry in the Midwest. I know they may get tax written off as a religious institution but where does all the funding usually come from?

The missionaries I know live in the slums where they serve and beg for their own food and the supplies they need to help others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you guys don’t believe in freedom of speech?
I’m an atheist but I don’t understand why you would favor banning speech.

Going to other countries, using your money and power to exploit people is not Free Speech.

Trying to convert people to your religion is the very definition of free speech. And, like all free speech that needs protection, many people don’t like it. And, like all free speech that needs protection because people don’t like it, the problem with banning it is that it is a slippery slope to banning more speech.

we don't allow religious "free speech" even in America, in the schools or by our government. And since religion is declining in American and Western countries, the missionaries have to prey on the poor countries of the world for converts because people just aren't buying it here.

This is irrelevant, because it is not the government who are the missionaries. Everything the missionaries do elsewhere, they can (and do) do it here as well.

That's completely false. You cannot proselytize in the public schools, or in the halls of government. It's prohibited by the first amendment. We have restrictions, thank goodness, on the extent of activities the religious people can practice.

Actually, case after case have held that free religious speech does not stop at the doors of public schools or other government buildings.

[Anonymous]

Agree. I have a relative who traveled to China to do this. They feel the need to push their religion on others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see, it’s evil, hateful, wrong, exploitative and every other badness for people to travel to share what they believe is good news, but it’s perfectly OK for you to denounce and defame generations of people from countless denominations because you disagree with them.

IME, people are most often threatened by a message that makes them suspect that what they insist they believe is not true, so they get aggressively defensive. When people think what they’re being told is silly, they more often ignore and/or laugh it off.

When the missionaries leave, should they take their schools, colleges, hospitals, water programs and everything else they brought with them?

Do the missionaries understand how un-Christlike their conditional so-called charity actually is? What would Jesus think of: Love thy neighbor as thy self — as long as you can first force thy neighbors to celebrate every twisted conditions that have been attached to this mockery of “Love”?

I’m sorry, but the cartoonish, caricature you paint really bears no resemblance to reality. Even in the 1500’s, the goal of Jesuit missionaries in Asia was to alleviate corporal suffering as well as to offer people the tools to (as the Jesuits saw it) attain eternal life. The letters of St. Francis Xavier are replete with examples of this. I don’t know where you got this idea of “conditional” charity; I’ve spent a ton of time around missionaries spanning nearly three decades and I’ve never once encountered anything like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you guys don’t believe in freedom of speech?
I’m an atheist but I don’t understand why you would favor banning speech.

Going to other countries, using your money and power to exploit people is not Free Speech.

Trying to convert people to your religion is the very definition of free speech. And, like all free speech that needs protection, many people don’t like it. And, like all free speech that needs protection because people don’t like it, the problem with banning it is that it is a slippery slope to banning more speech.

we don't allow religious "free speech" even in America, in the schools or by our government. And since religion is declining in American and Western countries, the missionaries have to prey on the poor countries of the world for converts because people just aren't buying it here.

This is irrelevant, because it is not the government who are the missionaries. Everything the missionaries do elsewhere, they can (and do) do it here as well.

That's completely false. You cannot proselytize in the public schools, or in the halls of government. It's prohibited by the first amendment. We have restrictions, thank goodness, on the extent of activities the religious people can practice.

Actually, case after case have held that free religious speech does not stop at the doors of public schools or other government buildings.

Really? Name one. And don't cite after school clubs -- that's different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never met a Muslim proselytizer. Have you?

The Saudis are essentially proselytizing just the same as Christian missionaries. Places like Pakistan didn't use to be so conservative. Saudis poured money into "schools" and "education" (with an agenda), and effed the culture up.

All missionaries and proselytizers of all religions are horrible, horrible people.

Each and every one? Without exception?

Wow. I thought only God was all knowing, but here you are judging the hearts and lives of millions of people you’ve never met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you guys don’t believe in freedom of speech?
I’m an atheist but I don’t understand why you would favor banning speech.

Going to other countries, using your money and power to exploit people is not Free Speech.

Trying to convert people to your religion is the very definition of free speech. And, like all free speech that needs protection, many people don’t like it. And, like all free speech that needs protection because people don’t like it, the problem with banning it is that it is a slippery slope to banning more speech.

we don't allow religious "free speech" even in America, in the schools or by our government. And since religion is declining in American and Western countries, the missionaries have to prey on the poor countries of the world for converts because people just aren't buying it here.

This is irrelevant, because it is not the government who are the missionaries. Everything the missionaries do elsewhere, they can (and do) do it here as well.

That's completely false. You cannot proselytize in the public schools, or in the halls of government. It's prohibited by the first amendment. We have restrictions, thank goodness, on the extent of activities the religious people can practice.

Actually, case after case have held that free religious speech does not stop at the doors of public schools or other government buildings.

Really? Name one. And don't cite after school clubs -- that's different.

Different? How? Because they disprove your assertion. Sorry. The statement “You cannot proselytize in the public schools, or in the halls of government. It's prohibited by the first amendment” is absolutely false and displays a profound ignorance of first amendment history and jurisprudence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see, it’s evil, hateful, wrong, exploitative and every other badness for people to travel to share what they believe is good news, but it’s perfectly OK for you to denounce and defame generations of people from countless denominations because you disagree with them.

IME, people are most often threatened by a message that makes them suspect that what they insist they believe is not true, so they get aggressively defensive. When people think what they’re being told is silly, they more often ignore and/or laugh it off.

When the missionaries leave, should they take their schools, colleges, hospitals, water programs and everything else they brought with them?

Do the missionaries understand how un-Christlike their conditional so-called charity actually is? What would Jesus think of: Love thy neighbor as thy self — as long as you can first force thy neighbors to celebrate every twisted conditions that have been attached to this mockery of “Love”?

I’m sorry, but the cartoonish, caricature you paint really bears no resemblance to reality. Even in the 1500’s, the goal of Jesuit missionaries in Asia was to alleviate corporal suffering as well as to offer people the tools to (as the Jesuits saw it) attain eternal life. The letters of St. Francis Xavier are replete with examples of this. I don’t know where you got this idea of “conditional” charity; I’ve spent a ton of time around missionaries spanning nearly three decades and I’ve never once encountered anything like that.

? if they're not spreading the word they're not "missionaries." What you're describing as helping people can be done by any secular charitable organization. The difference is that along with the missionaries' help comes a sermon and efforts to convert them to a particular religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree. I have a relative who traveled to China to do this. They feel the need to push their religion on others.

Wow. A dataset consisting of a single person and your own judgement. Now that’s persuasive!