RELIGIOUS CONVERSIONS AND PLURALISM
URL - http://foundationforpluralism.blogspot.com/2014/06/why-is-it-so-hard-to-convert-to-judaism.html
I am much closer to a reformed Jew than the orthodox. No,
I am not Jewish, I am a Muslim. But on the issue of conversion I am in
tune with the Orthodox Jews - I have chased many people away seeking to
convert to Islam, I asked them to spend that time in learning about
their own faith, something they are familiar with and at times have
shared the wisdom of their religion.
Being an Atheist for half of
my life, I chose Islam, not because it is superior, but because I was
familiar with it and it suited my belief in pluralism. If not, any
faith would have been a good vehicle for social living in harmony. By
the way Judaism, Islam and Hinduism are closer to Atheism - God is not a
being or a thing in these faiths and you cannot give an acceptable
image either. While Hinduism sees it in many forms, Islam and Judaism null
it out.
Anyone who boasts that his religion is superior, better,
oldest, wisest, scientific, logical etc, has not really understood his
or her religion. Religion is about humility that builds bridges,
mitigates conflicts and nurtures goodwill. To claim any hint of
superiority is killing the essence of religion- arrogance is the mother
of all conflicts and religion is about peace and not conflicts. Personally one
should have the freedom to eat, drink, wear or believe whatever one
wants, however, I don't see the need for conversion, there is nothing
wrong with the religion you believe in, it works for you, its like your
mother. But if you want change, you should go for whatever religion suits you without any guilt or restrictions.
This is my response to an article, "Why Is It So Hard To Convert to Judaism?"
If you look to religion from Mr. Spock's perspective,
you see religion as an instrument to bring "togetherness" within an
individual and with what surrounds him or her - life and matter. All
religions serve the same purpose.
None of the Masters wanted to
create a group to be against the other, all they were interested was in
creating societies where no individual had to live in fear of
the other. They wanted everyone to subscribe to the idea of social
harmony and respecting life of the other as their own.
Every one
of them from Zoroaster, Moses, Confucius, Krishna, Buddha, Mahavira,
Jesus, Muhammad, Nanak, Bahaullah, umpteen Shamans in native traditions
to the peace makers like Gandhi, MLK and others wanted to build cohesive
societies. And NONE of them wanted any one to convert against
something, but rather to be the inclusive individual.
Very few of
us have seriously questioned the need to convert, or even questioned
the veracity of the claims that Jesus or Muhammad wanted people to
convert - convert to a good human or specific political group that is
opposed to others? In another decade, more of us will be questioning,
and Religion would become a beautiful choice for personal consumption
rather than political instrument to control others.
As Cosgrove
said, "First Hillel converts, and then Hillel teaches. First you join
and then, once you are a vested member, you figure out what it is all
about." Indeed, Muslims have made conversion easy - just say that you
believe in one God and Muhammad (pbuh) is his prophet. Then comes
learning about Islam and living a life of Islam. Most people get their
religion rights, a few don't, and make a mess for others.
What amazes me
with all religions is - they have forced religion into outwardly
appearances and names. That is the first thing a convert is looking for;
how do I look Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Christian or whatever. I wish we
all redefine us in terms of character reflection rather than caps,
clothes, beards and wears.
We have reduced religion into "appearance" rather than imbuing its essence that is to make you a contented happy being.
When
I go into a place of worship, and I have been to every place, what I
see is the devotion of the individual, and not the physical movements,
it is the humility that permeates him or her and not the show off. It is
the same devotion expressed in so many different ways.
Lastly, I
raised my kids with an open mind - they have been to most places of
worship. I did not want them to be bigots when they grow up.
At
each place of worship, my little girl would quietly nudge and ask,
"Dad, what are they saying?" - for a six year old, I learned to simplify
it, "Sweetie, they are appreciating God for providing food, clothing,
home and a world to live, and thanking him for good parents, family and
friends. " In all honesty, you cannot translate anything other than
this, no matter where you go.
One day, we were in the midst of
Bhajans (chanting hymns) sitting crossed legged on the floor in the
Hindu temple. When she nudged me, I knew what was coming … that
beautiful face was admiringly looking into my eyes… and like a cassette
player plays when the button is pushed, I said. "Sweetie, they are…."
Then what came was a big surprise of my life. She jumped up, raised her
hands, and said, "Gee Dad, it is so cool that God can be worshiped in so
many ways."
Mike Ghouse is Public Speaker, thinker and an author committed to building
cohesive societies, and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day.
Everything about him is at MikeGhouse.net and many links to media, websites and
blogs.
# # #
Why Is It So Hard To Convert to Judaism?
Editorial
Courtesy: The Jewish Daily Forward
Published June 02, 2014, issue of June 06, 2014.
In February 2013, Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove of Park Avenue Synagogue, as fancy and important a place as its name suggests, floated an intriguing idea. In a sermon to his congregation on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, Cosgrove urged the Conservative movement, his movement, to become much, much more welcoming to anyone interested in converting to Judaism.
He cited the famous talmudic story of the would-be-convert who approaches two dueling rabbis, Shammai and Hillel, asking to learn the entire Torah on one foot. Shammai dismissively pushes the man away. Hillel, instead, converts him immediately, teaching him that the Torah’s central message is: “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. The rest is commentary. Go and learn.”
“The order of events is often missed, but it is instructive for us today,” Cosgrove said in his sermon. “First Hillel converts, and then Hillel teaches. First you join and then, once you are a vested member, you figure out what it is all about.”
Related
Don't Believe in God? Come Aboard!
Finding God in the Other
Man in Search of God
Cosgrove’s sermon created a stir, and he repeated his proposal before various meetings and conventions during the past year. He’s not the only one to suggest that conversion become simpler, quicker, cheaper and way more welcoming. There’s even a discussion about this in the latest edition of the Conservative movement’s official magazine.
Enough talk. Time to do something.
We who care about sustaining the future of the modern Jewish family, who want to confront the tide of assimilation and disengagement with positive, affirming Jewish values, or who simply like being Jews and want to pass that along, need to radically rethink conversion. Instead of playing hard-to-get, or acting as if Jews are part of a club with admission standards higher than Harvard Law School, we need to open our arms, drop our reluctance, lower the barriers and not just welcome converts to join our synagogues. We need to encourage people to become Jews, in their way, in their time — especially when marriage and child rearing are involved.
“Some people don’t talk about money or sex. Jews don’t talk about conversion,” notes Rabbi Joy Levitt, executive director of the JCC in Manhattan, who has thought a lot about this issue. “I don’t understand why. I think it’s a wonderful thing. I have a lot of confidence in the tradition’s ability to work its magic on people.”
Think this isn’t a problem? Read the latest issue of Voices of Conservative/Masorti Judaism, which to its credit published a couple of pointed articles criticizing the status quo. “I think it’s hard for anyone who grew up Jewish to understand how intimidating — how downright scary — it can be for a non-Jew to set foot in a synagogue or make an appointment with a rabbi to discuss conversion,” writes Darcy R. Fryer, a historian and teacher who converted in 1998.
The title of her story, “Too Long a Wait,” suggests one of the barriers placed before the convert. Fryer studied for 14 months; many rabbis require at least a year, ostensibly to experience the annual Jewish calendar. There’s the cost — hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, in conversion classes. There’s the tradition of turning away a would-be convert three times, just to test her resolve and dedication.
Why stretch out what is essentially an emotional decision? As Fryer writes, “most of my figuring out how to live as a Jew came after I converted, just as couples figure out how to be married after they get married and parents how to parent after they have children.”
Even the words we use stigmatize. We refer to a person as a “convert” rather than a “Jew.” We give this new Jew a Hebrew name affixed with “son of Abraham and Sarah” rather than with his (presumably) non-Jewish parents. When that name is read aloud in synagogue, he is labeled. And we wonder why the process can be alienating.
As Levitt says, “We should use convert as a verb, not a noun.”
There is, let’s be honest, an underlying hypocrisy here: We ask more of the convert than we do of the Jew by birth. That’s especially true as the number of Jews “of no religion” increases and the intermarriage rate soars for the non-Orthodox, two key findings of last year’s Pew Research Center’s survey of American Jews. We don’t ask Jews by birth to study for a proscribed time, to pass a test, to prove themselves. All you need is one Jewish parent and little else in your life to qualify for a free trip to Israel with Taglit-Birthright.
For centuries, there was good reason for Jews to hold tight to the clan and avoid even the appearance of proselytizing, lest they antagonize their neighbors and the powers-that-be. But the situation is reversed now. Our reticence to promote ourselves and our reluctance to welcome newcomers is the exact opposite of what’s expected in the digital age.
Jonah Peretti, founder and CEO of Buzzfeed, one of the nation’s fastest-growing media companies, spoke to a media summit last year and used a comparison of Mormons and Jews to make a point about the nature of social interaction that is relevant here.
“There was one Mormon for every 10 Jews [in 1950]. Now there are more Mormons in the world than Jews. Why is that?” Peretti asked. It’s not because Mormonism is a higher-quality religion than Judaism. “The real reason is that Mormons actually focus half of their time on practicing their religion and the other half of their time on how to spread their religion,” he said. “The idea matters but so does the mechanism for spreading the idea.”
We don’t suggest that Jews don Mitt Romney-like suits and skinny ties and go around spreading the Gospel for a year or two. But somehow we have to harness the passion, dedication, indeed the confidence that Mormons exude and overcome our reluctance to share our faith and culture with anyone the least bit interested in joining us.
“Everybody wants their lives to be more meaningful,” Levitt observes. “We have what to offer here.”
This is a campaign tailor-made for the Conservative movement. Orthodoxy clings to the traditional notion that years of study and observance must precede conversion. (And that’s in America. The Israeli rabbinate sets the bar impossibly, cruelly high.) The Reform movement has little incentive, given its embrace of patrilineal descent and the increasing willingness of its rabbis to perform interfaith marriages.
But Conservative Jews could be to the modern world what Chabad-Lubavitch is to the traditional: a center of exuberant outreach. Such an embrace could also help Conservatives with the central paradox of their attitudes toward intermarriage: Conservative rabbis may not perform, or even attend, an interfaith marriage, and yet expect that the new couple will somehow gravitate toward their synagogues. This may be a principled stand, but it’s not a sustainable one.
Ironically, in a series of videos released by the Jewish Theological Seminary for the upcoming holiday of Shavuot, several Conservative scholars cited talmudic teachings emphasizing the need for straightforward and undemanding conversion.
We should have no fear of diluting Judaism by making conversion easier. It is a radical transformation of identity, but so is being born into a Jewish family, except the new Jew has made a choice, one we should hasten and embrace.
Read more: http://forward.com/articles/199214/why-is-it-so-hard-to-convert-to-judaism/#ixzz33bwp2Vri
Showing posts with label Conversions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conversions. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Texas Faith : Is it time for religions to double-down on evangelism?
TEXAS FAITH :: TEEN WISDOM ON SELLING RELIGION
My teen blurts out, “Dad, if my pastor were to tell the truth that all religions are good, then he stands to lose his congregants to other liars." Indeed, religion has become a sleazy product to a "few" ministers, who sell their religion to the gullible by denigrating other religions.How do you know they are sleaze balls? Here are a few pointers; i) they make you believe all others are your enemies ii) they frighten you with the end of the world scenarios if others grow in numbers iii) they make you feel good by making someone else bad, iv) all other religions, races and ethnicities are inferior, and v) they have nothing good to say about other religions because they really don't believe in the goodness of their own.
These few Pastors, Imams, Rabbis, Pundits, Shamans and other religious ministers are in business to entertain the congregants and cash in on their vulnerabilities.These men and women are a tiny percent of every group.
What can you do? Ask the clergy to talk about peace and building bridges. If they quote falsities, they need to present at least three different sources.
URL: http://theghousediary.blogspot.com/2013/03/texas-faith-is-it-time-for-religions-to.html
Texas Faith: Is it time for religions to double-down on evangelism?
By Bill McKenzie/ Editorial columnist | wmckenzie@dallasnews.com | 16:16 pm 3:26:2013
In a Time Magazine essay this week, Meacham raised the question of whether it’s time for Christian leaders to double-down on their faiths. Meacham sees some more aggressively promoting the Gospel message instead of watering it down.
Time included his essay in its annual issue of 10 ideas that are changing how we live. And you can read his thoughts at this link:
Now, Meacham, an Episcopalian who helped start The Washington Post’s On Faith blog, is writing here largely about Christians, who are seeing a growing share of their market lose out to the religiously-unaffiliated. But his question can certainly be applied to other religions as well. And that is whether it’s best to “double-down” on evangelism.
What is your view of doubling-down on evangelism? If you agree that it’s time to do that, please explain why. If not, why not? Can your faith tradition really sit by idly and expect its followers to grow?
MIKE GHOUSE, President, Foundation for Pluralism, Dallas, and Speaker on interfaith matters, diversity and pluralism
The faith in a higher power brings relative stability, and allows us to cruise through the ups and downs of life. Indeed, religion is a peace-anchor to most people as it offers them a sense of grounding.
Doubling-down on evangelism creates opportunities for the tyrants and the greedy. A pastor I know of told his congregation, “I need one hundred people to sign up this morning to be on my special team, and each one will commit to bring a new person a week to Jesus.” He was counting on 400 new guests a month for a total of 3,600 in three quarters.
His call was followed by a film, showing a few individuals who struggled to donate $1,000 once, but now God has blessed them to generously donate in millions. Was the pastor preying on the vulnerabilities of the congregants to support his life style? God only knows the truth.
Doubling-down on religion has the unstated, but expected consequence of having a larger following, usually gained through denigrating other traditions. Religious Politics is indeed a product of greed, by pumping fear and insecurity into the gullible.
When Muslims outnumbered Christians in 10th century Syria, Christians legitimately feared that they were losing to Islam through conversions. However, to keep the Christians within the fold, a pastor resorted to declaring that the “Quran was a false book written by a false prophet.” Those words continue to reverberate in through Christian corridors even today. Muslim evangelicals are no angels either; they do the same, denying legitimacy to parts of the Bible.
As a pluralist, I believe that doubling-down on evangelism will harm the teachings of Jesus. It knocks out the do unto others teaching. Instead of restoring peace to the individual, it will aggravate one’s sense of goodness by disparaging other religions. And many congregants are sick of this. They move on towards places of worship that don’t denigrate others. You can see that in the increasing number of nones.
If our goal is to create the kingdom of heaven where no one fears the other, then we need to focus on the essence of religion. It means assuring the people that all religions will bring peace, and any choice would be a good choice. My daughter could not resist the irony, and blurted out, “Dad, if my pastor were to tell the truth that all religions are good, then he stands to lose his congregants to other liars.”
To see all the 15 responses, please visit: http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/texas-faith-is-it-time-for-religions-to-double-down-on-evangelism.html/
....Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace, Islam, Israel,India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place. He is committed to building a Cohesive Americaand offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. He believes in Standing up for others and has done that throughout his life as an activist. Mike has a presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest onSean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News; fortnightly atHuffington post; and several other periodicals across the world. His personal sitewww.MikeGhouse.net indexes all his work through many links.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Religious conversions are outdated
http://theghousediary.blogspot.com/2011/01/religious-conversions-are-outdated.html
Your religion is dear to you as mine is to me. Neither should I denigrate your religion nor should you consider mine less than yours.
Your religion is dear to you as mine is to me. Neither should I denigrate your religion nor should you consider mine less than yours.
Every religion works for the "believer", it brings a balance within and builds an orderly society. Neither Muslims nor Christians are obligated to convert any one to their faith,
Once upon a time, conversions were sought to uniformize people, to have support for their personal (ill) intentions to dominate and control and fight their manufactured enemies. Today that will not work and should be out of our system. No two Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Jews.... agree on the issues, and then what is the need to convert?
People should have the free will to choose what they wear, eat, look, and believe. Let it be their personal choice a choice that gives them spiritual atonement.
Jesus said to go to every corner of the world and spread the good word and that word was for people to treat others as they wanted to be treated and some Christians took it in literal sense, just as some Muslim do. God sent a revelation to the Prophet, your role is to convey the messages of goodness and it is up to people to follow it, perhaps to concretize the free will, God chose to have Prophet's own uncle die without accepting the message of the prophet. There is a great wisdom in it.
Both Christians and Muslims agree that their religion makes a better human out of them, and precisely that is the goal of a religion, any religion, whether it they follow the book or the oral tradition. It is the insecurity in people that generates 'trickery" in them to protect their interests to have people tune into the same music, it was once, not any more. God has made us diverse with a unique thumb print, DNA, eye print and what not... Let's learn to respect and accept the God given uniqueness of each one of us, then conflicts fade and solutions emerge.
There is no one version of Christianity, Islam, Hinduism or Buddhism. Even the smaller numbered religions like Judaism, Jainism, Sikhism or others do not agree on certain basics. In America , the Christians fight over Abortion rights.
Religion will not serve politics in the long haul, although the right wing in America and elsewhere have demonstrated that it can, but it will be temporary and will not last. People will return to the roots of goodness as Religion is about bringing humility and creating orderly societies and not ganging up on others. By the way no one can cast the first stone.
Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer. He runs the Foundation for Pluralism championing the idea of co-existence through respecting and accepting the otherness of other and is committed to nurturing the pluralistic ideals embedded in Islam through the World Muslim Congress. Mike is available to speak on Pluralism, Islam, Civil Societies, and Peace & Justice at your place of worship, school, work place, seminars or conferences. He is a media commentator offering pluralistic solutions on issues of the day.
Mike's work is reflected at three websites & twenty two Blogs listed at http://www.MikeGhouse.net/
Mike's work is reflected at three websites & twenty two Blogs listed at http://www.MikeGhouse.net/
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Religious Conversions
RELIGIOUS CONVERSIONS OR RECRUITMENT?
Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 7:06pm | Edit Note | Delete
Religions are beautiful, if every one gets it as Jesus intended, Mohammad wanted, Moses taught, Krishna explained, Nanak practiced, Buddha enlightened, Zathustra showed or the native tradtions point out... there would be no problem. All they wanted was a better world by following a few basic principles. They were looking at the end result and not the means. Religion is not the problem.
The purpose of religion is to bring a sense of composure and a balance within oneself and with what surrounds; life and environment. All religions or traditions whether scripted or not, have the same goal; to create a continual balance.
When you buy a $700 suit for $100, you will call all your friends to go get one. I guess the same zeal enters one's mind if they are rejoiced with their faith.
Arrogance is the mother of all conflicts that is why every possible tradition out there requires one to bow, kneel or prostrate to show humility and acceptance of a greater being than ourselves. To believe my faith is better than yours is sheer arrogance, it breeds conflicts, and assumes that other faiths are less than mine; and "they" need to catch up, Hell no!
To believe that other faith is deficient is being disrespectful to the otherness of other. God has not signed a deal with any one behind my back, if God were to favor one over the other, we have not understood the nature of God, all loving, caring and generous, after he is your and my creator. But if you insist God does favors to you, keep him, we don't need it, we don't need that kind of God illusion.
Spirituality and Arrogance are inversely proportional. To be religious is to be humble and to be a peace maker.
There is no need to have institutions of proselyteziation. Every faith is beautiful, however one should have complete freedom to choose what he or she wants to believe or ritualize. Let there be no compulsion in religion. (Quraan 2:256).
After all, NO ONE is responsible for my actions other than myself, that I have to reflect upon in my solitiude and be accountable on the elusive Day of Judgment.
I am a Muslim and I proclaim, my faith is NOT superior or inferior to any. My faith requires me to be humble and my role is to mitigate conflicts and nurture goodwill that is what leads to the kingdom of peace. My faith works for me as your faith works for you, you enjoy your faith and I will mine. (Quraan 109:6)
Mike Ghouse is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions to issues of the day. He is a thinker, writer, speaker, optimist and an activist of Pluralism, Interfaith, Co-existence, Peace, Islam and India. His work is reflected at three websites and 22 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conversion or recruitment?
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/muqtedar_khan/2010/03/the_difference_between_conversion_and_recruitment.html
Q: Is there a problem with proselytism overseas by U.S. religious groups? Isn't sharing one's faith part of religious freedom? When does it cross the line into manipulation and coercion?
I believe systematic and institutionalized endeavors to proselytize on a global stage is warfare by other means. I am not opposed to conversion per se. If someone finds meaning in a particular message and seeks to embrace it, congratulations. If one feels an urge to share one's beliefs and what it means with others, then again that is welcome. But if one starts a campaign to "recruit" people through an organized crusade, then it is, I believe, contrary to the very idea of spiritualism as understood by most faiths, and is an act of aggression.
Faith is not a commodity that lends itself to a global consumer marketing campaign. To treat it as such is demeaning to faith itself. Marketing it using brochures and not compassion, arguments and not service, providing material incentives and not spiritual comfort, is abhorrent.
Islam and Christianity have reputations for proselytizing. But often the rapid growth of Islam is assumed to be as a result of Christianity like attempts at systematic proselytizing. This is far from the truth. There are no lifelong missionaries in Muslim societies. Mosques do not have budgets or fund raisers for missionary work. Islam is today the fastest growing religion in America and Europe and that is not because of some major missionary campaign, but indeed in spite of all the demonization of Islam in the media as a false religion, as a religion of violence and as a value system intolerant towards women.
Many Western commentators interpret the extremism of al-Qaeda and other groups as indicative of the Islamic mandate to convert people to Islam. I personally have difficulty understanding this claim. How does one convince others of the virtue of one's ways through murder and slaughter?
On the other hand, many Islamic and third world countries associate Christian missionaries with crusades, colonization and imperialism. If you see a Christian missionary, run! Western armies are not far behind, or they are already there. Even the U.S., the champion of secularism and freedom of religion, has had so much trouble disassociating itself and its foreign policy from proselytizing. U.S. armies in occupied Iraq have been used to protect Christian missionaries distributing Bibles along with food to starving Iraqis and associating Christian symbols with military ones in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Efforts to safeguard freedom of religion, such as the now controversial U.S. Commission of on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has been shown as biased towards Christianity. It has over the years shown more concern for opening opportunities for evangelism in the Muslim World than protecting the religious freedoms of Muslim Women in France.
In India too there is a large constituency for banning conversions because they see it as a cultural invasion of India, by Islam and Christianity. Clearly proselytizing has no place in the global village.
Islamic sources, regardless of how some Muslims may act or interpret them, are overwhelmingly against active proselytization. The Quran states very clearly that there is no compulsion in religion. There is no need for compulsion, since the truth is elf evident (Quran 2:256). In several other places, the Quran states very clearly that the role of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is to only deliver the message from God. He does not have the right to exercise power over those who receive his message (Quran 88;21-22), it is God, not people, who will exercise accountability upon the creation (Quran 88;26]. The job of a Muslim is to deliver the message, not to manage, not to act as an advocate nor to seek to act as a guardian of others (Quran 10:18, 3:29, 18:29).
I like Jefferson's idea that the best way to communicate what one's values and beliefs are is by living them. If Muslims want to bring the message of Truth to others, then rather than launching global campaigns to proselytize, they should live their faiths and let its grace work. The same applies to others. Be good so we know your values are good.
To be concise proselytization is neither good religion nor good politics. Religion's objective is to build a spiritual link between the creation and the creator, not to serve as an identity marker engaged in a battle for market share of souls.
~~~~
Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 7:06pm | Edit Note | Delete
Religions are beautiful, if every one gets it as Jesus intended, Mohammad wanted, Moses taught, Krishna explained, Nanak practiced, Buddha enlightened, Zathustra showed or the native tradtions point out... there would be no problem. All they wanted was a better world by following a few basic principles. They were looking at the end result and not the means. Religion is not the problem.
The purpose of religion is to bring a sense of composure and a balance within oneself and with what surrounds; life and environment. All religions or traditions whether scripted or not, have the same goal; to create a continual balance.
When you buy a $700 suit for $100, you will call all your friends to go get one. I guess the same zeal enters one's mind if they are rejoiced with their faith.
Arrogance is the mother of all conflicts that is why every possible tradition out there requires one to bow, kneel or prostrate to show humility and acceptance of a greater being than ourselves. To believe my faith is better than yours is sheer arrogance, it breeds conflicts, and assumes that other faiths are less than mine; and "they" need to catch up, Hell no!
To believe that other faith is deficient is being disrespectful to the otherness of other. God has not signed a deal with any one behind my back, if God were to favor one over the other, we have not understood the nature of God, all loving, caring and generous, after he is your and my creator. But if you insist God does favors to you, keep him, we don't need it, we don't need that kind of God illusion.
Spirituality and Arrogance are inversely proportional. To be religious is to be humble and to be a peace maker.
There is no need to have institutions of proselyteziation. Every faith is beautiful, however one should have complete freedom to choose what he or she wants to believe or ritualize. Let there be no compulsion in religion. (Quraan 2:256).
After all, NO ONE is responsible for my actions other than myself, that I have to reflect upon in my solitiude and be accountable on the elusive Day of Judgment.
I am a Muslim and I proclaim, my faith is NOT superior or inferior to any. My faith requires me to be humble and my role is to mitigate conflicts and nurture goodwill that is what leads to the kingdom of peace. My faith works for me as your faith works for you, you enjoy your faith and I will mine. (Quraan 109:6)
Mike Ghouse is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions to issues of the day. He is a thinker, writer, speaker, optimist and an activist of Pluralism, Interfaith, Co-existence, Peace, Islam and India. His work is reflected at three websites and 22 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conversion or recruitment?
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/muqtedar_khan/2010/03/the_difference_between_conversion_and_recruitment.html
Q: Is there a problem with proselytism overseas by U.S. religious groups? Isn't sharing one's faith part of religious freedom? When does it cross the line into manipulation and coercion?
I believe systematic and institutionalized endeavors to proselytize on a global stage is warfare by other means. I am not opposed to conversion per se. If someone finds meaning in a particular message and seeks to embrace it, congratulations. If one feels an urge to share one's beliefs and what it means with others, then again that is welcome. But if one starts a campaign to "recruit" people through an organized crusade, then it is, I believe, contrary to the very idea of spiritualism as understood by most faiths, and is an act of aggression.
Faith is not a commodity that lends itself to a global consumer marketing campaign. To treat it as such is demeaning to faith itself. Marketing it using brochures and not compassion, arguments and not service, providing material incentives and not spiritual comfort, is abhorrent.
Islam and Christianity have reputations for proselytizing. But often the rapid growth of Islam is assumed to be as a result of Christianity like attempts at systematic proselytizing. This is far from the truth. There are no lifelong missionaries in Muslim societies. Mosques do not have budgets or fund raisers for missionary work. Islam is today the fastest growing religion in America and Europe and that is not because of some major missionary campaign, but indeed in spite of all the demonization of Islam in the media as a false religion, as a religion of violence and as a value system intolerant towards women.
Many Western commentators interpret the extremism of al-Qaeda and other groups as indicative of the Islamic mandate to convert people to Islam. I personally have difficulty understanding this claim. How does one convince others of the virtue of one's ways through murder and slaughter?
On the other hand, many Islamic and third world countries associate Christian missionaries with crusades, colonization and imperialism. If you see a Christian missionary, run! Western armies are not far behind, or they are already there. Even the U.S., the champion of secularism and freedom of religion, has had so much trouble disassociating itself and its foreign policy from proselytizing. U.S. armies in occupied Iraq have been used to protect Christian missionaries distributing Bibles along with food to starving Iraqis and associating Christian symbols with military ones in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Efforts to safeguard freedom of religion, such as the now controversial U.S. Commission of on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has been shown as biased towards Christianity. It has over the years shown more concern for opening opportunities for evangelism in the Muslim World than protecting the religious freedoms of Muslim Women in France.
In India too there is a large constituency for banning conversions because they see it as a cultural invasion of India, by Islam and Christianity. Clearly proselytizing has no place in the global village.
Islamic sources, regardless of how some Muslims may act or interpret them, are overwhelmingly against active proselytization. The Quran states very clearly that there is no compulsion in religion. There is no need for compulsion, since the truth is elf evident (Quran 2:256). In several other places, the Quran states very clearly that the role of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) is to only deliver the message from God. He does not have the right to exercise power over those who receive his message (Quran 88;21-22), it is God, not people, who will exercise accountability upon the creation (Quran 88;26]. The job of a Muslim is to deliver the message, not to manage, not to act as an advocate nor to seek to act as a guardian of others (Quran 10:18, 3:29, 18:29).
I like Jefferson's idea that the best way to communicate what one's values and beliefs are is by living them. If Muslims want to bring the message of Truth to others, then rather than launching global campaigns to proselytize, they should live their faiths and let its grace work. The same applies to others. Be good so we know your values are good.
To be concise proselytization is neither good religion nor good politics. Religion's objective is to build a spiritual link between the creation and the creator, not to serve as an identity marker engaged in a battle for market share of souls.
~~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

