Conversion of the Soul

[lunamoth]

Hi Scott,

But really don't you think it's splitting a mighty fine hair to make this kind of distinction? If a Christian hands out a pamphlet it's evangelizing, which you seem to consider proselytizing, but if a Baha'i hands out a pamphlet it's teaching, not proselytizing?

peace,
Laurie

 

[Popeyesays]

Hi Scott,

But really don't you think it's splitting a mighty fine hair to make this kind of distinction? If a Christian hands out a pamphlet it's evangelizing, which you seem to consider proselytizing, but if a Baha'i hands out a pamphlet it's teaching, not proselytizing?

peace,
Laurie

Well, Luna I have never given a pamphelet to anyone who did not come looking for information. In fact, I can't remember ever passinjg out pamphlets to people without them expressing an interest in what the pamphelet might be about. I don't even carry pamphelets, though I do carry cards with telephone numbers and addresses of the city Bahai Center if discussion should lead me to give out that information.

Do I consider this forum or others like it to be "giving out pamphelets"? Nope.

Regards,
Scott

 

[9Harmony]

Hi Scott,

But really don't you think it's splitting a mighty fine hair to make this kind of distinction? If a Christian hands out a pamphlet it's evangelizing, which you seem to consider proselytizing, but if a Baha'i hands out a pamphlet it's teaching, not proselytizing?

peace,
Laurie

Hi Laurie,

One distinction that I've witnessed...

I worked at the Baha'i booth at the Iowa State Fair for 3 years. Our booth was right across from a Christian booth.

The first year i was there, the Christians would form a line in front of our booth, attempting to divert people away from us. Asking passers by if they had been saved yet. Handing a pamphlet to everyone that walked by.

The Baha'i's would just sit behind their table, talking to each other, smiling at passers by. And would only give out pamphlets if someone came up to the table and inquired.

The Christians mellowed out some by the 3rd year i was there, but there was still a distinctive difference in the approach. Several times they have tried to save me as well.

The most effective way of teaching is simply by living the life, and that entails quoting the writings, not because we are trying to one-up anyone, but rather because they become so engrained in us, as we strive to live the life.

Does that make any sense?

-Amy

 

[Tao_Equus]

With respect, and without complaint, on many threads where Baha'i post from their perspective it often includes a quotation from your scriptures when none has been requested. This is equivelant to a pamphlet and is arguably an effort to win people to the thinking of your scriptures and thus prosletysing. My feeling is only a Baha'i would see the distinctions you declare. And it certainly does not 'feel' like Baha'i do not try to prosletyse. Again I state that it seems a rather illogical move for any religion to take such a stand if only for the reason it immediately opens an argument of hypocracy any time you try to disseminate your beliefs.

My 2c's


Regards

TE

 

[Popeyesays]

With respect, and without complaint, on many threads where Baha'i post from their perspective it often includes a quotation from your scriptures when none has been requested. This is equivelant to a pamphlet and is arguably an effort to win people to the thinking of your scriptures and thus prosletysing. My feeling is only a Baha'i would see the distinctions you declare. And it certainly does not 'feel' like Baha'i do not try to prosletyse. Again I state that it seems a rather illogical move for any religion to take such a stand if only for the reason it immediately opens an argument of hypocracy any time you try to disseminate your beliefs.

My 2c's


Regards

TE

Your tuppence is always welcome. I answer questions with what the writings say because my answer might be wrong, and you are at least as capable as I of determining what the truth inthose original words might mean.

Regards,
Scott

 

[iBrian]

Words have connotative and denotative meanings. Confusion arises when you try to do both at once.

Ah, but now you're playing with semantics again.

Even if you extend "gospel" to its original meaning of "good news". Preach and sermonize are pretty much synonymous. The Baha`i Faith does not allow sermons. We have no pulpits and no clergy to deliver them.

This is a distraction from the issue - the pulpit usually resides within a Christian congregation, for a minister to remind Christians of their faith. Trying to absolve any faith of proselytising because it doesn't have a pulpit or ministers is avoiding the issue.

There is a substantive difference between "teach" and "evangelize" or "proselytize". Baha`i's "teach", they don't really do the other, despite the perception of some.

Let me remind you of your first two posts - an essay aimed at Muslims pointing out the error of their ways, and the ascendency of the Baha'i faith other Islam.

This is "teaching" to you - but if you're going to insist on that terminology, then the Baha'i meaning of "teach" is preach - proselytise. Toying with semantics cannot escape that.

With respect, and without complaint, on many threads where Baha'i post from their perspective it often includes a quotation from your scriptures when none has been requested. This is equivelant to a pamphlet and is arguably an effort to win people to the thinking of your scriptures and thus prosletysing.

Actually, this is a very good point.

 

[smkolins]

Ah, but now you're playing with semantics again.

[/size][/font]

So then words have no meaning, except what you mean - "you" = "listener".

...

With respect, and without complaint, on many threads where Baha'i post from their perspective it often includes a quotation from your scriptures when none has been requested. This is equivelant to a pamphlet and is arguably an effort to win people to the thinking of your scriptures and thus prosletysing.

Actually, this is a very good point.

Actually I don't think it is a very good point, despite the norms around here. CR is a voluntary place where one should expect to discuss religion. If participation in CR meant one had to convey Christian norms then it would in essence be prosletysing. But it is not. Same for all the religions. One not need read every post, and one may even setup ignore rules to simply not see a post.

I would suppsoe that as some religionists have thumped with their scripture, all reference to scripture feels like thumping. Of course this can be something done by any religionist, or aetheist. But whatever purpose scripture has been bent to, it must in essence remain it's own purpose. If "what was meant by the scripture" were the reality of religion there would be no need for it as the "what" would become the scripture. But this becomes a problem emediately.

As has been said in many other threads, there are often so many misconceptions of the Baha'i Faith, that to use our own words sometimes causes us grief when we make a mistake, or when others take our comments out of context. If can stick to the scriptures, then we raise or fall on what we stand for, rather than what my fumbling attempt might or might not convey.

In my experience it isn't the use of scripture that is the problem, it's the refusal to read it whether because it is quoted too awkwardly to be read, or the poster and or the reader have no interest in discussion but only in making their own point. Censuring the scripture isn't the solution. Mutual respect and care are.

 

[Popeyesays]

[/size][/font]

Ah, but now you're playing with semantics again.





Let me remind you of your first two posts - an essay aimed at Muslims pointing out the error of their ways, and the ascendency of the Baha'i faith other Islam.

This is "teaching" to you - but if you're going to insist on that terminology, then the Baha'i meaning of "teach" is preach - proselytise. Toying with semantics cannot escape that. .

Actually, those were not my first posts. And that was an intent YOU applied to the posts in question - beauty is not the only thing which resides in the eye of the beholder. The second post I put up was a translation of a tablet by Baha`u'llah "Ode to the Dove" which is not widely available in English. It did not have a lot to do with Islam or triumpahalism at all. You read with an eye to censure what I had written without paying any attention to what I had written or quoted. If you're going to censor posts because you are prejudiced, you're going to have to get used to the fact that prejudice is what it is. Toying with semantics can't escape that either.

Now this may or may not make you angry. But plain talk is what is called for, and you do not hesitate to speak plainly. Perhaps it will be possible for you to listen that way for a moment.

To look in the dictionary, read what the word means, and use it precisely is God's own gift to dialogue.

Regards,
Scott

 

[BruceDLimber]

Hi, Amy!

I worked at the Baha'i booth at the Iowa State Fair for 3 years. Our booth was right across from a Christian booth.

The first year i was there, the Christians would form a line in front of our booth, attempting to divert people away from us. Asking passers by if they had been saved yet. Handing a pamphlet to everyone that walked by....

-Amy

Given that the Baha'is were doubtless paying a fair sum of money for the booth, I should think that a quiet mention of what was going on to the officials there would solve the problem real quick!

Regards,

Bruce

 

[BruceDLimber]

Hi, TE!

With respect, and without complaint, on many threads where Baha'i post from their perspective it often includes a quotation from your scriptures when none has been requested.

You should understand, I think, the reason why so many Baha'is tend to post scripture passages during discussions.

The basic reason is that every one of us is fallible, and as a rule, we often prefer to quite from our scriptures (which we see as totally reliable) rather than risk mis-stating something--especially those of us whose communication skills aren't necessarily all that great.

So there's really nothing nefarious or sneaky going on here, and it's not an attempt to proselytize or take unfair advantage of anyone else!

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Bruce

 

[Tao_Equus]

I think a more pertinant question would be " Is it possible to teach and not proseltyse?". I for one think not. Even having a booth at a state fair for example is making that effort. Again I would re-state that it seems a very illogical position to take.


Regards

TE

 

[Popeyesays]

I think a more pertinant question would be " Is it possible to teach and not proseltyse?". I for one think not. Even having a booth at a state fair for example is making that effort. Again I would re-state that it seems a very illogical position to take.


Regards

TE

I would draw this distinction. If you have a booth at the fair and go out of your way to give people literature who did not ask for it, you are proselytizing. If you sit at the booth and talk with people who talk with you first, then you are teaching - giving information to those who wish to have it.
From Merriam WSebster: "2 : to guide the studies of
3 : to impart the knowledge of <teach algebra>
4 a : to instruct by precept, example, or experience b : to make known and accepted <experience teaches us our limitations>"

"Consort with all men, O people of Baha, in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship. If ye be aware of a certain truth, if ye possess a jewel, of which others are deprived, share it with them in a language of utmost kindliness and good-will. If it be accepted, if it fulfil its purpose, your object is attained. If any one should refuse it, leave him unto himself, and beseech God to guide him. Beware lest ye deal unkindly with him. A kindly tongue is the lodestone of the hearts of men. It is the bread of the spirit, it clotheth the words with meaning, it is the fountain of the light of wisdom and understanding...."
(Compilations, The Individual and Teaching - Raising the Divine Call, p. 4)

So teaching offered is simply offered. It is not pressed with warnings of consequences, it is not salted with hopes of reward, it is just offered. Those who take up that teaching and find satisfaction in it are not guided by the teacher but by God, from a Baha`i point of view.

Anyone is free to accept or reject. What was is not free to do is accept or reject for someone else. So if what I offer is not to someone else's liking, I'm sorry, perhaps I phrased it wrong, I am capable of such error. This is another reason for offering the actual words of Baha`u'llah, or Jesus, or Muhammed, or Krshna or Buddha - to present the words of theachings in their original form so an individual can choose or not choose based on what he actually hears, not on what I think I heard.

Regards,
Scott

 

[lunamoth]

Hi Laurie,

One distinction that I've witnessed...

I worked at the Baha'i booth at the Iowa State Fair for 3 years. Our booth was right across from a Christian booth.

The first year i was there, the Christians would form a line in front of our booth, attempting to divert people away from us. Asking passers by if they had been saved yet. Handing a pamphlet to everyone that walked by.

The Baha'i's would just sit behind their table, talking to each other, smiling at passers by. And would only give out pamphlets if someone came up to the table and inquired.

The Christians mellowed out some by the 3rd year i was there, but there was still a distinctive difference in the approach. Several times they have tried to save me as well.

The most effective way of teaching is simply by living the life, and that entails quoting the writings, not because we are trying to one-up anyone, but rather because they become so engrained in us, as we strive to live the life.

Does that make any sense?

-Amy

Hi Amy, nice to *hear* your voice again.

I guess I would say that because there are more Christians than Baha'is there are also more obnoxious Christians than obnoxious Baha'is. Sorry that your booth was assaulted.

Certainly people have different ideas about what is good or effective evangelizing and I certainly would say that attacking your booth like that was not good behavior, Christian or otherwise. As I said above to Scott, evangelizing does not always look like pamphleting and paid missionary work. I think that just showing Christ's love to each other, living the life as Baha'is say, is the best evangelizing. But, just as there is sometimes aggressive Christian evangelizing, there are also some forms of Baha'i teaching that most would put squarely in the category of proselytizing.

For example, Baha'is do door-to-door teaching ala JWs and LDS. It's not pushed, but I would say that it is encouraged for those individuals who want to do it. Likewise pamphleting in public places, which really is not much different than having a booth. And hey! I am not criticizing that Baha'is do these things. I was totally into teaching as a Baha'i; I know it is done out of love and enthusiasm as much as out of obligation.

The miscommunication seems to be based in the fact that Baha'is say that they do not proselytize and are not out to convert anyone when to casual observers there is not much distinction between teaching a religion and proselytizing. I totally understand how Baha'is make the distinction, and I understand the extensive use of quotes, but that does not change things in the minds of non-Baha'i readers.

Finally, as a Baha'i, I thought I knew the rule about not proselytizing, but it also seemed to be very much the point that teaching was about gaining converts to the Baha'i Faith. Is it also against Baha'i law to admit that you seek to gain converts? Perhaps I should write to the UHJ!

peace,
and I'm starting to be sorry I started all this again.
Laurie

 

[Tao_Equus]

Thank you Scott,
I do see where you are coming from but as Luna points out no non-Baha'i will agree with such a fine destinction. You can quote literal dictionary defenitions but its the perception in peoples minds that really tune a word's nuance. I said before that it's illogical rule of your faith to prohibit it but on reflection it is maybe a useful tool in keeping check on the fervour of some individuals who might be prone to aggresive recruiting.
On the whole I find that the Baha'i as represented by yourself and others here on CR to be very peaceful and genuine. Where you offer insight into your thinking I far from always agree but find it enlightening and educational. Luna has stated that she's begining to regret starting on this subject and I cant blame her. Its one of these circular ones where no consensus will be reached. So I back out of it now with respect.

Regards

TE

 

[Popeyesays]

Thank you Scott,
I do see where you are coming from but as Luna points out no non-Baha'i will agree with such a fine destinction. You can quote literal dictionary defenitions but its the perception in peoples minds that really tune a word's nuance. I said before that it's illogical rule of your faith to prohibit it but on reflection it is maybe a useful tool in keeping check on the fervour of some individuals who might be prone to aggresive recruiting.
On the whole I find that the Baha'i as represented by yourself and others here on CR to be very peaceful and genuine. Where you offer insight into your thinking I far from always agree but find it enlightening and educational. Luna has stated that she's begining to regret starting on this subject and I cant blame her. Its one of these circular ones where no consensus will be reached. So I back out of it now with respect.

Regards
TE

When all is said and done, we'll all survive.

My respects to you as well,

Scott

 

[iBrian]

Actually I don't think it is a very good point, despite the norms around here. CR is a voluntary place where one should expect to discuss religion.

Indeed - discuss religion, not post a library about it.

But whatever purpose scripture has been bent to, it must in essence remain it's own purpose.

As has been said in many other threads, there are often so many misconceptions of the Baha'i Faith, that to use our own words sometimes causes us grief when we make a mistake, or when others take our comments out of context. If can stick to the scriptures, then we raise or fall on what we stand for, rather than what my fumbling attempt might or might not convey.

We're here for interfaith discussion - to use our own words to convey our opinions.


EDIT: Let me clarify this - it's expected that every now and then someone will want to quote their scriptures to justify a position, underline a point, and generally add emphasis by point of reference to what they are discussing.

The issue unique to the Baha'i membership here is the habitual use of scripture in general. It's simply not necessary, and it is unbalancing to CR.

If every other faith here is able to post in majority without having to quote scripture with every post, then I can't really accept that Baha'i members in general need to be treated as an exception.

 

[iBrian]

Actually, those were not my first posts. And that was an intent YOU applied to the posts in question - beauty is not the only thing which resides in the eye of the beholder.

...

You read with an eye to censure what I had written without paying any attention to what I had written or quoted. If you're going to censor posts because you are prejudiced, you're going to have to get used to the fact that prejudice is what it is.

Your first two posts were:

- posting an anti-Islamic/pro-Baha'i thread on the Islam board
- posting an anti-Islamic/pro-Baha'i thread on the Baha'i board

Daring to claim my removal of those to be an issue of prejudice demonstrates an approach that simply isn't acceptable here - you appear to be arguing that so long as you think your behaviour is okay, then you shouldn't be held accountable to any other standard.

I'm saying you are and will be when you post on CR. There's an attempt to create an even playing field for all religions here, and that means everybody has to be treated in the same manner.

I would draw this distinction. If you have a booth at the fair and go out of your way to give people literature who did not ask for it, you are proselytizing.

Which Muslims invited you to post that their religion was flawed and that Baha'i had superceded it? If you were not invited so, then you were clearly proselytising, regardless of any semantical argument.

So teaching offered is simply offered. It is not pressed with warnings of consequences, it is not salted with hopes of reward, it is just offered.

I think this is a key problem with persons such as yourself - that so long as proselytising isn't done in an aggressive manner, then it's not proselytising. But just because someone uses a friendly voice when trying to promote their faith does not make it otherwise. Arguing semantics will not wash.

Absolutely nobody is here to with a remit to teach their faith under any definition - we're here to discuss our personal viewpoints in an environment of mutual respect.


I should also underline that we've had a constructive Baha'i membership here for the past 2 years - people who showed an apparently genuine interest in multi-faith dialogue - smkolins, BruceDLimber, 9HArmony, barefootgal, IMsassasfras, for example.

However, over the past 6 months that has deteriorated, as self-promotional issues have come to a head. You yourself came in proselytising, argue semantics about the issue - then dare to claim that I'm prejudiced for calling you to account.

CR has shown an overwhelming tolerance to try and accomodate every person of every faith - I didn't ban you despite your original entrance, because we like to try and give everybody a chance to be constructive here - and if you think we're negatively prejudiced for doing so, then that's your opinion to hold.

But we can only offer as much hospitality as we have. For people who wish to reject that - the internet is a far bigger place than CR.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Brian, we've explained several times why Baha'is tend to prefer quotes rather than our own words, so I don't know why this isn't now clear.

BTW, what is a "constructed Baha'i membership?"

And one more question, if you happen to know: why is the "Quick Reply" box sometimes available and sometimes not?

Thanks.

Bruce

 

[iBrian]

what is a "constructed Baha'i membership?"

My bad - typo: "constructive" - now corrected.

As for prefering quotes - my point of reference is to ask myself if it would be acceptable for a Christian to post across the boards - for example, Neo-Paganism - while quoting the Bible extensively with their posts. I think it would be pretty clear that it could be taken as potentially invasive and unnecessary.

At the end of the day, without quotes is a better way of engaging in dialogue - we're here to represent our own opinions, rather than present the opinions of our religions.

I'm hoping this isn't going to be a general issue, though - I mentioned it because it was raised and expanded upon.

And one more question, if you happen to know: why is the "Quick Reply" box sometimes available and sometimes not?

Shouldn't happen like that - but there have been a couple of bugs in the board software. We're going to undergo a board upgrade pretty soon - I'm hoping that tidies some of the loose ends. See what happens.

 

[9Harmony]

Hi Amy, nice to *hear* your voice again.

I guess I would say that because there are more Christians than Baha'is there are also more obnoxious Christians than obnoxious Baha'is. Sorry that your booth was assaulted.

Certainly people have different ideas about what is good or effective evangelizing and I certainly would say that attacking your booth like that was not good behavior, Christian or otherwise. As I said above to Scott, evangelizing does not always look like pamphleting and paid missionary work. I think that just showing Christ's love to each other, living the life as Baha'is say, is the best evangelizing. But, just as there is sometimes aggressive Christian evangelizing, there are also some forms of Baha'i teaching that most would put squarely in the category of proselytizing.

For example, Baha'is do door-to-door teaching ala JWs and LDS. It's not pushed, but I would say that it is encouraged for those individuals who want to do it. Likewise pamphleting in public places, which really is not much different than having a booth. And hey! I am not criticizing that Baha'is do these things. I was totally into teaching as a Baha'i; I know it is done out of love and enthusiasm as much as out of obligation.

The miscommunication seems to be based in the fact that Baha'is say that they do not proselytize and are not out to convert anyone when to casual observers there is not much distinction between teaching a religion and proselytizing. I totally understand how Baha'is make the distinction, and I understand the extensive use of quotes, but that does not change things in the minds of non-Baha'i readers.

Finally, as a Baha'i, I thought I knew the rule about not proselytizing, but it also seemed to be very much the point that teaching was about gaining converts to the Baha'i Faith. Is it also against Baha'i law to admit that you seek to gain converts? Perhaps I should write to the UHJ!

peace,
and I'm starting to be sorry I started all this again.
Laurie

Hi Laurie,

Sorry for my absense lately, life in general has been rather chaotic and has left me little time to post.

Regarding the fair booth, i never once felt attacked, rather i understood that they simply felt they were doing something meritorious in the sight of God. They felt they were protecting passers by from us. It didn't keep people who were really interested from by-passing them and approaching our booth. We had a backdrop behind us which said "The Baha'i Faith" and underneath it said "Unity in Diversity" the backdrop itself was covered with pictures of diverse people mingling together. Which was visible above their heads, so who knows, perhaps they actually drew peoples attention to us, who normally may not have noticed.

Regarding door to door teaching, this is not anything that I have ever done in the time I've been a Baha'i. I think this was utilized frequently perhaps in the 70's, but not recently. It may still be done in some bigger metropolitan areas, but more along the lines of inviting neighbors to study circles, devotional gatherings, and childrens or youth classes.

Regarding gaining converts...of course every religion hopes to increase their membership. But the Baha'i Faith to me is different in that we simply share what we've learned and it is entirely up to the audience what to do with that information. We will never coerce anyone into joining us. We will never promise eternal salvation. It is the decision of each individual. It is between themselves and God.

When i first became a Baha'i. Some members of my family thought i had been brain washed into joining a cult. But that could only be true, if I brain washed myself. I am isolated, attended a couple firesides, but the majority of my own investigation was simply reading the Baha'i Writings for myself. It was my decision alone, and one i have yet to regret.

As for it being against Baha'i law to admit we seek to gain converts...I don't really think it is a law perse, but rather an act of humility. If we begin to feel proud that we perhaps led someone to the Faith, inevitibly something seems to happen to make us realize that it is not us, it is the act of allowing God to work through us that is responsible.

As for your point of how others tend to see us in these discussions, I think that is a valid point. We are all learning how to communicate in this online world, and one i always try to keep in mind. Though not always successfully. I for one am grateful for the opportunity to learn from all of you in this way. There seems to be a very fine line, a balance we are all trying to achieve, apparently we haven't found it yet.

Don't feel bad for bringing this up again. If these are issues that trouble you then they should be discussed.

Take Care!

Loving Greetings, Amy