An article in Indolink today caught my eye because it examines something very familiar to most SM readers, Christian Evangelicals attempting to convert Hindus, except in a very different context than usual. The setting of these conversions isn’t rural India but American college campuses:
…there is increasing evidence that Christian evangelical groups are aggressively targeting Hindu students in American college campuses for conversion.
In fact, a sampling of Asian American-identified evangelical fellowship websites reveals mission statements targeting Asian and Asian American students for outreach and membership, while simultaneously affirming a non-race-specific evangelical identity.
There is evidence that large numbers of Asian American college students are turning to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through the encouragement and support of national and local prayer and Bible study organizations. Alongside the large national organizations, there are numerous local bible studies and fellowships that are often sponsored by local churches and are ethnic specific…One reason for the present renewed aggressive effort is that, unlike other Asian Americans, Hindu-Americans have staunchly resisted efforts at conversion. Also, unlike other Asian Americans who are becoming increasingly associated with evangelical Christianity on college campuses, Hindu-Americans have their own campus groups such as Hindu Students Federation.
Nevertheless, evangelical “parachurch” organizations like Campus Crusade for Christ (CCC), The Navigators, and IVCF are soliciting large numbers of students to their weekly bible studies, prayer meetings, and social events. There is no doubt that Asian Americans – especially Korean and Chinese – are becoming increasingly associated with evangelical Christianity on the college campus. The hope is that Indian-Americans will follow suit. [Link]
I don’t particularly care if someone that follows Hinduism decides to convert to Christianity. The idea that someone is born into a religion has always seemed rather silly to me, as does a notion I have previously read on our comment boards which declares that “white people can be real Hindus.” Religion should be a personal choice. In the context of America you definitely can’t accuse Evangelicals of taking advantage of poor or illiterate people. College students aren’t typically poor (although most are now illiterate). The real reason I found this article interesting is that it contained strategy advice on how-to, and how-not-to convert a Hindu.
<
p>
“Do not criticize or condemn Hinduism. …. Criticizing Hinduism can make us feel we have won an argument; it will not win Hindus to Jesus Christ…Never allow a suggestion that separation from family and/or culture is necessary in becoming a disciple of Christ. …Avoid all that even hints at triumphalism and pride. …Do not speak quickly on hell, or on the fact that Jesus is the only way for salvation. …Never hurry. Any pushing for a decision or conversion will do great harm. …. Even after a profession of Christ is made, do not force quick changes regarding pictures of gods, charms, etc. …Do not force Christian ideas into passages of Hindu scripture. … Empathize with Hindus. …. Learn to think as the Hindu thinks, and feel as he feels…. Those who move seriously into Christian work among Hindus need to become more knowledgeable in Hinduism than Hindus themselves are…A new believer should be warned against making an abrupt announcement to his or her family, since that inflicts great pain and inevitably produces deep misunderstanding……” [Link]
That’s some good stuff. It’s like finding a general’s battle plans. 🙂
Christian evangelist Rajendra Pillai of Clarksburg, Md. adds a few more specific pointers:
Pillai observes, “We can effectively reach Asian-Indians by knowing a little about their culture, beliefs and practices. First and foremost, we need to learn as much as possible about Hinduism.”
And he offers the following pointers:
“The Indian culture is highly collectivist. This means that most Indians will consider their acceptance of the Gospel in light of how it will impact their families and friends. There is also a strong possibility of being rejected by family members if a person changes his or her religion. Chances are you will not get an immediate response. Be prepared to walk with and support your Indian friend if he or she wrestles spiritually.
“As Indians come from a collectivist society and yearn for community, many will be open to coming to church if it means being a part of a community where people are genuinely concerned about each other. You might start by inviting them to less-threatening events outside of a Sunday church service.
“Most Asian-Indians yearn for community. Coming from a collectivist society, they have a tough time adjusting to the American individualistic culture. This is where Christians can step in, and the church can become the community they are seeking…” [Link]
<
p>
<
p>
Nobody better try and turn the comment section into anti-Christian rants. That isn’t what this post is about. I find strategic plans fascinating whether they be military, political, or business related. I found this article educational because it shows a religious strategy laid bare. It is also something that many of us who walk across college campuses every day see in action.
Sahej:
At the individual level that is sometimes true but they assume that the origin of Christ’s message, and by extension the Church’s message, are not earthly but heavenly and ahistorical. Now, assume that is not true- that the past and present proponents are preaching a message with a history as a social institution shaped by human experience. Enter humankind’s vices and virtues.
yes, i agree it may be explicitly ahistorical. but in the context of a conversation, history plays a part. the growth of the black church is a historical movement. how common is it to see afro-centric motifs in a black church? common enough. its not shocking to refer to jesus as a man with hair as lamb’s wool anymore is it? religion in general is often ahistorical explicitly no matter what faith you’re speaking of. i agree on the point about enter mankind’s vices and virtues. the lack of explicit historicity can lead to vexing results
Manju:
If race wasn’t a factor, then why aren’t the conversionists operating in Europe where the majority have theologically and spiritually rejected the Church? It is afterall, the heart of the Catholic, Protestant and Greek Orthodox Church. Why is the white non-believer off-limits in Europe but the dark uncouth-polytheistic-pagan believer the target? Certainly there’s a historical foundation for the former, so why isn’t it done?
This topic is much more explosive when it involves christians trying to convert Jews. Many Jews scream “holocaust” at this thought. It’s quite an emotional issue in an already complex relationship. Christian evangelicals are one of the greatest defenders of israel, so they are simultaneously considered zionists and Nazis.
It is not my choice to use these extreme terms, this is actually how the argument is being framed out there.
I don’t know but I don’t think a superiority complex explains this. I do know that the Catholic church under the last pope made a concerted effort to go after africa and latin america b/c he thought europe was hopeless, ie too secular. Probably its harder to go from a secular/scientic viewpoint to a religious one than vice versa. it must be easier to convert someone already in a religious framework.
Economics must also play a HUGE role…Poor people are simply more inclined toward religion. So one must go where the poor are.
not for altruistic reasons though- the evangelical relationship with Islam is key to that posturing; as is the politics- if evangelical’s seek to be relevant in the GOP, or the broader American political spectrum, they must half-heartedly defend Israel.
there aren’t too many people running to convert hedonistic swedes, you’re right
from what i’ve heard it is relly quite heartfelt and strong…and I run in republican circles now and then. They are quite passionate about israel primarily b/c they really believe the bible is literal and that god promised israel to the jews. “and god does not go back on his promises” said pat robertson or Jerry falwell (i forget and get them confused). which makes their position more radical than most israeli jews…who (minus the orthodox) are generally liberal and secular.
CAD
Would replacing Western with Semitic satisfy you? The West has appropriated the Judeo-Christian traditions and concepts as well as Greek philosophy as the fountainhead for western thought. And by geography, Palsestine is to the West of where the influence of the Eastern philosopies lie. And the influence of Middle East in most of Asia only happened in the last 600 years, mostly thru’ invasion and Christianity was never an Asian religion until the last century.
Manju:
on this I agree.
the ineffable Marx (sacre bleu!):
JK Galbraith said something about this too which I have never been able to find. The poor, whose life is so materially deprived can only hope for a better existence in the next life via religion; the rich don’t share the same sentiments as the present life is pretty darn good.
true, but there is that annoying bit about not accepting Jesus as the son of god, err, Son of God.
of course the other marx, groucho adds some colour to this:
“Opium is the religion of the people”
Plus, the GOP is not the historical home of pro-israeli policy, despite the fact that nixon saved israel. Most jews are democrats and pro israeli lobbying $$ has historically gone to them. But w/ the rise of neoconservatism in a post 911 world and the influence of Christian evangelicals, the GOP seems to have become even more pro-israael than the democrats. I don’t think it has converted into many votes quite yet though.
But i think it really is, right or wrong, a genuine policy based on principle (as oppossed to influence).
Jesus, its 4am, i gotto get up soon.
Sometimes it more about money than votes. Why do you think the politicians humor Indian-Americans? The GOP has been getting a lot of the Pro-Israeli money lately.
Yah I agree. Principles in power politics is a thin veil indeed.
Good God! This is a much better strategy than the tracts they mailed me informing me in comic detail why I shouldn’t become a suicide bomber. Who are their marketing consultants? Amway?
As if that wasn’t hilarious enough, if you click on Habu’s, erm, “Gandhi dot,” she expectorates a bubble with a question mark out of her trunk.
And for the record, Objective Ministries is a hoax, albeit an elaborate and sly one. With people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson running amok, its getting harder to spot parody from genuine bigotry and intolerance.
I would like my Muslim friends, the descendents of Abraham’s evil son Ishmael, to open their eyes after reading this.
I wonder how people will react when some of the nastier Chick tracts show up.
If only we could identify the point where piety becomes perverse…
I posit that proselytizing is the punishable point of perverting any putative presence of piety into proven and pestilent perfidy.
No, seriously I do.
ROFL at the cartoon stories in that chick.com website.. Seriously I don’t have problem in the missionaries offering money for conversion. I’d take it.. 🙂
Simplistically speaking
Religions are basically what stories you believe in..
If you believe in local stories related to the regions of India you are a Hindu. If you believe the stories cooked by Mohammad about Allah in Arabia, you become a Muslim. If you believe in the stories cooked by John(??) about Jesus you become a Christian..
I have no problems in people believing in any of the stories if they can make some immediate money now.. Too bad, I have not come across any of the missionaries..
Fighting over religion is like fighting over who has the best imaginary friend…
If you believe the stories cooked by Mohammad about Allah in Arabia, you become a Muslim
Muhammd (salalaho waleho wassalam/peace be upon him) did not cook stories though he was well known for cooking a mean schwarma with hummus. God’s angel Gabriel (Jibra-eel) delivered to him the message from God which he then delivered to the people around him.
Religions are basically what stories you believe in..
Thats the positivist viewpoint – that religions are primitive (pre-scientific) worldviews which people “believe in.” But I would contend for very many people outside the monotheistic framework, practice counts for plenty more than mere belief. For example, there is a deep agnosticism that runs through much of Hinduism. Belief isn’t necessarily central to some orthodox sects of Christianity either.
I think that perhaps a more accurate description would be “…..outside the Abrahamic framework” — Sikhism is an avowedly monotheistic religion, but the emphasis here is also on practice and direct personal experience of God, rather than mere “belief”.
I think that perhaps a more accurate description would be “…..outside the Abrahamic framework” — Sikhism is an avowedly monotheistic religion, but the emphasis here is also on practice and direct personal experience of God, rather than mere “belief”.
Yes Jai, I agree. Thank you.
But agnosticism, atheism etc. are also belief systems. The difference between Hinduism and the rest is that Hinduism does not make any truth claims. The stories are there for whatever they’re worth, which may be different things to different people. It is irrelevant whether Shiva is real or not. Of course, as the days go by hinduism begins to resemble the JC traditions more and more. In the California text book case the Hindu side took great pains to assert that Hindus believe in only one God!
speaking of missionarry plots/plans/battle plans/whatever you wnat to call it and Kenyatta, here’s one of his most famous quotes:
“When the Missionaries arrived, the Africans had the Land and the Missionaries had the Bible. They taught how to pray with our eyes closed. When we opened them, they had the land and we had the Bible”. -Jomo Kenyatta.
“In the California text book case the Hindu side took great pains to assert that Hindus believe in only one God!”
the basis of Sanatan Dharma is a belief in one supreme being or universal reality, although this is expressed through diverse Gods and paths. so to an extent it is true. the problem arises when one reacts to being called a “pagan”, “heathen” “idolator” by trying to respond to these insults and challenges by mistakenly equating this belief in a supreme reality to the abrahamic concept of monotheism in the vain hope that it will begin to command “equal” status to that accorded to the “religions of the book” siblings in western countries. and by mistakenly downplaying the polytheistic aspects of Hinduism. the supreme reality and the abrahamic concept of monotheism are not the same thing and this difference should not be fudged merely to try to get those who cannot understand the concept to understand it.
those chick tracts are freaky. it’s also amusing that people really wrote that. craziness.
Muhammd (salalaho waleho wassalam/peace be upon him) did not cook stories though he was well known for cooking a mean schwarma with hummus. God’s angel Gabriel (Jibra-eel) delivered to him the message from God which he then delivered to the people around him.
That’s another nice story.. 🙂 What’s schwarma / hummus ??
also heard pope condemned india’s ban.
“also heard pope condemned india’s ban.”
when is the vatican going to become a secular state and allow religious freedom within its own borders? 🙂 why did it try to insist that the EU call itself Christian in its charter?
What’s schwarma / hummus ??
Are you serious?
Schwarma is da bomb!
Schwarma is da bomb!
Thanks for the link.. looks good. I’ve had “Chicken teriyaki rap” for a “to go”.. it looks similar.. have to find out the taste..
gag
That was attributed to the link in the highlighted comment – The “chick” website.
I joined IVCF my first year of college, and stopped going at the end of the year when they urged me to accept Christ. I’m not a believer of anything, so their efforts were wasted, but what IVCF does provide at a large public university is, as the article says, community, wholesome fun, and good-natured people who cared. Personally, I never saw it as a religion thing (until they really pushed it) but I was having a hard time fitting in anywhere, and they seemed to fit the bill. I actually even enjoyed singing hymns in an informal setting, attending meetings, being around generally happy people, and ignored the parts where they talked about Christ. If I were more receptive to faith of any kind, I may have felt swayed by their brand of religious practice, but I’m not; I went as far as to research and proclaim my adherence to the atheistic Charvaka sect in middle school to counter the ritualistic and dietary interpretations of Hinduism my North Indian friends had when talking to me about religion (I’m Bengali).
As far as my experience goes, the article is right on re: IVCF and Campus Crusade. CCC is more confrontational and less effective, but IVCF has the whole “welcoming” thing down pat. They don’t really talk about religion until the fifth or sixth meeting, and really emphasize the community, and not attending church part. And the vast majority of IVCF at my university was Korean or Chinese American. In fact, Caucasians were significantly in the minority.
I don’t know what proportion of IVCF’s Indian recruits are bad investments like me, but I know of others like me at my alma mater who have experimented with IVCF while they try to find a place for themselves. Usually they tend to be turned off by the Indian American social groups, surprised by the heavy party atmosphere and not ritualistic enough to be in the Hindu Students Council (some of those people are pretty extreme).
Hindutvavadi in CA:
Dude, do you not read comments? Read my first comment. It seems like you read the first sentence of each comment and then go off.
I should stop being nice to you to give you credit on certain points, because you certainly don’t even take the time to read comments. Don’t argue for the sake of arguing.
FYI, The first Christians in India, were converted by St. Thomas the Apostle [an Israeli Jew], who arrived at Kodungallur on the Malabar Coast of India in 52 AD. [Link]
I’m a Christian–protestant/”charismatic” to be specific. (Yes, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons try to convert me.) I agree with folks who mentioned how shady it is to pretend “just” to chill with people if 80% of your interest is in sharing your faith with them. ItÂ’s like the Amway comment someone made earlier. A friend of mine said he flat out told a coworker of his one of the first days they had lunch together. “IÂ’m a Christian and part of the reason IÂ’m cool with us hanging out is because IÂ’d like to share my faith with you.” [note: not covert] Of course the dude was like, “Whaaa?!” Funny thing is, they havenÂ’t had that theological conversation yet, but they still hang out. If/when they do, the shock factor is gone. IÂ’m sure the guy respects the fact that he kept it real.
The Christians in India were doing pretty well for nearly 1500 years. In 1498, when the Portuguese navigator Vasco da Gama landed on the Malabar coast, there were an estimated two million Christians across the land, and they had 1,500 churches. [Link] Fast forward about 50 years and Portuguese colonizers are persecuting, torturing and executing Hindus, Jews and non-Roman Catholic Christians alike. Thank God those days of supremacy are dwindling. Those hardheads are a shrinking minority.
The point of all that is to say: Sadly, it is necessary to write “conversion strategies” if only based on the history of the Christian church at large.
I’d like to point out that while all of us are using “West” and “East” (including me), these terms have been geostrategically coined. So whether you think Palestine was in the East or West is subjective. Yes, Palestine was under Roman occupation. I still don’t think that means that Palestine was automatically part of the West. This would be analogous to saying that because India was under the Moghul Empire, largely from Turco-Mongolian origins, it consequently became an extension of Turkey.
Christianity was never an Asian religion until the last century? What of the Syrian Christians in India, who constituted the first Christian community outside of Palestine?
This was my original comment:
Like I said, don’t read the first part of the comment, get all hot and bothered, and then write your response. Calm down, read the entire thing, and then reply.
Comment #93 is addressed to hindutvavdi in california.
Proselytizing Hindus are scary! Look at the ones who’ve converted to Amway and chase us down the aisles in Walmart. If Hindus start converting, the whole world will hate us!
“I studied in one such school..for 10 years. Not once did I feel that they tried to “convert” us”
Brown_FOB, I too studied in Catholic/Christian schools all my life in India…and loved the schools, nuns and all. However, like you, while nobody tried to ‘convert’ me per se, just the act of being in those schools is a sort of ‘soft’ indoctrination…in some ways, at least in some of the cultural knowledge that comprises us, many of us products of missionary schools have to admit that we are sort of ‘christianey’ …by which I mean we know the bible quite well, loved singing carols and hymns, celebrated christmas with great enthu complete with santa :). I guess the ultimate proof of the effectiveness of the ‘soft conversion’ is that I don’t even really mind this…
Although, as Divya and others have mentioned, this might also have to do with the fact that being Hindu (at least back in those good old days) allowed one to quite happily absorb different religious practices (if not the religions themselves) with no sense of contradiction. I loved going to gurudwaras with friends, had assorted Muslim friends and basically was happy to celebrate anyone elses festivals.
Couple of corrections in previous post:
hindutvavadi in ca
I’d like to point out that while all of us are using “West” and “East” (including me), these terms have been geostrategically coined. So whether you (or I) think Palestine was in the East or West is subjective. Yes, Palestine was under Roman occupation. I still don’t think that means that Palestine was automatically part of the West. This would be analogous to saying that because India was under the Moghul Empire, largely from Turco-Mongolian origins, it consequently became an extension of Turkey.
Christianity was never an Asian religion until the last century? What of the Syrian Christians in India, who constituted one of the first Christian communities outside of Palestine?
This was my original comment:
Like I said, don’t read the first part of the comment, get all hot and bothered, and then write your response. Calm down, read the entire thing, and then reply.
No I, didn’t take off after reading the first comment. I had a problem with “Christianity as an eastern religion” which was in your statement below:
Christianity is an “Eastern” religion, seeing that it was born in Palestine.
Let us leave it at we agree to disagree on this.
No, I don’t argue for the sake of arguing. My original comment in the thread was in support of GGK.
st. thomas went to india around 52 a.d. according to Wiki. historically thats a pretty significant fact. india is so old man. Pali, Sanskrit, and Tamil are from this Asian Subcontinent; three of the original classical languages. we been doing this for a long time (having language that is). non sequiter? if anyone is a lover of the Asian Subcontinent, isn’t it someone who sees the diversity and history of this region. all this history and most of it i don’t even know yet. how smart must people who speak Tamil be, their language has continually been used for literature for over 2,0000 years
Conversion is not part of the hindu dharma; because we are accepting of all religions, we find ourselves constant challenged, that our identities as Hindus are not sufficient in Western eyes. You don’t see too many evangelical groups on campus trying to figure out how to convert the Muslim students; they know it probably won’t work.
I suppose I am little touchy on this issue because I am from a small midwestern town, and many attempts were made to convert me, which always seemed funny since the Indian (hindu) kids in my town were the only ones that ever went to good colleges or did anything with their lives. Still, they got to my kid sister and converted her, and it nearly tore my family apart. The thing that bothers me is not the embracing of Christian teachings; everyone should try to find inspiration wherever they can. It’s the necessity of drawing lines, of needing definition and rejection and separation. The idea that any group or cause is the “only way” seems ludicrous to nearly anyone who thinks for themselves; that is why nearly every developed nation with the exception of the United States is heavily secular. Here, we mistake our grotesque levels of material comfort for divinity; the very reason that an Eastern philosophy is totally incompatible with an American lifestyle.