I just have to get something off my chest. It’s been driving me nuts, and this blog is really my only outlet for issues like this. So here goes…
Watched a documentary yesterday where, during an interview, a pastor of a huge mega church in Colorado was asked why they felt it was ok, nay, mandatory, to sort of get up into people’s grill and essentially force them to hear their take on Jesus, being saved, going to Hell, etc.
When asked, his reply was this. “I am a Coke drinker…I love the stuff, but because we live in a pluralistic society, because I like Coke, I am forced to watch Pepsi commercials. I own a GM truck, but I am forced to watch Ford commercials.”
Let me just break down a couple problems that I have with the good reverend’s comments.
A. You never, EVER have to watch a Pepsi or Ford commercial. You ALWAYS have the option of turning it off, changing the channel, not looking at the newspaper, ignoring the billboard, etc. You have complete and TOTAL free will in this regard.
B. Someone I don’t know or trust, stopping me in the street, jumping in my way and telling me I need to be saved (or whatever it might be…just using this guy as my example) is a complete fallacy of comparison with the whole Coke vs Pepsi thing. Now if a dude in a Pepsi suit would jump in front of me in line at the Chevron counter, and hold a can of cola up to my face and demand that I drink it, then maybe the comparison works. But they don’t. Therefore it doesn’t.
Let me tell you how I have come to understand free will, and what I like to call, “my circle of influence”.
My circle of influence is small, and rightly so. Mine is primarily my family and closest friends. An example: It is right and good for me to sit my kids down and help them understand the physical and social dangers of smoking, drinking, drugs, etc. This is my mandate…my job as dad. To help them make good choices, and thereby have a strong understanding of the consequences, be they good or bad, to the choices they might make.
There are two parts to this: Helping them make good choices, but maybe more importantly, give them an understanding that they have no right to judge others for engaging in the things I warn them about. To simplify, Nick knows its bad to smoke, but Nick also knows that it’s bad to ridicule or chide others who choose to smoke. This applies to anything…just using smoking as an example.
Back to the religion thing. Someone else in this documentary, when asked why they are so in peoples faces all the time, said the following: “This nation was founded on these principles, and we have to make sure to do our part to bring people to Christ.”
Wrong.
This country (the US) was founded on some important principles, but not the ones this guy thinks. I love this quote from Thomas Jefferson:
“Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear. “
Even more to my point:
“It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God.“
And lastly, one of my all time favorite quotes from him, or anyone:
“It is in our lives and not our words that our religion must be read.“
I believe ever so strongly, that people need to respect others and their right to make choices of their own. To act otherwise, is lame. LAME!
In the end, enjoy the circle of influence you have to do some freaking good in this freaking world. That makes a bigger dent, difference, and change than any amount of time screaming into the faces of people you don’t agree with.
Take us out again, Thomas: “Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”
I hear ya, brotha! I hear ya.
@Jack – “I would argue you that they have the right to do it, and you have the right to tell them to go to hell, should you be so inclined.”
You’re 100% right. But that little exchange does nothing for peace, unity, or a myriad of other “Christian values and principles”. Do we agree?
First things first, nicely said Scott. No one should have to endure the opinions of others presented as irrefutable and inarguable fact, doubly so when they are attempting to tell you what your obligations are. What good would this freedom be if one doesn’t come by it freely?
Completely agree with Fett, and must point out that every last quote that anyone can make to attempt to establish the US as a country founded on, and abiding by Christian principles will exist outside of any legislation and legal form. These people spoke often of their personal beliefs with one another, and valued that chance to discuss how they believed man should act and behave enough to realize that if one of their opinions took precedence within the legislation, they would all lose many of their freedoms. Which is why religion and state are specifically excluded from influencing one another.
One last point, there are plenty of examples how the US is not a Christian nation, but perhaps the best place to look would be the Judicial system, as it does not mirror or follow the lead of any of the Christian ideals of justice.
@Scott amen, brotha!
I’m with you Scott. The line between Church and State is way to blurry, but tell that to our latest 2 presidents…
Jesse, “In God We Trust” appeared on a 2 cent coin in 1894, and was not officially on USA all currency until 1956 (for fear of godless communists). It was added to the pledge at about the same time for the same purpose.
If the USA was truly founded on christian principle, they why is it not a crime to be of any other religion? How could a christian nation ever not put the ten commandments in law? Only three of the ten are law (four if you’re under oath)
“which didn’t fall into the easy trap of flaming” I do not think that word means what you think it means. Flaming means personal attacks.
@Fett101
The Ten commands can’t be put into law because it would be nearly impossible to regulate emotions and feelings.
It’d be like that Twilight Zone where Jeffrey is a good boy, and everyone likes Jeffrey.
http://czarnoff.posterous.com/response-to-myextralifecom-another-serious-co
I agree with Falcon. As a Christian, the way some people choose to evangelise really annoys me. For example, here in the UK, I saw a guy on the street for pretty much the first time last summer, taking about hell and the problems of today. A few Christians were with me, and we didn’t agree with this method. Similarly, did any see that documentary on the most hated family in the US? They picket soldiers’ funerals, condemn the US Army as gay, and walk around shouting about how “God Hates Fags” and such. Some of these methods of evangelism make all Christians look bad. Personally, I’d be happy to talk to anyone about my faith, and in some situations would try and tell the eprson if I think it would be beneficial and they would take it seriously, but would rarely try and force it upon someone. What annoys me is when people try and take apart my faith when I haven’t tried to attack theirs, or try to force mine upon them in any way.
Although I agree with what most of you guys are saying, and understand its not just a religious thing, be careful not to tar all Christians with the same brush. (and I’m not saying that’s what you’re doing.) Most of us wouldn’t dream of shouting at you in the street, or forcing anything upon you, because we wouldn’t be happy if a Sikh, Muslim or any other religion tried the same.
Ceiynt, It is true that they cannot arrest people for mentally sinning in such that Christians think it is a sin to merely think of adultery or stealing. But legally enforcing the ten commandments is possible and has been done before. For one example heresy has been and still is a punishable offense in many countries. Galileo was just one of many killed for heresy. And don’t forget The Spanish Inquisition and Salem witch trials (as well as many lesser known instances). Even today, especially in Islamic countries, people are killed/punished for simply changing their religion or being raped.
Brilliant words Scott, you have my complete and utmost respect. Keep up the great work, both on and offline.
Coke should sue the guy.
(I would if he associated himself with my products… if I had any.)
That is the price of brainwashing.
…
Still according to many kids, a dad’s mandate is for levying groundings.
…
As for free will, I wish the media would let me decide what is important and what will get me upset rather than picking and choosing what I get to see and telling me to get angry about something. (Shame on you CNN and Fox. How about just do what you say you do: Report and let us decide.) People peddling their beliefs and their opinions (as if it were fact) on the masses have polarized us, and we fight and argue and never agree on anything any more.
As a christian who has worked for a church and has knocked more than a few preachers from their stands for conveying a message in words and a totally different one in their delivery I must both agree and disagree here. As a follower of this religion it is my calling to tell others about it, but as some guy who the catholic church decided to deem a saint said, “Spread the word of Christ to all who you meet, and if absolutely necessary, use words.”
These people who grandstand and shout and force the concepts of Christianity on you don’t know what they’re talking about. Our religion has 2 main commandments and a handful of suggestions, read it to be sure: Love God with all you have, and then Love each other just as much. If anyone tells you they get this religion but does not approach you in a loving and caring way, they just don’t get it.
So Scott I totally back what you’re saying about the delivery, but some of us just have to try to use that circle to help people in more than right now.
One of my favorite people in the whole world is a Catholic priest who does not preach. All he does is volunteer his time to help people… and he does not preach to them. He does not judge people (even me and my beliefs). He does not hold back his help from anyone.
…
If they ask, he answers. Thazzit.
…
Lead by example. It speaks louder. Believe me.
I couldn’t have put it better myself Scott, I thought the UK was bad enough but seriously, forcing religion down someones throat like that guy is just wrong.
/RAmen
pop, there goes the can of worms
ScottJohonson.StreetCred += 2;
Nice essay, great prose.
…and its a shame that the comments degraded into an argument about faith. Silly rabbits, you can’t argue about faith itself. Existential import will walk right up and kick you in the butt at every turn.
@Scott
great post. Was just wondering, what was the name of the documentary?
Correction: some of the comments degraded. My sincerest apologies to the level-headed folks in this thread. (Gesundheit!)
I didn’t even look at another thread above me. Maybe because I no more care about their replies as they care about mine
Anyway, awesome post, Scott. I agree with what you said. I especially like the quote:
“It is in our lives and not our words that our religion must be read.“
This says it all. Some of the most dedicated church goers I know are also the biggest hypocrites I know. If there is a God, then he or she will judge them. I don’t care, so long as it doesn’t affect me. In some ways it does though. It was the religious right who was influential in getting Bush elected. It is that same bunch who criticizes everything about Obama down to his wife’s shoe selection.
Likewise, Obama fancies himself a religious person, and his religious views cannot help but influence his politics and thus affect how the government acts on our behalf.
That quote, for me, hits home the most with that small sect who “protests” at soldiers’ funerals saying they are all going to hell. If the soldiers are going to hell, I think they will be getting in line behind those protesters. I find it particularly ironic that it was soldiers past that gave them the right to condemn the soldiers of today to hell.
I agree the coke/pepsi religion analogy is deeply flawed. I am sure that it is just the tip of the flawed arguments coming from people like that!
if my post was on a tangent in your opinion, great.
No need to waste space flaming. I don’t care
I’d like to ad that your circle of influence extends to what movies I might wait to watch on dvd rather than spend 10 bucks on.
I agree 100%! And you just gave me some new favorite quotes!
Southern Baptist minister throwing in his 2 cents:
I have a right to share with others that which I’m passionate about, whether it’s Jesus, WoW, or Kirk vs Picard.
I NEVER have a right to be rude, obnoxious, coercive, etc.
If I’m anything other than respectful, gentle, kind, etc., then I am undermining that which I’m trying to promote.
If someone declines an invitation for discussion, then it’s time for me to shut up.
I prefer to humbly demonstrate my faith through a life of consistency, and I typically have very little patience for those who are arrogant & loud. Their “help” is neither wanted nor appreciated, imho. It’s saying a lot when your attempts to proselytize offend non-Christians IN ADDITION TO Christians!
to Scott (sorry, I don’t think I could ever talk @ anybody)
You mentioned this being an ‘outlet for issues like this’ and the general tone of your post seemed very unhappy, even angry. Many commenters here seem to share your feelings.
Isn’t it strange that so innocuous a thing as a TV documentary can generate such vitriol?
I do hope that getting this ‘off your chest’ has alleviated some of the pressure you felt and that you are feeling better now.
For what it’s worth, I’m not into that kind of proselytizing either and I’m a Christian. I tend to avoid watching TV shows like this in favor of ‘Doctor Who’ or ‘The Muppets’, too; life is stressful enough as it is.
Anyway, keep going man.
I HEAR YOU BROTHER SCOTT!!!
*big hugs* you rock Mr. Johnson!
I really don’t understand people who argue on the internet. I just don’t know what they hope to accomplish.
The internet is a far more pure place to debate then IRL. All you see is the argument. You do not see the opposite sides race, gender, speaking skills, etc. (though typing and grammar matter)
@Scott: I think your wrong about the intrusiveness of advertisements. I can’t watch a sporting event without ads plastered all over the place. Sure I can not watch the game, but that’s analogous to saying I could choose not to walk down the street without the obnoxious preacher. Why shouldn’t I be able to walk down the street without being harassed? Why can’t I watch a sporting event without having ads thrown in my face? So the reverend’s analogy was a good one, but it’s condemning of his actions, not vindicating.
As to the religion issue, it’s incumbent on people who believe they have found the way to connect with God (or god(s)) to try to communicate this with others. Whether or not the US was founded on Christian principles is beside the point. However, when people approach the matter as this particular reverend did, they actually discredit their message. What’s needed is common courtesy.
Yes! Wow, that was amazing! It actually made me smile to read this. It was so refreshing to hear someone say “I have my views, I share them, but I do NOT (and teach my kids to do the same) ridicule others for having their own beliefs.” Great post!
Carrying out the exercise in this image
( Actually walking the 150 feet and looking back )
gives me a sobering sense of perspective.
http://www.anim5.com/IDDFOS/show_026/_durer_samson.jpg
..
Anyone who disagrees with you is the problem, Scott. To think I was going to rant about this very same ideology on my own blog but you beat me to it. Now I can just link to yours.
If only more people would listen to the wisdom of our Founding Fathers.
Too much agreeability.
“It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God.“
Works both ways.
Christian influence via advertisements is minimal. Coke can advertise on the television. Christianity cannot. Alternate ways are required.
Anonymous evangelizing requires drastic action. This can be perceived as rude or not. Whether it’s even wrong to be rude is of no concern.
As long as no significant harm is done, there is no problem.
The most they can do is decrease support for their faction, in this case Christianity, by attempting to spread word through getting in grills.
Not everyone is the best.
Jefferson’s quotes not necessarily best example.
My opinion, Jefferson speaks about persecution, not attempted evangelizing.
Last I check, men being rude about religion does not count.
Any case, plenty of other things need change more.
Oh well.
Scott that was awesome I loved it everyone bit of it I hope to have “Serious Talks” in the future (Btw there is no sarcasm in this)
I may not be religious but I understand if people love god and it doesn’t affect my day to day life in any way nor should my lack of faith but sadly it does brother some people.
Tolerance of Christianity seems low.
Christian’s are typically less open to other religion because they already have own.
Like trying to fill an already full bucket with paint.
If you are sure of yourself, no point listening to others, though might be good idea.
Funny. Atheists can get in your face about being anti-Christian.
Christians cannot get in your face about being pro-Christian.
The logic of fairness seems flawed.
I agree w/ alot of what you’re saying there Scott.
The Pepsi vs religion thing is a pretty weak, despite what prople may think the main purpose of marketing is to raise awairness of your product, whereas the religious chap was more forcing people to his way of thinking.
Well said, Hector. I agree with you completely.
On another note… someone threw out the “hypocrite” term… oh boy. Christianity is not about being perfect. It is about striving to be like Christ, who is perfect. As humans, we are going to fail… often, and miserably. That is what grace and redemption are for. Those failures are not necessarily a revelation of hypocrisy. You have to know a man’s heart to truly use that label.
If you are not viewed as a hypocrite by others from time to time, maybe your moral standards are not high enough. Amoral people cannot be hypocritical.
I agree Scott. The subject can be religion or telling me what I should think about any subject. I’m a big boy and can make up my own mind. This is one of the things that makes America great. I’ve got no problem with someone standing on a street corner speaking about any subject. But they better not try and stop me from walking away if I want to.
Scott, I’d like to say you’re pretty dead on in the original post for this thread. From other personal bits of life you’ve shared through this site, I’d have to say you’re living life as a decent person and a good parent (actually, you and your wife seem to be REALLY cool parents). I seem to recall some videos of you at church; so I’m assuming you’re a christian. Your life reflects your faith; that’s the best evangelical work you can do. I’m not rushing out to be baptized or anything, but I do respect your beliefs and acknowledge the positive values of your faith.
Intimidation is never the best method of delivery. The person in the documentary should realize this and realize that rather than convert, he is hardening the hearts of those he seeks to convert. EPIC FAIL for him.
Word………
“I’ve got no problem with someone standing on a street corner speaking about any subject. But they better not try and stop me from walking away if I want to.”
THIS is the important part of this discussion IMHO. I have no problem with people putting pamphlets in doors, handing out flyers on street corners, etc, because I can always recycle whatever it is they give me if I’m not interested, and it’s not a burden. However, if you try to physically impede me in order to force me to listen, I’m probably going to want to whack you with a shoe (I wear slip-on dress shoes, so be warned). Do what you feel you must to be heard, but don’t encroach on someone else’s freedoms in order to do so. “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”
“Like religion, politics, and family planning, cereal is not a topic to be brought up in public. It’s too controversial.” -Erma Bombeck
I agree with you, Scott.
Only complaint I have, mostly against those waving it around in the comments is that Christians didn’t create morals, the just adopted it (or stole it, since they claim it to be their’s and their’s alone).
Really, the basic concepts of morality are simple ideas a monkey could create. You don’t need a creator to bring them to you. If I had to create a list of ten commandments, if I had never heard of them before, I’m quite sure mine would be uncannily similar to those in the bible (minus the first two which are useless).
If you want to share your idea with me, feel free to ask me if I’d like to hear. If I say no, you should stop. If I say no twice, you’ve gone to far. As Scott said, ads are exactly like this. See a Pepsi commercial you don’t want to watch, change the channel. If the TV was programmed to switch back to it, though, then that would be too far. In other words, that argument, as Scott said, is stupid.
I think the thing that rankles, for me, is the concept of courtesy in forcible evangelism. If I am to sit/stand/walk and listen to your beliefs and how they should apply to me, why is it that you do not afford me equal time to express my beliefs and see if I can convince you? It’s a matter of courtesy, the ultimate in interpersonal commerce. The reason I dislike people screaming their ideas in my face in person is that I can not ignore it. I am forced to react, be it a quick sidestep, a request for quiet or something more forcible. If a commercial comes on during something I choose to watch, I always have the option to tune it out and think about other things. Broad spectrum, public advertising is, by very nature, passively discourteous. Forcible evangelism is, by nature, actively discourteous. Example: If I write on a wall, “If you’re reading this, you’re a moron,” I am being passively discourteous (vandalism notwithstanding). I am not forcing you to read or even be aware of the words I wrote. If I step up and yell, “You’re a moron!” in your face, I’m actively being discourteous.
If you are not willing and open to conversion yourself, you have no right to attempt to convert others to your way of thinking. If you feel the need to lash out at anyone who doesn’t adhere to your tenets, your faith must not be quite so absolute. Absolute faith can withstand challenges. Someone who never doubts their faith, has never tested their own resolve, has no faith to speak of.
Essentially, I ‘m trying to say is, It’s easier to shout in the void and collect the echoes that come back than it is to have a quiet dialogue and allow what changes may come. If your doctrine is the right one, you have no need to shout it. People will come to your whispers.
All Christians are called to evangelism whether they like it or not, but there are certainly better ways than others. The “J-MAN ALL UP IN YO HIZZIE, FOO” approach is almost always the wrong way to go about it.
The more radical Protestant churches (and sects) go door-to-door and stop people on the streets and the like. This perhaps has its times and applications, but in a good deal of the civilized world doing such things for anything, even canvassing for charities or politicians, is often seen as an annoyance.
Instead of just having a few people with loud voices calling out “in the wilderness” like in the days of yore, I think that a more modern and impactful approach would be for each Christian to just live their lives as best as they can and help others to do the same. Wikipedia says there are about 1.9-2.1 billion Christians out there, so if this happened, there would surely be the big impact that the louder members are supposedly seeking.
Even if many of these outspoken people believe that the only purpose of their ventures is to “strengthen the Kingdom of God”, I think that there are some equally sought after side-effects as well. Side-effects that are ground more in the natural world than a spiritual one.
If these side-effects were taken out of consideration, and the “Good News” was shared honestly, personally and politely from people living in a more “Christ-like” way, then I think that the ends sought after by all of these people would be met in a more satisfactory way for everyone considered.
This is proof of what the Scott was saying…Do we all have the right to basically say what we believe in…Yes….Do we all have the right to disagree what others believe…Yes….Do we have the right to cram each others beliefs down each others throat….Yes..(to a degree) because some “extremist” may use”deadly force to push their beliefs on others…I have a right to get you out of my personal space any way I see fit if you intrude upon it (i.e. In my face telling me I’m gonna burn if I don’t get saved)….This discussion turned into a religious nature when all that Scott was saying is “get out of my face”…He did not say “I hate religion and I hate you”….However, the fact that the man in the story stated ” He drives a Chevy and he HAS to watch Ford commercials” etc….He actually proved the whole point….He believes he has to sit and watch that television commercial, he believes he has to “Look” at that billboard….He has no choice in his mind…Which is the point……HE CAN’T THINK FOR HIMSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone has a choice….Some persons just know how to make them for themselves.
You’ve definitely sparked a strong response with your valid view Scott. I would have to agree with you. All too often people are quick to judge, which is a disappointing human flaw and we’ve all reached the boiling point at some point. An open heart and mind can help extinguish this problem, but it can be hard to find. We all have our beliefs, I surely have mine, but to be told we’re going to hell for not sharing the same views as others or our views are wrong defies the very beliefs religion teaches and our country was founded on: thou shalt not judge.
I’m glad you shared your thoughts. Even though we’re far apart, I’ve come to realize how close we actually are in views like vented above. I’m proud you’re in my family!
Great writing, Scott. I agree totally.
I would also recommend that everyone in this thread watch Religulous. Good stuff.