Why do Religious people try to convert everybody? (Buddhism, Christ, America)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's an interesting question and perhaps should go wider. Why do atheists try to convert people to atheism? It's not just trying to get it accepted, but we want to persuade people. Of course, there are many who say they are not interested in converting anyone else, but I suppose that's the case with a lot of Christians too. But the fact remains that both have an agenda of trying to get more supporters. But there are some religions that don't look for converts at all. In fact it only looks like Christianity and Islam who are involved in an active recruitment campaign.
Buddhism doesn't, but it used to. At one time it converted pretty much the whole east from Persia to Japan.
Even Judaism pushed under the Hasmoneans, who were aggressive in converting their neighbours by war and forced conversion. It some ways it almost looks related to politics and religious and political conversion have often - not always - looked like they were joined at the hip.
There's also the 'expatriate' tendency. Surprisingly often people who fo to other countries to holiday, work and live will seem to form communities with their own restaurants, newspapers, schools and places of worship. There's not the desire to convert of course, but the desire to be surrounded by people are like yourself is an element in conversion.
I'm just looking at the mechanics as to why it happens when it happens and thus perhaps why it sometimes doesn't.
It appears that the conversion attempts of Buddhism is mostly by rulers, not monks. For example, I think it was King Ashoka of India who sent monks to Siam and vicinity. Apparently he was a cruel leader until he converted to Buddhism, and then wanted to spread the religion.
Fortunately, at least in Thailand, I have NEVER seen the slightest hint of efforts to convert visitors. And they certainly have the opportunity to do so with the tourists visiting Thai temples.
It appears that the conversion attempts of Buddhism is mostly by rulers, not monks. For example, I think it was King Ashoka of India who sent monks to Siam and vicinity. Apparently he was a cruel leader until he converted to Buddhism, and then wanted to spread the religion.
Fortunately, at least in Thailand, I have NEVER seen the slightest hint of efforts to convert visitors. And they certainly have the opportunity to do so with the tourists visiting Thai temples.
Yes. It was Asoka who initiated the conversion, but the conversion continued even after the end of the Mauryan empire. Apart from Resurgent Hinduism in India, were it not for Islam, the East as far as Persia might be Buddhist today.
As to conversion, back in the 80's I was Once approached by someone with a Buddhist polemic pamphlet (1). The only time. They do have the Tripitaka along with Gideon Bibles in the hotels drawers.
There was just one Buddhist conversion -lecture in the UK where a young baldhead tried a Buddhist version of Pascal's wager. But these are very uncommon example of proselytization.
I need hardly point out that Buddhist countries (if not Buddhism itself) are capable of acts of what looks very much like Ethnic cleansing when it sees the need.
(1) didn't work too well as Pascal's wager depends of the stick and carrot of hellthreat and the promise of heaven.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-21-2019 at 12:56 AM..
Yes. It was Asoka who initiated the conversion, but the conversion continued even after the end of the Mauryan empire. Apart from Resurgent Hinduism in India, were it not for Islam, the East as far as Persia might be Buddhist today.
As to conversion, back in the 80's I was Once approached by someone with a Buddhist polemic pamphlet (1). The only time. They do have the Tripitaka along with Gideon Bibles in the hotels drawers.
There was just one Buddhist conversion -lecture in the UK where a young baldhead tried a Buddhist version of Pascal's wager. But these are very uncommon example of proselytization.
I need hardly point out that Buddhist countries (if not Buddhism itself) are capable of acts of what looks very much like Ethnic cleansing when it sees the need.
(1) didn't work too well as Pascal's wager depends of the stick and carrot of hellthreat and the promise of heaven.
I'm guessing what you found in Thai hotels was the Dhammapada, which is just one part of the Tipitaka, and usually it's a book printed by the Society For The Promotion Of Buddhism -- a Japanese organization -- that places the book in Thai hotels.
Yes, there are bad monks in Thailand and Burma (and probably elsewhere) who are terribly misguided.
However, I can conservatively say that I've visited well over a thousand Buddhist temples in Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia, and looking like an American tourist, you would think that as I explored temple at least once some proselytization would have occurred. But not once. Never. And even when I would visit Thai Buddhist temples here in the States (and at the one in Colorado Springs where I ended up tutoring the monks in English), not once did any of the monks push Buddhism one me, and they actually seemed relieved when I told them I was already Buddhist. To be honest, I found it to be a bit of a challenge in Thailand to learn Buddhist ways and ceremonies. It was hardly pushed onto me. I was invited by a monk to one very poor temple in Thonburi one day when I was taking the river taxi, and ironically when I got to the temple, three young monks wanted me to teach them about christianity.
I think there are a number of factors to be considered here.
Do the religious teachings/texts contain observations on superiority of that particular religion's worldview? If there are specific passages or teachings one can recite to demonstrate their monopoly on truth it becomes easier to procelitise both as an organised institution and an individual.
Are there specific directions within those teachings/texts to spread the word, to save, to help people find the truth? If so, then there is an immediate impetus to confront what one might consider a falsehood. (And some people don't even need that encouragement.)
If the answers to the above are yes, then it makes it easier for people to engage in procelitism on a grass root level. If those teachings/texts are a bit more vague or do not carry specific instruction on spreading the truth/faith, then it might fall onto the organised forms of religion and their direct representatives to devise plans for propagation of their beliefs/worldview, which could be done for all sorts of reasons and in many various ways.
This is just a really crude musing. I don't know, phet, it might explain why you may not have encountered active procelitism. But it doesn't mean that there were no other more organised methods to spread Buddhism and to out-Christianise, out-Islamise it, etc. Same goes for many other religions.
I have found that when you present certain problems to a religious person, they will try to convert you or at least get you to "follow in the footsteps of the lord." This is simply an attempt to provide solutions.
However, the fundamentalist mindset is such that it knows that it has the solution to eternal happiness. Aside from the fact that fundamentalists aren't exactly known for such things as introspection, self-doubt, and humility, when you know as much you can easily convince yourself that you have an obligation to share that solution.
And if people resist your message? Well, you just have to try harder. In fact, you have to do whatever it takes to get them on what you know is the path to eternal happiness.
I'm not a big religious book reader, but maybe it contains it in the various religious books around the world.
But why do religious people try so hard to covert other people to their beliefs?
I have no idea why some atheist can't limit their discussion on how the universe works to this notion.
The third biggest flaw I see in some religions (here christy) is that they are told to go out and convert others. Its not even to "sell their product", That I would understand. They are told to go out and save us?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
