Contagious Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-02-2016, 11:11 AM (This post was last modified: 07-02-2016 11:56 AM by The Organic Chemist.)
Contagious Christianity
In an effort to spread the faith, my wife's church has a course that is entitled "Contagious Christianity." So aside from the obvious unintentional hilarity of using an adjective more utilized in the description of the spreading of viruses, there are a multitude of hilarious things I was reading in her book and I wanted to share this with some of you for fun.

So it starts out by giving you a self-assessment test to find out where your strengths are. There are six styles of evangelism they list: direct, intellectual, testimonial, interpersonal, invitational, and serving. It then goes on to give some dos and don'ts in each category and this is where the meat of the process is and needless to say, these guys have no idea how to talk to people who are aware of what they are peddling and have rejected it. Although, these techniques may work on people who have no idea what christianity claims its all about but will instead, foster unhealthy relationships.

The funny meaty part (TL/DR part is at the bottom):
These are only a few excerpts from each section and my thoughts on them and are by no means exhaustive.

Direct style:
Cautions:
3) Avoid judging or laying guilt trips on others who approach evangelism with a different style.

Funny how this only says don't lay a guilt trip on other people and their evangelizim techniques. We can't do that because we need to lay the guilt trip on the intended target (which is later).

How to prepare:
1) ask friends for feedback
2) Prepare to stand alone (a la Acts 2) - This is funny because it says that "the nonbeliever" will sometimes get uncomfortable when you "confront them with the truth." Could it be that they may simply may be uncomfortable with some asshole who is supposed to be their friend telling them essentially they are helpless, filthy sinners, and worthless unless you think like them? Consider

Intellectual Style (my favorite section)
Cautions
1) Avoid getting stuck on academic points, arguments, and hair-splitting points of evidence. These mainly close the path back to the gospel message.
2) Avoid becoming argumentative.

These are hilarious. Step 1 says not to get hung up on the finer details. The finer details are where you can discern on how correct a claim is. I am aware that if christians did this, they would no longer be christians but to see it so blatantly in print and under the "intellectual" section no less is really a gem of horribleness.

How to prepare:
1) Study and take 1 Peter 3:15 seriously.
2) Avoid doing all of your prep in a vacuum, go out and talk with others to try out your arguments and answers.

They seem to think it is a good idea to study something that a nonbeliever may say although I imagine that this does not entail on reading anything of what one has to actually say like Dennett or Hitchens, or what someone who came from the faith has to say like Barker, Dillihunty, or even Seth but rather in some apologetic (i.e. Lee Strobel). This idea could explain why, when some of our discussions occur with this type of evangelical, they have absolutely no idea how to talk to us and also have no idea what to do when they are thrown off script because they have only talked to someone who actually thinks that we don't believe in superstition out of a desire to sin.

Testimonial
This section was essentially "wow them with your story" like that is actually compelling. We can't have their experience and therefore it is not really going to be that effective. This section just doesn't seem to get that.

Interpersonal Style
This stresses "truth" over valuing friendship. It literally says "telling people they are sinners and in need of a savior will test relationships." No shit. In other words, it is ok to strain or even lose a relationship over this. How awful. It also includes a recommendation to plan ahead on what you are going to do and to conspire and intentionally create opportunities to evangelize. Think about it, is the relationship being tested because of the guilt of sin or is the other person simply finding this rather disrespectful? The latter seems far more likely. Would these people like it if a Scientologist did this to them. A person they thought was their friend? Additionally, have these guys ever considered that if a person is intentionally creating situations in which to evangelize, are they really being a friend? Have these guys ever wondered WHY some people get pissed off at them? (And no Satan is NOT the reason)

Invitational Style
This section is about how you can invite people to events in an effort to evangelize. Again, this shows the antithesis of what a friend is or should be. Each section is basically you doing something with the targeted person with the expressed reason to try to convert them.

Serving Style
This section is what it sounds like: evangelize while you do a service of some sort and convey the spiritual motive you have. This of course is a completely useless technique when you encounter someone who will do a service for another, non supernatural motive such as empathy.




TL/DR section
This establishing section is wrong on so many levels.
1) They make a relationship out to be something you do TO someone as opposed to WITH someone.
2) They presume that these tactics are part of a healthy relationship.
3) The authors seem to have no idea to have a discussion. All of this is essentially coercive tactics aimed at a sinister goal.

I hate to think of how many friendships and relationships have ended because of this garbage. Let's be clear: if your intent is to convert your friend and you go out of your way to plan and execute interactions for this purpose, YOU ARE NOT THEIR FRIEND!!!!! This should more be a guidebook on how NOT to talk to a nonbeliever.

More to come.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
07-02-2016, 11:17 AM
RE: Contagious Christianity
Contagious - like ebola?

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat

Are my Chakras on straight?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
07-02-2016, 11:19 AM
RE: Contagious Christianity
(07-02-2016 11:17 AM)Anjele Wrote:  Contagious - like ebola?

Neurax Worm.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: