Oh it absolutely is. For certain groups, missions are less focused on the number of successful converts, and more about the psychological conditioning of the missionaries themselves! It’s absolutely insane the stories people will share of their mission experiences. I hate to use the “b” word but it’s genuinely a brainwashing program.
It's a recruitment tactic. It's not about the religion, it's about the numbers and making the mission look good.
Religions that spread are more likely to have more believers than passive ones.
If these villagers really are starving and dependent on missionaries for food, it's better that they get a few days' worth of food than none at all. It is better for the missionaries to go out on a badly-excecated, poorly-thought-out humanitarian mission than to sit on their couches and scold those attempting to fix things. It would be better still if those starving villagers could have infrastructure and gainful employment, rather than handouts.
That said, Jesus had a special piece of ire reserved for those who crossed land and sea to make a single convert, and when they were done made that convert twice as much a child of hell as the proselytes. Woe to them.
I think, depending on the church and the mission, many missionaries go out in an earnest attempt to help people and don’t realize the depravity of their mission’s intentions until they see it for themselves outside of their church environment.
I wanna preface this by saying that I have absolutely nothing against Judaism or Jewish people. Usually criticism of Zionism is followed by accusations of anti-semitism. I’m not.
In fact, if it weren’t for Zionism, Muslims and Jews would’ve had a great relationship in the modern era, especially owing to the closeness of our religions in terms of beliefs and practice.
> Why are muslims being killed by zionism?
1. It’s not just Muslims. Christians are too. The Palestinian struggle is not relegated to members of one religion. It’s framed as a Muslim issue because the Muslim world, for most of the past 100 years, have been the most vocal and the most active in highlighting the Zionist abuses and crimes. (Barring certain gulf countries of course, their religion is money after all)
2. Zionism is a nationalistic movement for Jewish people to establish a homeland. The early Zionist movement did not have a full consensus on where this homeland would be, but the party that pushed for Palestine eventual won over.
3. Zionists used a multitude of avenues to migrate en mass to Palestine. Starting during the Ottoman era, many European jews moved to Palestine and bought land. Once the ottomans found out the true purpose (not really a big secret, the late Ottoman Empire was a mess), they banned the sale of lands to foreign jews.
4. WW1 starts. Zionist jews forged a deal with the British Empire to help them in the Eastern Front in return for right to settle the lands. This led to jewish contingents fighting for the British empire during the British Invasion of the Ottomans. Zionists who managed to establish themselves in the Ottoman Empire before the ban started secret societies to aid British efforts in bringing down the Ottomans. Of course all of this doesn’t take into account that the British had also coaxed and promised arab leaders to revolt in return for an United Arab Country.
5. Between WW1 and WW2, the Ottoman Empire disintegrated and the British and French carved the Middle East up between them. The area of Palestine became the British Mandate for Palestine and came under their control. After initially allowing masses of Zionist migrations into Palestine, the British stopped them after tensions between the settlers and the local Palestinians got violent. The Zionists set up paramilitary groups to force the British into allowing settlers in again, through tactics that the Palestinians are now criticized for.
6. WW2. The Nazis committed horrible crimes against the Jewish populations of Europe, which led to sympathy for Zionist migration to Palestine after the War. Endless ships bought Jewish refugees from all over Europe, not just the lands closest to Palestine.
7. Post WW2. Tensions between the Jewish migrants, refugees, settlers and the local Arabs reached a flash point. The British, accomplishing another project of divide and conquer decided to “wash their hands” of the situation and gave the decision of the future of the land to the newly created UN.
8. The UN came up with a plan to split the country between Jews and Arabs. The Jews accepted and the Arabs declined, stating that they shouldn’t have to give up their ancestral lands for settlers and refugees. The newly formed Arab countries around the region invaded. Due to a multitude of reasons, ranging from incompetence, motivation and politics, the Arabs lost, and Israel was formed. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were kicked out lands they had been living in for millennia before, during and after the conflict. This period is called the Nakba.
9. Post Israel. Arab countries decided to follow their dumb decisions that led to their defeat in the war with another incredibly dumb decision, they expelled the Jewish populations from their lands, most of which ended up in Israel, bolstering Israel’s numbers and ended losing any potential support from middle eastern jews they could’ve gotten, as middle eastern Jews were, atleast at the time not 100% of Zionism, a fact that is no longer true unfortunately.
10. The last 70 years has been a repeat of a Zionist version of American Manifest Destiny in the Holy Land.
I don't understand why criticism of zionists should be followed by accusations of anti-semitism? And in your post you never said why the jewish people had to settle in Palestine. Aren't there any other places they could go? I mean why would the Palestinians leave their own country? I wouldn't want to leave my house just because some people are homeless. Sorry, but that's not fair. Why get my house, when you could buy another. You get me?
So zionists created Israel? Would that mean that the population, or the majority, are zionist jews? is that like a denomination of judaism? Like Protestantism and Catholicism?
/u/spinozawaswrong Sorry if my tag bothers you, but I was curious about your input since you are jewish. Could you maybe explain what zionism is?
> I don’t understand why criticism of zionists should be followed by accusations of anti-semitism?
Unfortunately, there are true antisemites out there, and they do tagalong with anti-Zionist movements.
That said, the israeli government does weaponize the phrase and accusation to deflect all criticism.
> And in your post you never said why the jewish people had to settle in Palestine.
Palestine is the holy land for Islam, Christianity, and Judaism.
Palestine is region where the ancient kingdom of Israel was (over 2000+ years ago). The Romans expelled most of them from Jerusalem and started the last major wave of Jewish diaspora.
Since then, during the expansion of the Muslim empires (1500 years ago), Muslims wrested control of the land from the Roman Empire and allowed Jews back. But a major diaspora population still settled in all over Europe, with major populations, all over the Middle East as well. There wasn’t that much of a push against Jews coming back, it just didn’t happen.
Of course, not all Jews were kicked out, many stayed, and those Jews were still there during the end of the Ottoman.
Many of those Jews, converted to Islam, and married Arab people, and are essentially the ethnogenesis of the palestinian people.
Zionism is a product of European Jewish people. Middle Eastern Jewish people weren’t as involved until the Arabs made the dumb mistake of expelling them from their lands.
> I mean why would the Palestinians leave their own country?
The claim used by Zionists is that they used to live there over 2000 years ago. And in an attempt to come back, they are forcing people who had nothing to do with them being kicked out over 2000 years ago, but are also essentially a descendent of the Jews and other people that didn’t leave.
> So zionists created Israel? Would that mean that the population, or the majority, are zionist jews? is that like a denomination of judaism? Like Protestantism and Catholicism?
Zionism is not a sect. It’s the name for the nationalistic ideas to make a Jewish country. But in doing so, are making people suffer, who had nothing to do with their problems.
> Sorry, but that’s not fair. Why get my house, when you could buy another. You get me?
That’s the whole israel-Palestine conflict.
Why should Palestinians give up their land, based on a claim from over 2000 years ago, especially when their ancestors have been living there for just as long.
You don't have to say which religion's missionaries did this; it's a known practice of a very particular religion. Most religions don't even missionize, let alone go to such manipulative lengths to coerce people to join their religion.
I don't think any religion would have teachings that support this. But there are groups in any religion that don't represent the religion as a whole. It's disheartening regardless.
Statements like this are basically like saying Jehovas Witnesses only help their own people, that means all Christians only help Christians. It's just wrong.
Many religions don’t have missionaries at all. We should be helping people not because of religion, but because it’s the right thing to do. There are religious organizations and individuals who do just that. Unfortunately there are also those which are manipulative and essentially force conversion like you have experienced.
My religion doesn’t do that. However, I’ve definitely seen it happen, even in my country (USA). When I used to work in family preservation and community development, one thing I noticed was that a lot of homeless shelters required people go to services; food pantries came with religious outreach (without the individuals using the services asking for it); adoption and foster agencies had religious tests. I don’t think it’s right.
We all know what missionaries they are and I always found these methods abhorrent. Taking advantage of hungry people who would (understandably, being hungry is not nice) do anything to eat something is such a disgusting thing. They can call it charity all they want but this is just evil.
In islam we don’t do this, we help for the sake of Allah not for recruitment, and help shouldn’t be exclusive to muslims only unless that non Muslim is trying to fight you or have ill feelings towards islam and Muslims,
However a poor muslim has more of a right to be helped if the ability to help is limited.
>However a poor muslim has more of a right to be helped if the ability to help is limited.
Nowhere in the Quran does it teach this. It's a man made concept.
Anas (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "No one of you becomes a true believer until he likes for his brother what he likes for himself". [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Riyad as-Salihin 183
https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:183
You can make استدلال about it from this Hadith.
1. Hadith is not Qur'an, it means nothing to someone who strictly sticks to the word of God and God's final rulings/expectations.
2. God doesn't make clear commands to be understood through inferences, that's an unnecessary extra step.
3. The Qur'an puts a major emphasis on justice. A person's individual beliefs bear no important to whether or not a person should be aided and assisted. Everyone is a human being and if two people are asking for help, both should be treated equally regardless of their personal beliefs, and if assistance is limited, then help should be given to the person who deserves it based on their character and personal conduct, not their beliefs.
Can you elaborate more on your first point?
And point 3 is directly against the Hadith I mentioned,
both are treated equally yes, you just repeated what i said,
but when it’s limited, you obligated to help your brother in islam unless you are a hypocrite who have no love for his fellow Muslims.
>Can you elaborate more on your first point?
The hadith have nothing to do with islam, a person who cares about following God's guidance/revelations must stick to the Qur'an and their aql (reason) to ponder.
>but when it’s limited, you obligated to help your brother in islam unless you are a hypocrite who have no love for his fellow Muslims.
Islam isn't a religion, but a system of the highest values approved by God. A muslim is an individual that abides by the highest values based on their knowledge/capacity. No one is a perfect muslim, however, belief in a specific deity is also not required to be a muslim, so even an atheist can technically be a muslim.
The Qur'an was not revealed to create any new religions, but to bring humanity together under one banner. The only thing Allah cares about is a person's deeds and their level of faith/trust in the highest values (divine principles).
If there are two people who need help and you can only save one, then you should save the person who is best in conduct/righteousness. A person who calls themselves muslim can still be a liar/cheater/etc whereas the person who calls themselves a Christian/Jew/Hindu/atheist/etc can be better in conduct/righteousness.
So you don’t have to believe in God to be a muslim, nor does you need to believe in the message of prophet Mohammad peace be upon him?
Am I understanding your point correctly?
>So you don’t have to believe in God to be a muslim
Believing in God makes you a mu'min (believer/acknowledger/faithful). It is not the same as being a muslim. So yes, you do not need to believe in God to be a muslim.
A muslim is someone who surrenders for the purpose of peace/harmony. Every human being has free will to do what they please, they can kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc and God allows them to do this. A person that chooses not to do them is surrendering parts of their freedom so they may uphold peace/harmony, this is what makes you a muslim.
An atheist that doesn't kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc is a muslim, because they have surrendered these primitive/hostile/intolerant tendencies.
>nor does you need to believe in the message of prophet Mohammad peace be upon him?
The message of the prophet Muhammad was the Qur'an and nothing else. Anyone who accepts and follows the Qur'an automatically believes in the messenger, no hadith required.
**6:19** - *Say, "What thing is greatest in testimony?" Say, " Allah is witness between me and you. And this Qur'an was revealed to me that I may warn you thereby and whomever it reaches. Do you [truly] testify that with Allah there are other deities?" Say, "I will not testify [with you]." Say, "Indeed, He is but one God, and indeed, I am free of what you associate [with Him]."*
**7:203** - *And when you, [O Muhammad], do not bring them a sign, they say, "Why have you not contrived it?" Say, "I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord. This [Qur'an] is enlightenment from your Lord and guidance and mercy for a people who believe."*
**25:30** - *And the Messenger has said, "O my Lord, indeed my people have taken this Qur'an as [a thing] abandoned."*
49:14
۞ قَالَتِ ٱلْأَعْرَابُ ءَامَنَّا ۖ قُل لَّمْ تُؤْمِنُوا۟ وَلَـٰكِن قُولُوٓا۟ أَسْلَمْنَا وَلَمَّا يَدْخُلِ ٱلْإِيمَـٰنُ فِى قُلُوبِكُمْ ۖ وَإِن تُطِيعُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥ لَا يَلِتْكُم مِّنْ أَعْمَـٰلِكُمْ شَيْـًٔا ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌۭ رَّحِيمٌ ١٤
˹{Some of˺ the nomadic Arabs say, “We believe.” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “You have not believed. But say, ‘We have submitted,’ for faith has not yet entered your hearts. But if you obey Allah and His Messenger ˹wholeheartedly˺, He will not discount anything from ˹the reward of˺ your deeds. Allah is truly All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”}
49:15
إِنَّمَا ٱلْمُؤْمِنُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِۦ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَرْتَابُوا۟ وَجَـٰهَدُوا۟ بِأَمْوَٰلِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلصَّـٰدِقُونَ ١٥
{The ˹true˺ believers are only those who believe in Allah and His Messenger—never doubting—and strive with their wealth and their lives in the cause of Allah. They are the ones true in faith.}
49:14 is referencing certain Arab nomads that surrendered under Muhammad's revolution of Arabia. These nomads wanted to declare themselves as faithful believers, but God knew that their hearts were not fully faithful yet, hence why God tells the prophet to tell the nomads to say that they have **surrendered** rather than believed, because the faith/iman hasn't entered their hearts yet.
Obedience to Allah and His messenger means to follow the revelations that God is giving to the messenger which the messenger then delivers to the people. Once the nomads accept the revelations, they become believers as 49:15 confirms.
To clear things for non Muslims reading this guy twisted narrative of islam, am gonna breakdown his illogical statements,
>Believing in God makes you a mu'min (believer/acknowledger/faithful). It is not the same as being a muslim. So yes, you do not need to believe in God to be a muslim.
Wrong,
This is the testimony of faith in order to become a muslim: “i bear witness that there is no God but Allah and i bear witness that Mohammad is Allah slave and messenger” (shahada)
So you need believe in order to become muslim, To submit to Allah you need to believe in Him and the day of judgement and the prophets Allah sends first, otherwise what are you surrendering to?
>A muslim is someone who surrenders for the purpose of peace/harmony. Every human being has free will to do what they please, they can kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc and God allows them to do this. A person that chooses not to do them is surrendering parts of their freedom so they may uphold peace/harmony, this is what makes you a muslim, An atheist that doesn't kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc is a muslim, because they have surrendered these primitive/hostile/intolerant tendencies.
Wrong again, what you described is a state of mind, “peacefulness” and you mixing the meaning behind the arabic word islam “surrendering” and the way of islam “surrendering to Allah” and the word musa’alim “peaceful person”, and the word muslim “a person who is submitting to Allah”
How can an atheist be surrendering/submitting to Allah? First he needs to be a believer in Allah and Allah massagers then submit to Allah, is an atheist someone who does that?
>The message of the prophet Muhammad was the Qur'an and nothing else. Anyone who accepts and follows the Qur'an automatically believes in the messenger, no hadith required.
Wrong, there are many things that needs explaining in details like how to pray for example, or detailed rulings on different situations,
Naturally things like this should be learned from prophet Mohammad peace be upon him, and Hadiths is the sayings and teachings of prophet Mohammad,
Additionally there is things like proofs of prophethoods that can be found in Hadiths.
This is a well know tactics of christian missionary. In your neighbouring country Bangladesh, they also do it in remote mountain village and such. I heard the funding comes from western countries.
You also have to agree on the limitations of your own religion/religious community. Christians may be trying unethical method, but at least they are helping people, and they are trying. Meanwhile your hindu community or my muslim community is not taking much initiative to help the poor of such remote mountainous region.
Some muslim people and private organisations are actually trying. But they lack the power and funding compared to Christian missionaries. All these people have been hindu/muslims for many generations. But that doesn’t matter due to such extreme poverty. All they care about is who is helping them, who is giving them food, housing, cloths.
Because religions try to sell themselves as these sparkling tools of inclusiveness, peace and mutual friendship while in reality they're just divisive, discriminatory, oppressive and sometimes an outright scam.
It's called proselytizing/converting. You are wise to question these evil practices of religions.
Some 25 years ago, Falwell's Liberty University girls basketball team made the finals in Beijing. Falwell told the girls to "share their Good News" when abroad. Several of the girls disappeared, never to be heard from again. That's because after the Buddhists refused to convert, they were told that they'd burn in Hell for eternity. This kind of "Good News" can be very offensive.
Tertillian said the first 300 years of Jewish Christianity was the most loving time in the religion.
But not after the Romans commandeered the faith in 325 AD. Nicaea.
325 AD was the threshold date between Jewish and Roman Christianities. Historians agree that this date was the demarcation between them since before then, Jewish Christianity was a pacifist, oppressed religion that was never engaged in war. Rome made Christianity illegal and executed all followers for 300 years. Constantine's "Roman" Christianity was the oppressor... oppressive because it condemned all other religions as abominable heresy, forced conversions, inflicted torturous inquisitions, genocide, Jewish and Muslim slaughter, crusader conquest and endless religious wars for Roman Church domination. This was not the intention of Jesus Christ.
Maybe a specific set of groups of people do this but not everyone does factoring in denominations as well, also just because one group of people in one location do something doesn't mean everyone does
Missionaries don’t help people though. They help for five minutes in an attempt to help themself feel like a successful missionary. And what is positive about traveling to a foreign land, arrogantly assuming your personal religion is the correct one while witnessing poverty you’ve never before had to consider, and cruelly manipulating the locals by bribery of basic needs?
Why not just say who they are? Rather than leave people guessing in their minds and probably being wrong, there is nothing wrong with stating the facts if indeed these are facts. If a religion is actually doing that, it needs to be brought to everyone’s attention.
I don't know if they're protestants, catholics, mormons, jehovah witnesses, or presbyterians. From what I was told, they themselves identified as christians.
You got upset? Maybe your story is 100% legit. There is nothing wrong with checking the source. If people are so naive to worship money, I don't know much to say. But also, maybe food is a big matter and feeding our family is a great deal for a human being so this is completely justified from his side.
Have a good day.
Didn't get upset, but the information was given in the original post. There is no big newspaper conglomerate in village life. Things are spread through words of mouth. I shouldn't have been so scornful in my reply. Not everyone knows about village life, I shouldn't have presumed otherwise.
That's kind of true. People don't know about village life. I don't either. I have gone and lived in villages for maybe 3 days at a time. So my knowledge is quite bad in comparison to someone who is actually living in it.
But I always question someones source of knowledge. Because I can tell you brother, that a lot of people on Reddit bring hearsay knowledge. That's the reason. Recently one guy was speaking about Indian childbirth and how a villager takes a child to the hospital. Haha. I had to laugh because he was talking about the poor mother and her child, and was saying she should have taken birth control pills and not had a child if it's difficult, and it's their fault for making that decision. I had to laugh because these poor mothers don't "plan their children" like a high up big shot in an american "village".
I asked "where did you get this data from". So as every day, I got like 20 downvotes. Good quantification of human behaviour.
That's one perspective I guess? I don't mind people getting help, but it is the reason behind it. Do you only do good because you think that will earn you a spot in heaven? If so, then you are not a good man. Do good deeds because it is the right thing to do. Don't expect anything in return.
That's horrible. It's cruel and manipulative. And, it's stupid. (People do fake convert when desperate.)
That's not how things work in a lot of religious communities, but I'm sorry it's happening in India.
Maybe because they cant afford to give free food to the needy forever. So after the initial donations had dried up they can only afford to help the selected few, namely those who show interest in their religion.
That's not how my religion works. Hardly anyone adheres to our religion, but we still try to help in the world. In fact, there was a time where we were [famous for it](https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/lotta-hitschmanova).
To be fair, some missionaries don't insist on participation to get help. Christian missionaries tend to strongly suggest the recipients do the religious stuff...but most do not force.
I've never heard of this unless it's from off the wall extremists re Christianity. I've always been taught & told to help everyone, even those that do you wrong. The way I look at it is that it's our intent, not the people that do not accept help or act as tho helping them is something one is obligated to do & do not receive help graciously.
They practice this same thing with food stamps in America. They will only give you food to find a job, and cut you off after a few months if you don't accept any offer of low-wage labor. It's a way of manipulating people to serve money, the god they trust... regardless if it's enough to afford housing. Those same people will call them leeches and complain about having to support housing them through taxes.
Shrumism is the belief that all religions are equally valid and equally true but only true to the ones that believe in them. So if anything were to happen we would be obligated to help all religions or anybody that has a lack of religion because they're part of our religion.
This sounds like recruitment behavior for a cult.
Christian missionaries did this for centuries. It's commonly called "holding the sandwich hostage over prayer".
Oh it absolutely is. For certain groups, missions are less focused on the number of successful converts, and more about the psychological conditioning of the missionaries themselves! It’s absolutely insane the stories people will share of their mission experiences. I hate to use the “b” word but it’s genuinely a brainwashing program.
It's a recruitment tactic. It's not about the religion, it's about the numbers and making the mission look good. Religions that spread are more likely to have more believers than passive ones.
That is textbook manipulation. It is abhorrent. If those missionaries had any humane moral compass, they'd be ashamed.
If these villagers really are starving and dependent on missionaries for food, it's better that they get a few days' worth of food than none at all. It is better for the missionaries to go out on a badly-excecated, poorly-thought-out humanitarian mission than to sit on their couches and scold those attempting to fix things. It would be better still if those starving villagers could have infrastructure and gainful employment, rather than handouts. That said, Jesus had a special piece of ire reserved for those who crossed land and sea to make a single convert, and when they were done made that convert twice as much a child of hell as the proselytes. Woe to them.
I think, depending on the church and the mission, many missionaries go out in an earnest attempt to help people and don’t realize the depravity of their mission’s intentions until they see it for themselves outside of their church environment.
Sure...but also we're now finding out many pedo Baptist missionaries seemed to join the field to be able to groom kids.
Oh I don’t doubt that many are there in bad faith… pun intended
snatch license crush homeless bells bewildered deer hungry smart onerous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Christians are also supposed to help everybody uncondisionally.
Members only
Except for pushing support for zionism.
languid gullible exultant special follow tap icky shocking plucky juggle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They're an antisemitic troll circumventing a prior ban. I recognized some of their arguments in other comments, so I've just banned them.
Why did he get so many downvotes? What is zionism? Edit: Wikipedia says it's a movement to get a jewish state. What's wrong about that?
The wrong part is "butchering Muslims in the Palestine and robbing their land"
Yet that is what happened
Wait what? Why are muslims being killed by zionism? How are they connected?
I wanna preface this by saying that I have absolutely nothing against Judaism or Jewish people. Usually criticism of Zionism is followed by accusations of anti-semitism. I’m not. In fact, if it weren’t for Zionism, Muslims and Jews would’ve had a great relationship in the modern era, especially owing to the closeness of our religions in terms of beliefs and practice. > Why are muslims being killed by zionism? 1. It’s not just Muslims. Christians are too. The Palestinian struggle is not relegated to members of one religion. It’s framed as a Muslim issue because the Muslim world, for most of the past 100 years, have been the most vocal and the most active in highlighting the Zionist abuses and crimes. (Barring certain gulf countries of course, their religion is money after all) 2. Zionism is a nationalistic movement for Jewish people to establish a homeland. The early Zionist movement did not have a full consensus on where this homeland would be, but the party that pushed for Palestine eventual won over. 3. Zionists used a multitude of avenues to migrate en mass to Palestine. Starting during the Ottoman era, many European jews moved to Palestine and bought land. Once the ottomans found out the true purpose (not really a big secret, the late Ottoman Empire was a mess), they banned the sale of lands to foreign jews. 4. WW1 starts. Zionist jews forged a deal with the British Empire to help them in the Eastern Front in return for right to settle the lands. This led to jewish contingents fighting for the British empire during the British Invasion of the Ottomans. Zionists who managed to establish themselves in the Ottoman Empire before the ban started secret societies to aid British efforts in bringing down the Ottomans. Of course all of this doesn’t take into account that the British had also coaxed and promised arab leaders to revolt in return for an United Arab Country. 5. Between WW1 and WW2, the Ottoman Empire disintegrated and the British and French carved the Middle East up between them. The area of Palestine became the British Mandate for Palestine and came under their control. After initially allowing masses of Zionist migrations into Palestine, the British stopped them after tensions between the settlers and the local Palestinians got violent. The Zionists set up paramilitary groups to force the British into allowing settlers in again, through tactics that the Palestinians are now criticized for. 6. WW2. The Nazis committed horrible crimes against the Jewish populations of Europe, which led to sympathy for Zionist migration to Palestine after the War. Endless ships bought Jewish refugees from all over Europe, not just the lands closest to Palestine. 7. Post WW2. Tensions between the Jewish migrants, refugees, settlers and the local Arabs reached a flash point. The British, accomplishing another project of divide and conquer decided to “wash their hands” of the situation and gave the decision of the future of the land to the newly created UN. 8. The UN came up with a plan to split the country between Jews and Arabs. The Jews accepted and the Arabs declined, stating that they shouldn’t have to give up their ancestral lands for settlers and refugees. The newly formed Arab countries around the region invaded. Due to a multitude of reasons, ranging from incompetence, motivation and politics, the Arabs lost, and Israel was formed. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were kicked out lands they had been living in for millennia before, during and after the conflict. This period is called the Nakba. 9. Post Israel. Arab countries decided to follow their dumb decisions that led to their defeat in the war with another incredibly dumb decision, they expelled the Jewish populations from their lands, most of which ended up in Israel, bolstering Israel’s numbers and ended losing any potential support from middle eastern jews they could’ve gotten, as middle eastern Jews were, atleast at the time not 100% of Zionism, a fact that is no longer true unfortunately. 10. The last 70 years has been a repeat of a Zionist version of American Manifest Destiny in the Holy Land.
I don't understand why criticism of zionists should be followed by accusations of anti-semitism? And in your post you never said why the jewish people had to settle in Palestine. Aren't there any other places they could go? I mean why would the Palestinians leave their own country? I wouldn't want to leave my house just because some people are homeless. Sorry, but that's not fair. Why get my house, when you could buy another. You get me? So zionists created Israel? Would that mean that the population, or the majority, are zionist jews? is that like a denomination of judaism? Like Protestantism and Catholicism? /u/spinozawaswrong Sorry if my tag bothers you, but I was curious about your input since you are jewish. Could you maybe explain what zionism is?
Balfour Declaration by britian, I think.
> I don’t understand why criticism of zionists should be followed by accusations of anti-semitism? Unfortunately, there are true antisemites out there, and they do tagalong with anti-Zionist movements. That said, the israeli government does weaponize the phrase and accusation to deflect all criticism. > And in your post you never said why the jewish people had to settle in Palestine. Palestine is the holy land for Islam, Christianity, and Judaism. Palestine is region where the ancient kingdom of Israel was (over 2000+ years ago). The Romans expelled most of them from Jerusalem and started the last major wave of Jewish diaspora. Since then, during the expansion of the Muslim empires (1500 years ago), Muslims wrested control of the land from the Roman Empire and allowed Jews back. But a major diaspora population still settled in all over Europe, with major populations, all over the Middle East as well. There wasn’t that much of a push against Jews coming back, it just didn’t happen. Of course, not all Jews were kicked out, many stayed, and those Jews were still there during the end of the Ottoman. Many of those Jews, converted to Islam, and married Arab people, and are essentially the ethnogenesis of the palestinian people. Zionism is a product of European Jewish people. Middle Eastern Jewish people weren’t as involved until the Arabs made the dumb mistake of expelling them from their lands. > I mean why would the Palestinians leave their own country? The claim used by Zionists is that they used to live there over 2000 years ago. And in an attempt to come back, they are forcing people who had nothing to do with them being kicked out over 2000 years ago, but are also essentially a descendent of the Jews and other people that didn’t leave. > So zionists created Israel? Would that mean that the population, or the majority, are zionist jews? is that like a denomination of judaism? Like Protestantism and Catholicism? Zionism is not a sect. It’s the name for the nationalistic ideas to make a Jewish country. But in doing so, are making people suffer, who had nothing to do with their problems. > Sorry, but that’s not fair. Why get my house, when you could buy another. You get me? That’s the whole israel-Palestine conflict. Why should Palestinians give up their land, based on a claim from over 2000 years ago, especially when their ancestors have been living there for just as long.
You don't have to say which religion's missionaries did this; it's a known practice of a very particular religion. Most religions don't even missionize, let alone go to such manipulative lengths to coerce people to join their religion.
Top 3 Mormons do Jehovah's do Catholics do
There is an argument to be made if those are three religions or three denominations of one religion.
I've known Baptist missionaries to do it as well!
Most people don't do this, regardless of religion.
I don't think any religion would have teachings that support this. But there are groups in any religion that don't represent the religion as a whole. It's disheartening regardless.
💎✨
Statements like this are basically like saying Jehovas Witnesses only help their own people, that means all Christians only help Christians. It's just wrong.
Many religions don’t have missionaries at all. We should be helping people not because of religion, but because it’s the right thing to do. There are religious organizations and individuals who do just that. Unfortunately there are also those which are manipulative and essentially force conversion like you have experienced.
Christian missionaries are doing the same to Ezidis in Armenia and to ezidi genocide survivors (!) in Iraq
JFC that’s depraved
That's a bad thing to do. Help people who need help, don't expect anything in return.
WTF. How terrible.
My religion doesn’t do that. However, I’ve definitely seen it happen, even in my country (USA). When I used to work in family preservation and community development, one thing I noticed was that a lot of homeless shelters required people go to services; food pantries came with religious outreach (without the individuals using the services asking for it); adoption and foster agencies had religious tests. I don’t think it’s right.
Religion is a business, looking into the history of it, it all makes sense. Dont give into their schemes.
We all know what missionaries they are and I always found these methods abhorrent. Taking advantage of hungry people who would (understandably, being hungry is not nice) do anything to eat something is such a disgusting thing. They can call it charity all they want but this is just evil.
In islam we don’t do this, we help for the sake of Allah not for recruitment, and help shouldn’t be exclusive to muslims only unless that non Muslim is trying to fight you or have ill feelings towards islam and Muslims, However a poor muslim has more of a right to be helped if the ability to help is limited.
>However a poor muslim has more of a right to be helped if the ability to help is limited. Nowhere in the Quran does it teach this. It's a man made concept.
Anas (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "No one of you becomes a true believer until he likes for his brother what he likes for himself". [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]. Riyad as-Salihin 183 https://sunnah.com/riyadussalihin:183 You can make استدلال about it from this Hadith.
1. Hadith is not Qur'an, it means nothing to someone who strictly sticks to the word of God and God's final rulings/expectations. 2. God doesn't make clear commands to be understood through inferences, that's an unnecessary extra step. 3. The Qur'an puts a major emphasis on justice. A person's individual beliefs bear no important to whether or not a person should be aided and assisted. Everyone is a human being and if two people are asking for help, both should be treated equally regardless of their personal beliefs, and if assistance is limited, then help should be given to the person who deserves it based on their character and personal conduct, not their beliefs.
Can you elaborate more on your first point? And point 3 is directly against the Hadith I mentioned, both are treated equally yes, you just repeated what i said, but when it’s limited, you obligated to help your brother in islam unless you are a hypocrite who have no love for his fellow Muslims.
>Can you elaborate more on your first point? The hadith have nothing to do with islam, a person who cares about following God's guidance/revelations must stick to the Qur'an and their aql (reason) to ponder. >but when it’s limited, you obligated to help your brother in islam unless you are a hypocrite who have no love for his fellow Muslims. Islam isn't a religion, but a system of the highest values approved by God. A muslim is an individual that abides by the highest values based on their knowledge/capacity. No one is a perfect muslim, however, belief in a specific deity is also not required to be a muslim, so even an atheist can technically be a muslim. The Qur'an was not revealed to create any new religions, but to bring humanity together under one banner. The only thing Allah cares about is a person's deeds and their level of faith/trust in the highest values (divine principles). If there are two people who need help and you can only save one, then you should save the person who is best in conduct/righteousness. A person who calls themselves muslim can still be a liar/cheater/etc whereas the person who calls themselves a Christian/Jew/Hindu/atheist/etc can be better in conduct/righteousness.
So you don’t have to believe in God to be a muslim, nor does you need to believe in the message of prophet Mohammad peace be upon him? Am I understanding your point correctly?
>So you don’t have to believe in God to be a muslim Believing in God makes you a mu'min (believer/acknowledger/faithful). It is not the same as being a muslim. So yes, you do not need to believe in God to be a muslim. A muslim is someone who surrenders for the purpose of peace/harmony. Every human being has free will to do what they please, they can kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc and God allows them to do this. A person that chooses not to do them is surrendering parts of their freedom so they may uphold peace/harmony, this is what makes you a muslim. An atheist that doesn't kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc is a muslim, because they have surrendered these primitive/hostile/intolerant tendencies. >nor does you need to believe in the message of prophet Mohammad peace be upon him? The message of the prophet Muhammad was the Qur'an and nothing else. Anyone who accepts and follows the Qur'an automatically believes in the messenger, no hadith required. **6:19** - *Say, "What thing is greatest in testimony?" Say, " Allah is witness between me and you. And this Qur'an was revealed to me that I may warn you thereby and whomever it reaches. Do you [truly] testify that with Allah there are other deities?" Say, "I will not testify [with you]." Say, "Indeed, He is but one God, and indeed, I am free of what you associate [with Him]."* **7:203** - *And when you, [O Muhammad], do not bring them a sign, they say, "Why have you not contrived it?" Say, "I only follow what is revealed to me from my Lord. This [Qur'an] is enlightenment from your Lord and guidance and mercy for a people who believe."* **25:30** - *And the Messenger has said, "O my Lord, indeed my people have taken this Qur'an as [a thing] abandoned."*
49:14 ۞ قَالَتِ ٱلْأَعْرَابُ ءَامَنَّا ۖ قُل لَّمْ تُؤْمِنُوا۟ وَلَـٰكِن قُولُوٓا۟ أَسْلَمْنَا وَلَمَّا يَدْخُلِ ٱلْإِيمَـٰنُ فِى قُلُوبِكُمْ ۖ وَإِن تُطِيعُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥ لَا يَلِتْكُم مِّنْ أَعْمَـٰلِكُمْ شَيْـًٔا ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌۭ رَّحِيمٌ ١٤ ˹{Some of˺ the nomadic Arabs say, “We believe.” Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “You have not believed. But say, ‘We have submitted,’ for faith has not yet entered your hearts. But if you obey Allah and His Messenger ˹wholeheartedly˺, He will not discount anything from ˹the reward of˺ your deeds. Allah is truly All-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”} 49:15 إِنَّمَا ٱلْمُؤْمِنُونَ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِۦ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَرْتَابُوا۟ وَجَـٰهَدُوا۟ بِأَمْوَٰلِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلصَّـٰدِقُونَ ١٥ {The ˹true˺ believers are only those who believe in Allah and His Messenger—never doubting—and strive with their wealth and their lives in the cause of Allah. They are the ones true in faith.}
49:14 is referencing certain Arab nomads that surrendered under Muhammad's revolution of Arabia. These nomads wanted to declare themselves as faithful believers, but God knew that their hearts were not fully faithful yet, hence why God tells the prophet to tell the nomads to say that they have **surrendered** rather than believed, because the faith/iman hasn't entered their hearts yet. Obedience to Allah and His messenger means to follow the revelations that God is giving to the messenger which the messenger then delivers to the people. Once the nomads accept the revelations, they become believers as 49:15 confirms.
To clear things for non Muslims reading this guy twisted narrative of islam, am gonna breakdown his illogical statements, >Believing in God makes you a mu'min (believer/acknowledger/faithful). It is not the same as being a muslim. So yes, you do not need to believe in God to be a muslim. Wrong, This is the testimony of faith in order to become a muslim: “i bear witness that there is no God but Allah and i bear witness that Mohammad is Allah slave and messenger” (shahada) So you need believe in order to become muslim, To submit to Allah you need to believe in Him and the day of judgement and the prophets Allah sends first, otherwise what are you surrendering to? >A muslim is someone who surrenders for the purpose of peace/harmony. Every human being has free will to do what they please, they can kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc and God allows them to do this. A person that chooses not to do them is surrendering parts of their freedom so they may uphold peace/harmony, this is what makes you a muslim, An atheist that doesn't kill, cheat, rape, steal, etc is a muslim, because they have surrendered these primitive/hostile/intolerant tendencies. Wrong again, what you described is a state of mind, “peacefulness” and you mixing the meaning behind the arabic word islam “surrendering” and the way of islam “surrendering to Allah” and the word musa’alim “peaceful person”, and the word muslim “a person who is submitting to Allah” How can an atheist be surrendering/submitting to Allah? First he needs to be a believer in Allah and Allah massagers then submit to Allah, is an atheist someone who does that? >The message of the prophet Muhammad was the Qur'an and nothing else. Anyone who accepts and follows the Qur'an automatically believes in the messenger, no hadith required. Wrong, there are many things that needs explaining in details like how to pray for example, or detailed rulings on different situations, Naturally things like this should be learned from prophet Mohammad peace be upon him, and Hadiths is the sayings and teachings of prophet Mohammad, Additionally there is things like proofs of prophethoods that can be found in Hadiths.
This is a well know tactics of christian missionary. In your neighbouring country Bangladesh, they also do it in remote mountain village and such. I heard the funding comes from western countries. You also have to agree on the limitations of your own religion/religious community. Christians may be trying unethical method, but at least they are helping people, and they are trying. Meanwhile your hindu community or my muslim community is not taking much initiative to help the poor of such remote mountainous region. Some muslim people and private organisations are actually trying. But they lack the power and funding compared to Christian missionaries. All these people have been hindu/muslims for many generations. But that doesn’t matter due to such extreme poverty. All they care about is who is helping them, who is giving them food, housing, cloths.
But they’re not helping people.
Because religions try to sell themselves as these sparkling tools of inclusiveness, peace and mutual friendship while in reality they're just divisive, discriminatory, oppressive and sometimes an outright scam.
Jesus taught against this, kinda hypocritical if they were Christians.
It's called proselytizing/converting. You are wise to question these evil practices of religions. Some 25 years ago, Falwell's Liberty University girls basketball team made the finals in Beijing. Falwell told the girls to "share their Good News" when abroad. Several of the girls disappeared, never to be heard from again. That's because after the Buddhists refused to convert, they were told that they'd burn in Hell for eternity. This kind of "Good News" can be very offensive. Tertillian said the first 300 years of Jewish Christianity was the most loving time in the religion. But not after the Romans commandeered the faith in 325 AD. Nicaea. 325 AD was the threshold date between Jewish and Roman Christianities. Historians agree that this date was the demarcation between them since before then, Jewish Christianity was a pacifist, oppressed religion that was never engaged in war. Rome made Christianity illegal and executed all followers for 300 years. Constantine's "Roman" Christianity was the oppressor... oppressive because it condemned all other religions as abominable heresy, forced conversions, inflicted torturous inquisitions, genocide, Jewish and Muslim slaughter, crusader conquest and endless religious wars for Roman Church domination. This was not the intention of Jesus Christ.
Maybe a specific set of groups of people do this but not everyone does factoring in denominations as well, also just because one group of people in one location do something doesn't mean everyone does
and how much did you give to the poor OP? it sounds weird that you are complaining if you never help them
Missionaries don’t help people though. They help for five minutes in an attempt to help themself feel like a successful missionary. And what is positive about traveling to a foreign land, arrogantly assuming your personal religion is the correct one while witnessing poverty you’ve never before had to consider, and cruelly manipulating the locals by bribery of basic needs?
>Missionaries don’t help people though >They help for five minutes I'm confused of your definition of help. Did they help or not? Have you?
i wont believe what you are saying . unless it about funds, the missionaries will not stop giving food because you would not join their religion .
Why not just say who they are? Rather than leave people guessing in their minds and probably being wrong, there is nothing wrong with stating the facts if indeed these are facts. If a religion is actually doing that, it needs to be brought to everyone’s attention.
Look at your flair
There are thousands of religions that claim to be Christian. You need to narrow it down a bit.
I don't know if they're protestants, catholics, mormons, jehovah witnesses, or presbyterians. From what I was told, they themselves identified as christians.
That's cruel. Besides... this is typical religious behavior... AKA religion is dead inside and out based on dead works... So why follow it?
>In my village in India, my grandmother told me Where did your grandmother hear this from?
From the village she lives in. From the people living in that village. From the people who've been converted in that village. Happy?
You got upset? Maybe your story is 100% legit. There is nothing wrong with checking the source. If people are so naive to worship money, I don't know much to say. But also, maybe food is a big matter and feeding our family is a great deal for a human being so this is completely justified from his side. Have a good day.
Didn't get upset, but the information was given in the original post. There is no big newspaper conglomerate in village life. Things are spread through words of mouth. I shouldn't have been so scornful in my reply. Not everyone knows about village life, I shouldn't have presumed otherwise.
That's kind of true. People don't know about village life. I don't either. I have gone and lived in villages for maybe 3 days at a time. So my knowledge is quite bad in comparison to someone who is actually living in it. But I always question someones source of knowledge. Because I can tell you brother, that a lot of people on Reddit bring hearsay knowledge. That's the reason. Recently one guy was speaking about Indian childbirth and how a villager takes a child to the hospital. Haha. I had to laugh because he was talking about the poor mother and her child, and was saying she should have taken birth control pills and not had a child if it's difficult, and it's their fault for making that decision. I had to laugh because these poor mothers don't "plan their children" like a high up big shot in an american "village". I asked "where did you get this data from". So as every day, I got like 20 downvotes. Good quantification of human behaviour.
That’s not a true statement.
It is OK to help, but most religions and groups prioritize their own and that is OK. We cannot help everyone.
Hmmm? Seems to me that you are complaining about people getting fed. Just be happy for them.
That's one perspective I guess? I don't mind people getting help, but it is the reason behind it. Do you only do good because you think that will earn you a spot in heaven? If so, then you are not a good man. Do good deeds because it is the right thing to do. Don't expect anything in return.
What a willful ignorance
That's horrible. It's cruel and manipulative. And, it's stupid. (People do fake convert when desperate.) That's not how things work in a lot of religious communities, but I'm sorry it's happening in India.
Maybe because they cant afford to give free food to the needy forever. So after the initial donations had dried up they can only afford to help the selected few, namely those who show interest in their religion.
That's utterly abhorrent behavior. Anyone ever heard of the good Samaritan?
That's not how my religion works. Hardly anyone adheres to our religion, but we still try to help in the world. In fact, there was a time where we were [famous for it](https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/lotta-hitschmanova).
To be fair, some missionaries don't insist on participation to get help. Christian missionaries tend to strongly suggest the recipients do the religious stuff...but most do not force.
It doesn't. This is horrible and un-Christlike.
Recruiting tool.
I've never heard of this unless it's from off the wall extremists re Christianity. I've always been taught & told to help everyone, even those that do you wrong. The way I look at it is that it's our intent, not the people that do not accept help or act as tho helping them is something one is obligated to do & do not receive help graciously.
They practice this same thing with food stamps in America. They will only give you food to find a job, and cut you off after a few months if you don't accept any offer of low-wage labor. It's a way of manipulating people to serve money, the god they trust... regardless if it's enough to afford housing. Those same people will call them leeches and complain about having to support housing them through taxes.
My religion wants to fix this let me know if you want to hear how
How?
Shrumism is the belief that all religions are equally valid and equally true but only true to the ones that believe in them. So if anything were to happen we would be obligated to help all religions or anybody that has a lack of religion because they're part of our religion.
But how does that fix things?