christ-on-a-stick

Greetings All!

A while back, I had a conversation with my aunt (fundy Xian of the Calvary Chapel variety) about what I feel are the questionable ethics of events such as Billy Graham’s “Crusades”, Greg Laurie’s “Harvest Crusade” that occurs here in Southern California each summer, and similarly, evangelistic church services (not the normal Sunday services) that take place for the sole purpose of winning converts right then and there (via “altar calls” etc.)

My primary ethical problems with these types of events are:

1) The subtle and sometimes not-so-subtle tactics of emotional manipulation employed – often including common “brainwashing” techniques

2) The hard-sell pressure of “you must do this NOW” (come forward and “accept Christ”).

As such, my argument to her was twofold; that

A) It is irrational to accept any truth-claim (particularly one of such purported magnitude) without investigating it for yourself, as opposed to just taking someone’s (or a group’s) word for it (keyword: gullibility!) Therefore, I find it unethical for a group to pressure others into doing just that – putting them on the spot, so to speak, by intimating that if you don’t “do it now” you just *never know* if you’ll have the chance again (classic intimidation/fear tactic.)

B) If Christianity is indeed “The Truth”, the preachers and evangelizers should have no fear of presenting people with the “evidence” and encouraging them to investigate it for themselves. If its’ true, it should hold up to critical examination and they will have won a convert for pointing them in the right direction to find out for themselves.

C) The hypocrisy factor: she admitted (and I think most fundy Xians would) that she would be none too pleased if here 16-year-old daughter were to come home and announce that she had embraced Islam/LDS/whatever solely by virtue of having gone to a scriptural study/rally/service and listening to some music and a sermon that urged her to “do this now before it’s too late”! They would, no doubt, see this as a remarkable lapse in judgement, but they do not hesitate to expect and HOPE that others will do just this at *their* events. That is, after all, the whole idea.

Anyone else have thoughts on this? I am curious as to whether I am missing anything or whether this line of reasoning seems sound. Also, if you are a theist and disagree, I welcome your comments. Well... I have a feeling I won't welcome *some* resident theists' comments and you know who you are I"ll bet but I don't think I'm allowed to say "Stay Out!" (except in SL&S) so... fire away!!!!

Thanks!

Lauri

Amos

Hi Lauri, it looks like you've been there and done that because your description is very good. I am also somewhat familiar with them because I used to visit a rather conservative Mennonite Church that later split because of a charismatic group that divided the members from within. I watched it close because some of my lady friends from there were also interested in my thoughts (they had this extraordinary need for fellowship and love because they were filled with the HS, so they claimed etc. etc. and this equaled three divorces in the end). To me it seemed that instead of the dove descending upon them it had just shit on them (not once but twice).

To be a victim at such a gathering is the most evil that can ever befall a person because it seems to affect their entire being for life. It is as if they play a hokus pokus on their mind and the intensity of the trauma (their success) is measured in different degrees of reaction. "God has been good," they say, and "seeing a light" is the best, speaking in tongues is also good and slain in the spirit is next. Those who don't respond are possessed and need more intense treatment that is available later that night (some weeks after this a man kicked his wife out after she left the second cheque for 5000,-) .

I am waiting for a lawsuit to end it all because one of these days we'll get another Hitler out of such an event. In fact did Bush Sr. not consult Billy Graham in prayer just minutes before he declared war on Iraq that time?

Infidelettante

You have missed nothing. When I was in Bible college I took
a course called hermeneutics. It should have been a course
on the various methods of interpretation of scripture. Only
it wasn't. It was two hours twice a week learning how to plan
church services and meetings to gain the highest emotional
reaction and the most "souls up front." Some are natural
manipulators, the rest of us had to be taught. We would even
seed the church with ringers "just to get the flow going."

At summer camps 500 kids would be deprived of sleep,
fed just enough to keep them moving, and ran through
games and events untill they dropped. On the last night
they would have agreed with any thing. There was always
a "great harvest" on the final night. I started going to those
camps at sixteen (1967) and didn't catch on till my third year
in college. There must be thousands of kids who have never
caught on. I happened to run into an old friend of a cousin
last year. He and my cousin went together two years in a row.
He asked about my cousin, whom I haven't seen in years, and
said those were the best years of his life. You know, they may
have been and I find it all very sad still after all these years.

edit: my cousin and his friend went to summer Bible camp
together two years in a row...they weren't going together.
At least I don't think...no, no, I'm sure...they weren't.
JT

Amos

Sad, really sad, and many will seek relief for the rest of their life while others will just remain slaves and will die to defend that which they spend a life feeding with all of their effort and money.

Amie

Hi Lauri
I think that people (atheists and theists alike) tend to teach their own children what they themselves believe...
I don't think religion itself is a bad thing, I think it benefits many people however it all comes down to how religious views manifest themselves in ones life. Like anything they can become potentially dangerous when taken to extremes...
yeah I am not so fond of that either...
well some people have beliefs based on subjective experiences that they've had (such as myself). I don't think its possible to argue someone out of their experience they have had but its definitely fair to question what happens as a result of that experience. To ask where this leads them? is this a productive part of their life? Is this experience going to be manifested as helpful or harmful? and so on and so forth...
I agree
What if your child embraced Christianity? Would you be disappointed? I don't like that "now or too late" either...
take care
Amie~

christ-on-a-stick

Edited to wait 'til tomorrow to respond to this topic.

stretch

Lauri,

I think your line of reasoning is very sound. This approach to evangelization does not give people time to reflect on what they're hearing.

Ojuice5001

That pressure to accept Jesus this instant is one thing I find offensive in Chick tracts. Have you ever noticed that whenever a Chick character's reaction to preaching is "I've got to think about this," he always dies before coming to a decision, and goes to hell? Yeah, that's realistic.

Rhea

That has always struck me as a central flaw in their whole religion.

"When we do it, it is good. When you do it, it is bad.
This makes perfect sense to us."


And then they get all confused/insulted when we just look at them and squint, and they say,

"You should trust us in all things"



Yes, i believe there is an ethical dilemma in living any double standard except one:
"Do good, expect less, keep doing good anyway"



I went to one of those weekends. I remember sitting in the dimly lit loft during the final "saving" session and thinking, "Does NO ONE notice that the condition we are in is indentical to that which is used to produce false confessions? Does NO ONE notice that these are identical tactics to those used to make people sign a form saying they did something when they did not? Does NO ONE here notice that they are being manipulated? I am NOT all that special. Why am I the only one who thinks that instead of a 1:00am preaching in a dimly lit room with sparkles on the ceiling what we really need is a sandwich and a nap?"

Perhaps an intereting question for anyone who finds this behavior ethical is to ask whether they think it is also ethical to perform this way to suspects in criminal cases. People who have been "broken" and confessed to a crime, even though they were locked up in a psych ward at the time. Confessions that are unquestionably done only because the person is broken and are in fact lies that have been created. I wonder if these evangelicals would condone the activity. Curious...

scombrid

I've been to one of those weekend revivals as a teen. I was a believing Baptist at the time and still found their tactics shady. They had most of the kids (over 1000) in tears at the alter call. Most kids went to the alter to go back to a little room and be preyed <sorry, couldn't help it> on. Those of us left in our seats were singled out by roving prayer couselors. They made us feel most uncomfortable. One sat on each side of me leaving me to feel rather trapped. "If you die on the way home tonight will you go to heaven". Me: "I'll go whereever god choses to send me". Man, they didn't like that answer. They hammered on me for 10minutes trying to get me to give my soul to Jesus to be born again. My church didn't believe in that doctrine so I refused to cave. (The prayer counselors happened to be members of a church that had split from mine because mine was into the whole born again speel). I decided that day that "Freewill" Baptist ministers were manipulative charlatons and their congregants were deluded cult members. That was when I was a firm believer. I can only imagine how I'd react to them now.

I have trouble respecting the beliefs of people that convert under these circumstances. I might feel sorry for them for having been manipulated but then I deride them for being so uncritical regarding such a decision.