How to politely decline invitations to church?
-
Originally posted by ADsolutE:
go church see wat? if see the wonder of church architech, maybe i would
See the architect, the service, the posters, etc. Many things to see. )
-
The only time I "voluntarily" visited a church is the church opposite Maxwell food center, the former Jing Hua cinema. I went there to reminisce the "old times"... many years before when my late father brought me to that cinema to watch a movie. Other than that there is absolutely nothing of interest in any church service.
-
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
The only time I "voluntarily" visited a church is the church opposite Maxwell food center, the former Jing Hua cinema. I went there to reminisce the "old times"... many years before when my late father brought me to that cinema to watch a movie. Other than that there is absolutely nothing of interest in any church service.
I see. I passed by there quite often due to work. They are doing very hard in influencing the hawkers at Maxwell food centre in Chinese langauge.
Okay, guess there's no takers. Hehe.
-
Most of the invitations i have got is their social outing and church's performance etc. I have been to church's semons and cell group's study too. Quite interesting too.
Also take it as an opportunity to understand someone's religion deeper. Rather than being someone, standing outside and looking inwards.
-
By the way, The following forum post was made last Saturday on the Straits Times:
Let's respect a person's private space in publicI WAS sitting alone in my school canteen one afternoon when a girl came up to me and asked if I had time to spare. Yes, it was yet another get-to-know-God session. I'm sorry if this sounds impolite, but I've had enough of such encounters in school and other public places.
I find the increasingly noticeable trend by Singaporeans to proselytise in public worrying.
It is not uncommon when one is sitting alone outside Starbucks, or on a bench in school, to find oneself being approached by some stranger who starts introducing his or her concept of religion.
It may be acceptable to spread one's religion by setting up a booth at Orchard Road, putting up a website, or distributing fliers but it should not go further.
Proselytising in school is too much. I am well aware that these people mean well, and feel intensely about their beliefs and that good things are meant to be shared. I feel the same way about my religion too but I do not do what they do because it is not the right way to share my beliefs.
Such get-to-know-God sessions are undemocratic because they indirectly convey the message that a person feels his religion is superior to the beliefs of others, and that others should therefore switch.
It is also intrusive especially if courtesy requires one to listen when one wishes to turn away. I am glad that my friends, who are of a different religion, do not try to convert me.
Religious freedom does include the right not to be annoyed by someone who over-enthusiastically tries to promote his or her beliefs.
Tolerance and acceptance have their limits.
I believe that the only way for a person to win respect for himself and his beliefs is for that person to be a good person first.
He should embody the values which his beliefs teach him, and prove the strength of love through actions, not sermons.
Show me that your beliefs make you a better person, and that your religion makes you care for the world; that is all you need to do.
After encountering one too many sessions in public, I think that there perhaps should be a law to ban such religious touting.
Wee Feng Yi (Ms)
IT'S TOUTING, SHE SAYS
'After encountering one too many sessions in public, I think that there perhaps should be a law to ban such religious touting.'
I am inclined to support the call for a law banning public religious touting. I think this will help us fend off unwanted church invitations.
Off topic for a bit, as Buddhists, do we not need to share the dharma with our fellow suffering beings? If so, how are we expected to share the dharma without coming across as hypocrites?
-
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
By the way, The following forum post was made last Saturday on the Straits Times:
I am inclined to support the call for a law banning public religious touting. I think this will help us fend off unwanted church invitations.
Off topic for a bit, as Buddhists, do we not need to share the dharma with our fellow suffering beings? If so, how are we expected to share the dharma without coming across as hypocrites?
It will be difficult to have this kind of rule. Even if it does, there are loopholes to go around with it. If you do notice what happens to Orchard Road in December for the past 2 (or 3?) years. =)
And to your last para, many buddhists I met often told me they know not-enough-yet to 'share dhamma'. If all buddhists must wait until become enlightened then share hor, then I think there won't be Dhamma in the first place liao. But then again the modern buddhists are generally more passive lah. It's the culture. It's like that one. Get used to it can liao.
Anyway, I didn't expect anyone would want to go church with me. Was just doing a 'test'. I was expecting more rebuttals, but seems like many really non-chalent about it. Only Isis made a good entry =)
Church-going is a good dhamma practice in fact but many either fail to see it or afraid to see it for themselves.
While many pro-MCK here would agree and rally with the so-call MCK's what Hua-yan state that all religions are the same (to me all religions are not the same though), but no one has the courage to even step into church to see what's going on.
Both hardware and software of modern churches, though quite different from what Christianity might have meant, proved to have met the requirement of urban-jungle-dwellers.
But of course, certain buddhists would have find it difficult to agree that there are valuable lessons that we can learn from churches.
Okay, don't flame me hor, this is how I feel lah. After exams will be busy running churches and Jain temple.
Hehe. Take care.
-
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
By the way, The following forum post was made last Saturday on the Straits Times:
I am inclined to support the call for a law banning public religious touting. I think this will help us fend off unwanted church invitations.
Off topic for a bit, as Buddhists, do we not need to share the dharma with our fellow suffering beings? If so, how are we expected to share the dharma without coming across as hypocrites?
Winds of change may come? Hehe...
http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2008/04/tale-of-one-jack-chick-and-two.html
-
I am in support of a law to ban all public religious services.
-
if i needed a religion i will find u, u dun need to bug me on the streets
-
I am also in favour in the banning of all public religious invitations, as in they come to you and talk about their religious stuffs and asking you to convert. Asking people to convert is to me a very downright thing to do. It is not respecting the person's religious belief. It is also very selfish of people to ask their peeps to convert to their own religion in order to get 'save'. You mean we cant get saved with our own religion? At worst, that intention is trying to say that all religions other than the person's religion is not true. Thats absurb.
While the young ones may want to look for a religion of themselves, my personal advice is dont listen to those people out there trying to tell you how good their religions are. Do research on your own by looking at comparative charts of different religions and find out the purpose and backgrounds of the religions. If your decision is that, then you are at freedom because you chose your own path, not being forced into it.
In response to questions like "why buddhist dont go about preaching their own stuffs", i have something to reply. I am aware that many buddhist are not going about preaching their own stuffs, but firstly lets observe is it really their fault? When people hear about other religions, they feel excited but when they hear about ours they roll their eyes, having the misconception that Buddhism is a superstitious religion.
If buddhist receive such a response, is there courage to further preach people if they have no interest in the dharma at all. We are not a religion that go out to win favour of converts or trying to make our religion powerful. Buddhism believes that the more important thing is to avoid evil and do good as well as to cultivate. It is not helpful at all to win converts just for the sake of winning them. Those who really know the truth are very few.
Someone mentioned that if buddhists think that buddhism will exist if they dont preach, then why did Sakyamuni Buddha and Asoka the great etc needed to preach the dharma? This is a very good question. This answer is very simple. In that age, that was the dharma age where it is a good time to spread the buddha dharma. Sakyamuni Buddha realized that it was time to teach humans dharma and thus He descended from Tushita Heaven and born as Gautama to teach.
Im not here to discourage any buddhist, but feel eastern religions as a whole is declining in Asia. People are more attracted to westernization. Bodhisattvas are also aware of this situation. The buddhist scriptures also said it very clearly about the signs of the declining age. However, you must not forget buddhism is now beggining to spread rapidly in the western countries. Sometimes, its all predestinied that such things will happen. Like did we expect western countries to get in touched with buddhism? Or did we expect a decline of buddhism in Asia?
It is important that we spread the Buddha's word, but let us share the dharma in a simpler way as daily words of wisdom. We seriously need to give the impression to Singaporeans that Buddhism is not a superstitious religion. Also, I believe the buddhists who do not spread their beliefs is because they are afraid that they might spread doctrines which are misinterprated by them. Some groups which are able to convince people in their beliefs might not be teaching true doctrines too, and this is not funny but serious. Thus with increasing buddhist activities in Singapore nowadays, i am actually quite happy, because most of these activities are organized by temples where there are people who know the true doctrines.
-
Tell them no thank you and make it firm!!!!
-
Originally posted by wilsonhao:
Like did we expect western countries to get in touched with buddhism? Or did we expect a decline of buddhism in Asia?
These are all part of globalization... But in the end Buddhism will stand to gain more benefits in the long run. I am optimistic for the 'revival' of Buddhism and the Dharma in times to come both in Asia and the west.
BTW, Buddhism and Dharma in Singapore is growing pretty fast.
-
maybe some christians see converting ppl to their own religion is a challenge to overcome..
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
These are all part of globalization... But in the end Buddhism will stand to gain more benefits in the long run. I am optimistic for the 'revival' of Buddhism and the Dharma in times to come both in Asia and the west.
BTW, Buddhism and Dharma in Singapore is growing pretty fast.
How does Buddhism gain in the long run when we are in the dharma ending age? Its a matter of time before we reach an age where no one will even hear of Buddha and the dharma.BTW, anyone knows what has become of that couple charged under the Sedition Act for distributing evangelistic materials?
-
Originally posted by jacqn:
maybe some christians see converting ppl to their own religion is a challenge to overcome..
Some of them truly feel that they have the 'cure' for cancer and is obliged to spread the good news. Their intention is indeed noble, but what they lack the wisdom to realize is that this "cure-for-cancer" thingy is not a good analogy for religion since religion is highly personal.For a start, the spiritual disease that afflicts Christians is very different from the ones that affects other people... and even if the spiritual disease is the same, different cures works better for different people; what is a cure for Christians may very well be poisonous for others, so it is pointless forcing their "cure" down other's throat.
-
Originally posted by Beyond Religion:
Some of them truly feel that they have the 'cure' for cancer and is obliged to spread the good news. Their intention is indeed noble, but what they lack the wisdom to realize is that this "cure-for-cancer" thingy is not a good analogy for religion since religion is highly personal.For a start, the spiritual disease that afflicts Christians is very different from the ones that affects other people... and even if the spiritual disease is the same, different cures works better for different people; what is a cure for Christians may very well be poisonous for others, so it is pointless forcing their "cure" down other's throat.
I agreee with your statement. Thats what i told my friends too. Christians may have 'fever' and they need the fever medicine. But perhaps we have sore throat. They shouldnt force us to take their 'fever' medicine when what we need is 'sore throat' medicine. Different people need different things. There cannot be at one time when everyone follows a single path.
-
IAt the time British ruled Myanmar (1936) , there was one big debate between Christian and Buddhist happened in Wathikun village in Pyay town.The debate started from one chief of village (Wathikun) family's argument. The chief of Wathikun village is Buddhist and his wife is christian.The debate took the whole day involving a group of christians(leader is U Thardin) and a group of Theravada buddhism (leader is Shin Oathkatha).In the end, a group of buddhism win this debate.Hence all the people in the village converted to Buddhism. To read the whole story details including debate questions and answers The file is written in myanmar language http://www.mediafire.com/?yjymfnc5mn9 http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?yjymfnc5mn9
-
What up with the different religion, belief and even conflicts of interests that divide people ? Essentially we are all the same human beings.
-
In this world, different people have different belief and ideas.The knowledge,background,education, interest, cultures of all the people are not equal. Some religion mix with different cultures.The different people like different colors, clothes , dishes and curry , cars and so on. Let give summary brief. As far as I know, most of the religions believe the God creator that create human,animals ,this world and so on. Buddhism based on there is no god creator.All the things happen based on each own natural properties and characteristics.The creator based on karma. You know, different people have different conditions Some people are rich and some poor Some people are beautiful and handsome ,some ugly Some people stay in long life and some stay in short life Some people have good voice and some have bad voice Some people are bright and some dull Because of different people have different karmas in the past, they have different conditions in the present life Nex time, let explain brief for the different reason why we reject god creator ,when some people start to believe god creator and what is the effect of belief of God creator.
-
Originally posted by Isis:
What up with the different religion, belief and even conflicts of interests that divide people ? Essentially we are all the same human beings.
Yes, we are all human beings. Neither do we want to like argue or whatsoever with others. But when our threat is concerned, we need to do something. We are not those people who eat already then nothing to do go split ourselves as human beings.
I have friends who are christians, and i consider them true friends. They never spread or ask me to convert to their religion and im currently fine with that. We all know that beliefs cant be forced.
However, these days there are more people forcing ppl into their beliefs, and we see this as an inappropirate thing to do. Mind you, when we buddhist talk about compassion, wisdom and understanding, it is to each and every sentient being But when it comes to desire,hatred and igorance we try to destroy or eliminate it. In this case, it is ignorance involved and not the indivisual. We are trying to point against ignorance in these people and not the people themselves.
-
Wanna to mention Dhamma telescope to differentiate which one is right or wrong .Like a microsope enables to see minute particles and also as a telescope making distant objects appear larger and nearer.To acquire a 'Dhamma Telescope', one must practice Samatha-kammaá¹á¹hÄ�na or Ä�nÄ�pÄ�nasati .Let go details in Ä�nÄ�pÄ�nasati . The Buddha taught Ä�nÄ�pÄ�nasati step by step: long breath, short breath, whole breath and subtle breath, only for easy understanding. At the time of actual practice, all four stages may occur at the same time. Then, if you can concentrate on the whole long breath, and the whole short breath for about one hour, then (as your concentra-tion improves) the breath will automatically become subtle, and you can change to concentrate on the subtle breath. When the subtle breath is long, you should try to know the whole, long,subtle breath; when the subtle breath is short, you should try to know the whole, short, subtle breath.If the breath does not become subtle by itself, you should concentrate on it (attention(manÄ�sikÄ�ra)) with the decision that it should be subtle. That way it will become subtle, but you must not make the breath subtle on purpose, nor make it long or short on purpose; just decide that it should be calm. In this way, long breath, short breath, whole breath and subtle breath, all the four stages, are included in a single stage. A concentrated mind can usually create a nimitta. When concentration is deep, strong, and powerful, then because of different perceptions, different nimittas appear. For example, if you want the nimitta to be long, it will be long; if you want it to be short, it will be short; if you want it to be round, it will be round;if you want it to be red, it will be red. So various perceptions may arise while practising Ä�nÄ�pÄ�nasati. You may perceive yourself as outside the body. It is simply a mental creation, not because of a soul. It is not a problem. Just ignore it, and return to being mindful of your breath. Using a nimitta as Dhamma telescope, everything is vivid.All the cells of the body,circulation of blood and the like could be seen very clearly.Not only that.One could see celestial beings like Devas and Brahmas and son on and those suffering in hell.
-
Tell him Jesus is a jew (true) and he should really be joining the jewish faith.
-
Originally posted by ChiBet:
Tell him Jesus is a jew (true) and he should really be joining the jewish faith.
Haha, yea. In truth, Christianity did not exist. It was not created by Jesus himself, because jesus is a jew. Christianity was formed by Jesus's disciples, mainly Apostle Paul and his people -
If you would follow me to a Dharma Talk once, then I'll follow you to a church once, Amituofo.
-
Originally posted by ian.tjong:
I remember rejecting my friend's invitation to a church. Well, she's quite a close friend so I dared to be blunt to her. I told her that I would consider going to her church if she could answer my question. My question was, if all human beings are created by God and God is so all-loving and treat all his human creations equally, then why lots of children born with poverty, disability, even death? Then God is not all-loving and all-equal, coz these babies "supposedly" are sin-free. My friend tried to answer me by saying that it is God's way to test the faith of the babies' parents, to strengthen their faith. Then I said, a lot of this cases happened to non-christian parents, so why the test and the strengthening? If really God is testing the parents, then isn't it extremely unfair to the unkwoning babies? She was quiet..
Then I also asked her, in many cases where God seems to be unfair, like something bad happens to a family, ie. robbery, serious illness, natural disaster, the answer is always the same, it's a test from God to strengthen our faith. In case like Tsunami in Aceh Indonesia, when a whole family died, who to test, who needs faith strengthening? She was again quiet.
I felt, she realised that no other logical explanation to these questions. So she replied in terms of faith and believe. She said, God always works in a mysterious way and it's all for the good of human beings. Then I said that this was not the answer to my questions, and I told her to ask her God to mysteriously bring me to church and stop asking me for good.
From then on, she never asks me again.
Another way to reject politely, I would answer "Amituofo" to every invitation asked. This way, I planted the Amituofo eternal seed in their minds, and I do not offend anybody.
Namo-Amituofo!
Please visit my blog,
namo-amituofo.blogspot.com
I think she is practicing the belief of not leading to an argument. I know in parts of the bible that says it is better to lose an argument than a friend. I think the best part is that she really treats you like a friend and not wanting to allow religion to cause a divide between you two. That is the way a christia nshould bahave. Those hard selling ones are cult-like.