Are Christian missionaries harmful to indigenous culture?

untill Christian missionaries destroy local culture they can not make non christian accept christian concepts. why some one living in india or america will call the bible people as his ancesters . they can be sympathetic with jesus but how are they going to accept the idea of original sin and his sacrifice. this is alien thought for others born in nonsemetic cultures.

it is great if they want to go and build hospitals and feed the poor and so on, but they do not do this out of pure motives. It is like a bribe. They will feed you in turn for your soul. And of course, it is never open-minded Christians that go on these missions. It is always the closed-minded ones that believe the native religions are Satanic and hellbound.

churches in north east india has destroyed local culture totaly within last 200 years and still activelly engaged in it.

Jesus was presented as “Christus Victor” or Jesus Christ the Conqueror (of all evil spirits).The belief of the Ao Naga people in life after death was linked to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. To this day, missionaries use theological deceit for conversion. They have been guilty of substituting the names of Ram and Krishna in the popular baar-geets of legendary Assamese Saint Sanardeva with the name of Jesus. When the local Vaishnava Sabha reacted angrily, they had to withdraw the offending stanzas.

Imposition of Roman script: The first thing that missionaries did when beginning work among a new tribe was to reduce its language to writing. This the missionaries did to enable people to read the Bible.The imposition of the Roman script has on occasion been at gunpoint. On august 21, 2000, terrorists of the Church backed National Democratic Front of Bodoland gunned down Shri Bineshwar Brahma, president of the Bodo Sahitya Sabha. His only crime was that he favored the use of Devanagari script for the Bodo language.

Many reports have come of how Church congregations use harassment, ostracism and other forms of force to increase their flock. Non-converted portions of a family land into disputes with neo-Christian portions over funeral customs, ownership of land and other matters and this result in clashes between groups which newspapers promptly label as anti–Christian acts, whereas these are often clashes between converted and non-converted tribals.

christians mssionaries in India have often been a divisive force, which used the tribals for advocating a breaking-up of the country. Today, Christian terrorists feel emboldened to use the gun to force Jesus down the throats of unwilling tribals.

missionaries actively involve in bad mouthing local relegions. last year a mr cooper came on tourist visa. he not only violated visa rules he went on to call krishna a satan and that krishna is the cause of AIDS.that is how they act in tolerant societies. they keep on behaving outragiously for conversion and when locals react even a bit they call it christian persecution.

Christianity is a money making buissness. and the bonus is ego satisfaction that because others have accepted our belief it proves we were better to start with.

in some areas incidents came up where school was distributing booklets criticising hinduism and in the end children of primary schools were asked to sign the last page and accept that they are sinners. when parents protested christians called it attack on their freedom of exercising their faith and freedom of spreading it.

many converts do not even know what they are getting into.

church is called girijaghar(girija = lord shiva's wife, ghar=home). in some tribal areas they replaced mary as godess of camels!

what the missionries contributed to american native culture?

the foremost thing christian missionaries declare in a new country that the locals had no culture or religion. that is if the native religion is unknown to christian world. else it is a satan cult.

JUST READ SOME POSTS HERE. MOST OF THEM REALLY THINK THAT NATIVE CULTURE DISTRUCTION WAS FOR GOOD.

thats how the mind set is created by church. they need to learn some respect for other cultures. most of them were established when europe was still in dark ages.

In a sense, sure, no matter if we are conversing about "organic" missionaries that furnish no longer some thing yet goodness and style, help and training, food and drugs, alongside with the Gospel. change is particular to go back on each and every occasion new issues are further, at the same time as the addition of electrical energy, phones, and televisions has replaced our own way of life, society, and traditions. that modify ought to nicely be considered as "harm" by technique of a organic traditionalist, ie someone who thinks that each and every thing must be done "the way we've continuously done it", with out wavering, with out replacing some thing. i imagine the authentic question is, is this change continuously a foul component? A society that by no skill transformations some thing is stagnant and lifeless. extreme wondering is discouraged, technological improvements are not allowed, innovation is repressed. change isn't continuously a foul component. we can use the elimination of a cancerous boom as an allegory; the surgical operation does certainly convey painful change, even if the completed result's a in good structure body. In related to in good structure change, evaluate the cultural practices of chinese foot-binding, the Indian (Hindu) caste equipment, or some Polynesian cannibalistic practices. might want to all of those cultural traditions were "left on my own", out of understand for the Indigenous cultures and ideology? For the most section, those practices were abolished (i'm no longer particular about the Caste equipment in India, or the cannibalism!) because the creation of overseas help and missionary workers. change is particular to go back, the question is, with what motorized vehicle will it come? ideally, it gained't comprise violence and repression, yet we've all considered too a lot of human heritage to be pollyannic about such an concept. i ought to extremely have a missionary any day, than Ghengis Khan. regrettably, there are also a large type of the latter, and they are extra aggressive than the former.

Yep. I especially like the part about how Christian missionaries go someplace to help out these days but only provide the needed medical care or food if the natives agree to convert. "Yeah, you want this grain and water? Yeah, well you better reject everything your culture has built for the past 1,000 years and accept MY religious beliefs or else you'll starve AND go to Hell!!" I'm sure God loves that.

Hey, wouldn't it be funny if the One True Religion existed in some tribal culture a couple hundred years ago and then the Christians went in and slaughtered them all for not believing like them? LOL!! What a riot!!

Yes..I am always irritated at Christian missionaries going to small villages in my country and others and seeking to convert people..the culture in these areas are based on the native religion and this is ruining that culture.

I agree completely with rian30.

I am sure they change native culture. Cultures are always changing. They aren't static. Anytime someone new comes along, or someone has a new idea, or someone invents something, the culture changes. Its a good thing. While I am not an advocate for Christianity, its crazy to try and keep a culture from evolving. Its going to happen. Also, what is necessarily so great about the native culture. If its so great then why would they change? If we work to keep all the backward cultures around, how will those people's lives improve. People will keep what works, and get rid of what doesn't.

I would argue that yes, they are. They disrupt the balance of the culture that they penetrate. We, as Americans would not benefit from another group of people coming into our cities and trying to force a new religion and way of life upon us, no matter how convinced those people were of their correctness and superiority.

Change doesn't benefit a culture when it is forced. It should come about gradually, through the needs and desires of that culture. They deserve the same respect that we would want.

The greatest threat to indigenous cultures is the military. As seen on the History Channel <World Wars and the Military> ... the military formed western prostitution houses for the boys. Before the military went to these places, the indigenous cultures just existed in it's little world. Now, prostitution, and "Sexual Tourism" is a major problem in places like Vietnam, Philippians, Africa, and Cambodia ... all because the military though it would be fun to objectify women as entertainment for the boys.

Missionaries are trying to enter these places and to restore human dignity to these cultures that were destroyed by the military. Education is a big part of restoring human dignity. Education in religion, reading, writing, arithmetic. Since these cultures have been uncovered and are still exposed in in-humane ways by the Western cultures, it is good to have good Christians introduce the good parts of Western cultures. We made the mess, and now we need to clean it up.

If by harmfull, you mean that it changes them, then yes. Missionaries have traditionally westernized indigenous cultures.

Whether you consider that good or bad is a value judgement.

My husband is a Native American and he doesn't think so. Of course it depends on the caliber of the missionaries. If they reflect true Christian principles it shouldn't be a problem.

Yes.They're are erasing cultures.