First of all, people are being encouraged to convert to Christianity. That is, they are being encouraged to turn away from their cultures and traditions. So yes, they are being “asked.” Hindus will often claim that the method of “asking” is deceitful and puts huge pressure on the prospective convert. I have no way of knowing if this is true or not–I’m fairly sure that Hindu nationalists exaggerate it.
My original statement:
Nobody’s asking Hindus who want to remain Hindus to turn away from their cultures or traditions
remains true. If they
don’t want to remain Hindus then that’s their choice.
Certain negative aspects of culture and tradition in many parts of the world, not just India, have bound people (especially women) in virtual slavery for too long. The lack of the right to self determination and individual religious freedoms are among those bonds.
It’s only fitting that people seek to throw off that which binds them, while holding on to the positive aspects of their culture (compare it to throwing off the shackles of colonialism while preserving the British education system). That change is going to generate animosity and even violence but that does not mean seeking change is wrong.
Several decades ago some lower caste Hindus sought change (to some degree, successfully) through the communist ideology. If some seek it through conversion to Christianity, what’s wrong with that?
The bigger point is that the idea of individuals running around in a vacuum choosing what culture and tradition to identify themselves with is a modern (Protestant, for that matter) idea. It’s certainly not the way Catholics have historically thought (which is why heretics were considered criminals–they were violating sacred vows taken in their name by their parents). Many Catholics and Orthodox respond to evangelical Protestant missionary activity in much the same way Hindus respond to Christian missionary activity (including, in many countries, fairly vicious levels of mob violence).
Wherever people respond to conversions with mob violence it’s wrong. I’m not aware of it happening in places where Christians are the attackers, but if it does it’s
still wrong. If a person is forced to hold (or change) religious beliefs then I would consider that faith highly questionable and the ones doing the forcing to be in the wrong, no matter what their faith. Regardless of how long this has been going on, regardless of the excuses for it and regardless of the faith of the perpetrators, interfering forcefully with someone’s religious freedom is
wrong - plain and simple. Besides, this is 2008, not the middle ages.
But it’s disingenuous to claim that the Western monotheistic religions (Islam and Christianity) can fit within this framework. Without radically changing our basic claims, there’s no way that we can. There is nothing inconsistent about a Hindu accepting Vaishnavism and Shaivism and even Buddhism and Jainism as legitimate versions of Indian religion, while seeing Christianity and Islam as foreign, imperialistic religions. Because the plain historical fact (if you *really *want to call a spade a spade) is that that’s how they established their current strong presence in India (Christianity did of course long predate colonialism in India, but the ancient Christian populations accepted a status as a separate caste, gave up efforts to evangelize long ago, and so were tolerated).
What is disingenuous is to somehow seek to justify the animosity converted Christians suffer. Indian children learn not just in their communities, but in school, that all religions are to be respected and tolerated. Those educated in convents have always been exposed to some degree of evangelism in the course of their education, so this is not some new phenomenon that Indians suddenly have to deal with. What seems to be new (or maybe the information age just makes it appear that way) is the level of physical violence against missionary activities.
I have been told that the Indian government, years ago began restricting foreign missionary activity because it was felt that poor illiterates were easy prey for the missionaries. Interestingly, those missionaries not only preached the gospel, but
offered education to the aforementioned poor illiterates.
I encourage you to do so, with particular attention to the spades that your bias might lead you to overlook.
My bias is towards God’s creatures living in the freedom that He endowed them with.
