It is sad that Christians are unjustly accused of converting non-Christians to Christianity unethically. Conversion to Christianity is not the work of man but of God. It is only one who truly believes in Jesus and accepts Him as his or her personal Saviour that will become a Christian.

"Yet to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God - children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." (John 1: 12,13).

Conversion to Christianity is spiritual and, not mental or physical. Jesus said you must be born again. (John 1:7) That is spiritual birth.

A Christian knows that all have sinned and are condemned to an eternal hell.

But a Christian also knows that anyone who believes in Jesus and accepts Him as one's own personal Saviour will receive forgiveness of sin and will not have to suffer in hell. He will receive eternal life and be taken at death by God to be in Heaven with Him forever. Could one who knows these facts be without telling the good news of salvation to others who do not know it, but are therefore heading for an eternal hell ? Could they be without trying to persuade such to accept the salvation offered to them freely through belief in Jesus?

Knowing these facts, would anyone want to keep them to one's self without telling others and trying to persuade them to accept the salvation offered to them freely through belief in Jesus Christ.

Christians are also commanded by God to tell others.

"Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." (Matthew 28:19)

To do this it is not necessary to bribe anyone with help of any kind or a gift. Since salvation is a work of God, all that Christian has to do, is to tell others of God's love for them and of the blessings they themselves have received from Him including salvation.

Then why do Christians help others or give gifts to non-Christians ? The love of God constrains them to share with others the blessings they receive from Him. God is love and he bestows His love to others through Christians.

God's love creates in Christians a love for others which is the motivating power in them for helping others.

Christians must love their enemies and do good to them.

If we love God we must also love our brethren, friend or foe.

From the above facts, is it not abundantly clear that Christians are not helping people in order to convert them, but are expressing their love to God and man ? Non-Christians seeing the love of God projected through the lives of Christians, accept the God whom the Christians love and believe in. This surely is no fault of the Christians.

Christians also try to persuade non-Christians to accept Jesus as their Saviour by preaching or personal conversation, without using any unethical means. People also begin to believe in Jesus as a result of receiving healing and other blessings through the power of God or after seeing others receive such blessings. Is this unethical?

Tiddy Senapatiratne,
Hekron, Rozelle.

I do not want to start any religious controversial dispute, because each person has the liberty to profess his/her faith. But regarding Mr. Senapathiratne's article, I have to make my observations purely on a bona fide footing.

According to history, the Portuguese were active in converting Buddhists to Roman Catholicism by sword or by reward. This is a fact and not a fiction. After all, no Christian organisation was able to convert more than 12% of the population, most of whom lived within the maritime provinces of the country, under Portuguese suzerainty. Buddhists have never tried to proselytise Christians to Buddhism.

Mr. Senapathiratne is, perhaps, aware that Christians were outwitted by Buddhists at the Panadura Controversy in 1873, which received worldwide recognition. If conversion to Christianity is not the work of man, but of God, the whole world created by Him, would be a haven for Christians. It has not happened. For example, Colonel Olcott, who was a Christian by birth, embraced Buddhism by his own conviction. God never prevented it.

Albert Einstein, the world famous scientist and mathematician says: "If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism". Why he arrived at that opinion is self-explanatory. Mr. Senapathiratne speaks of the love of God for mankind. Why then allow mass murder and genocide, as a result of warfare, without resorting to what God did to punish the sinners in Sodom and Gomorrah, by causing brimstone and fire to rain upon the two countries (Genesis 19:24)?

Today, if a man were to believe in anything, it must be rational in outlook and scientific in origin, and just heresay carries nowhere. Just quoting scriptures is an attempt to overcome what is really unknown sans any established fact.

Aryadasa Ratnasinghe, Mattegoda.

>It is sad that Christians are unjustly accused of converting non-Christians to >Christianity unethically. Conversion to Christianity is not the work of man but of God. >It is only one who truly believes in Jesus and accepts Him as his or her personal Saviour >that will become a Christian.

Christians as a whole are not unjustly being accused of unethically converting non-Christians to Christianity. However, some evangelist organisations, who are relative newcomers to Sri Lanka, are engaged in converting poor Buddhists and Hindus to Christianity through unethical means. These evangelists do not seem to believe that conversion to Christianity is the work of God. Rather, they seem to believe it is the work of money, food, clothes and other such material inducements.

>"Yet to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to >become children of God - children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a >husband's will, but born of God." (John 1: 12,13).

>Conversion to Christianity is spiritual and, not mental or physical. Jesus said you must >be born again. (John 1:7) That is spiritual birth.

Perhaps it is, which is why there is no purpose or need for evangelist organisations to bring people to their religion through material inducement. Does this not suggest that the religion itself is unable to draw people to it through its teachings? Indeed, it may be construed as an insult to the word of God.

>A Christian knows that all have sinned and are condemned to an eternal hell.

>But a Christian also knows that anyone who believes in Jesus and accepts Him as one's own >personal Saviour will receive forgiveness of sin and will not have to suffer in hell. He >will receive eternal life and be taken at death by God to be in Heaven with Him forever. >Could one who knows these facts be without telling the good news of salvation to others >who do not know it, but are therefore heading for an eternal hell ? Could they be without >trying to persuade such to accept the salvation offered to them freely through belief in >Jesus?

This is a Christian belief or perspective. It is no more important or valid that the perspective of those who follow the Buddhist, Hindu or Islamic faiths. To suggest that one's own view of the world is the only true one is a sign of chauvinism and is certainly not conducive towards religious harmony in a multi-religious society. Preaching one's religion should not be condemned, but an exclusivist attitude that does not see the good in other religions must be put aside.

>Knowing these facts, would anyone want to keep them to one's self without telling others >and trying to persuade them to accept the salvation offered to them freely through belief >in Jesus Christ.

>Christians are also commanded by God to tell others.

>"Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the >Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." (Matthew 28:19)

People have free will to make their decisions. This is also taught in Christianity. They should be presented with all the facts, not surreptitiously brought into a faith through material inducement like offering jobs, money and clothing. To assume that good people are going to suffer in hell for eternity just because they do not believe in the Christian God or his son Jesus Christ, is to take a narrow minded view that was popular in the Dark Ages. It is a belief that is certainly anachronistic in the 21st century.

That God commanded Christians to "tell others" is fine. However, evangelist Christians must remember that Sri Lanka is a multi-religious society also composed of Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims. Thus before embarking on any evangelistic mission, it would be apt for them to take into consideration the effect their evangelist activities would have on religious harmony in the island. If their activities lead to violence and bloodshed, then the question must be asked whether their evangelism would be approved by the Christian embodiment of compassion and love - Jesus Christ - and an all-merciful loving God.

>To do this it is not necessary to bribe anyone with help of any kind or a gift. Since >salvation is a work of God, all that Christian has to do, is to tell others of God's love >for them and of the blessings they themselves have received from Him including salvation.

If this is so, why do evangelists bribe non-Christians with 'gifts' in oder to convert people? Certainly it is against the truth and honesty which God embodies.

>Then why do Christians help others or give gifts to non-Christians ? The love of God >constrains them to share with others the blessings they receive from Him. God is love and >he bestows His love to others through Christians.

>God's love creates in Christians a love for others which is the motivating power in them >for helping others.

>Christians must love their enemies and do good to them.

>If we love God we must also love our brethren, friend or foe.

Evangelists provide 'gifts' to the less fortunate because they are interested in converting these people to Christianity. It is not really charity, because when one gives to charity one does so without expecting anything in return. The evangelists, however, are merely interested in "harvesting souls" (a term they use) for their God. This is their motivation. They are not interested in the physical or mental well-being of potential converts. They are only interested in "harvesting souls" and doing their bit in the relentless battle against "Satan" who is allegedly trying to "steal souls" through nefarious means. Some would suggest this mission to "harvest souls" and "save them" is a delusion. We must ask ourselves whether it is worth the violence and the fraying of religious harmony in Sri Lanka.

>From the above facts, is it not abundantly clear that Christians are not helping people >in order to convert them, but are expressing their love to God and man ? Non-Christians >seeing the love of God projected through the lives of Christians, accept the God whom the >Christians love and believe in. This surely is no fault of the Christians.

Unfortunately, it is not abundantly clear. Certainly, some Christians maybe helping people out of the goodness of their heart, but many evangelists are not. The history of missionary activity around the world also forces us to think cautiously about the effects of Christian evangelism in Sri Lanka. Evangelists in Sri Lanka often portray other religions as pagan, evil and not worthy of consideration. Surely this is not an attitude we wish to foster in our beloved country?

>Christians also try to persuade non-Christians to accept Jesus as their Saviour by >preaching or personal conversation, without using any unethical means. People also begin >to believe in Jesus as a result of receiving healing and other blessings through the >power of God or after seeing others receive such blessings. Is this unethical?

Of course some people are involved in preaching their religion to non-Christians without resorting to unethical means. But aren't these people also assuming that their own religion is better than others; that others MUST be brought to their religion or suffer in hell for eternity? This is an attitude that needs to be addressed, along with the unethical means used by evangelists to convert Buddhists and Hindus to Christianity.

Both Buddhism and Hinduism do not hold themselves to be the only one true path. Thus followers of these two faiths are not burderned with a need to convert everyone to their respective religion. In fact, it is looked upon as anti-Buddhist and anti-Hindu for followers to coerce people to believe in these two religions. Since Buddhism and Hinduism have a long and distinguished presence in Sri Lanka and have coloured the culture of this country for several millenia, new evangelist groups should take some time out to reflect on the values upheld by these two religions, and ask themselves whether their militant missionary activity is congruent with the sensibilities of the vast majority of Sri Lankans.