Two Christian girls are talking to a Hindu girl, and the one Christian girl discovers that the guest is not a Christian, quite shockingly. So the Christian girl (the hostess) starts a discussion with the Hindu girl about the fact that she isn't a Christian and launches right into how she needs to "convert". The Christian girl really tries to be nice but doesn't know how to explain it very well. After some awkward discussion she says flat out (really believing she is saying it nicely), that you need to ask Jesus to come into your heart!
The Hindu girl insists that she was raised Hindu with her gods, saying "Hinduism is all I know".
Then the Christian girl expresses that since the Hindu girl is following false gods that she is going to hell--both Christian girls express great sadness, and the one speaking says, "It's really hard for me to see ...people...that are...my friends...and...I know they're going to hell, and I really don't want them to go to hell..."--clearly this girl doesn't understate her feelings. The Hindu girl insists kindly that she doesn't believe in Hell, and says, "I've always been Hindu". They ask the girl pray with them, and the girl seems a little hesitant but goes ahead. They all hold hands and the Christian girl proceeds to ask the girl to "let God inside of you". The Christian girl asks the Hindu girl, "Do you feel God?".
The girl says, "I feel Krishna".
The other Christian girl says, "Are you sure that's not like Jesus?"
The Christian girl says, "Christian? Krishna? Like Christian?"
The Hindu girl responds--"Like Krishna."
The other Christian girl says, "Is that what you all Jesus in your language?"
The Hindu girl responds, "I feel...nothing."
After more chatter about describing what it should feel like, the Hindu girl says, "Look guys, I'm Hindu..."
After more chatter, The Christian girl looks away and sadly says, "I don't understand why it's not coming into you."
Later, the Other Christian girl says, "You're just not open enough."
The hostess says, "This is hopeless"
The other Christian girl says, "You Just have to say no to the Devil and yes to Jesus, that's what it comes down to."
As they continue talking, the one Christian girl doing the talking says, "I know it's not your fault you're Hindu, but I don't know if I can be around that type of presence."
After some more interaction and the hostess girl saying she doesn't know if they can be friends, the Hindu girl says, "Well, it was nice meeting you."
The other Christian girl asks, "you're leaving?".
The Hindu girl says, "Well, I mean, you know, you said you said we can't be friends." The Christian girl tries to negotiate with her to stay, but the Hindu girl politely says that she has to go home anyway. (If you really want to watch this video from the hostess' vlog, here it is)

There are several problems here. It is very unfortunate that the Christian girl didn't stop and listen after asking the girl "Krishna? Like Christian?"--if she had listened to the answer (which would be no, probably followed by an explanation), she could have learned something...If you aren't going to study other religions, at least listen to people before you try to cram a spirit into their head by sheer force--especially considering that you don't even know what's in there to begin with. I'm not trying to belittle the hostess and her Christian friend, I am just saying that she and many other Christians can learn through the experience, which I'm sure God allowed to happen for that very reason. If nothing else it is very valuable as a way to discuss what we can do to communicate better.

The Video is entitled, "Converting an indian to Christianity - don't let the devil win". The description is as follows: "My friend saraa is indian and i learned about her culture and realized she needs to become christian, i wanna save her but right now its not looking so good :(. " Both the title and description of the video use Christianese. I'll go mind-unbending detail with a similar example later.

There are two major problems with Christianese:

1. It is simply poor communication, putting non-Christianese (normal) language through a Christianese filter when you speak; and, even when you listen!
2. It can interpret normal events as Christian, causing a Christian who is ignorant of history or reality to demonstrate their ignorance. This problematic way of defining God reduces your evidence for him and perhaps even your concept of him to "The God of the Gaps".

Christianese is poor communication, and exposes many American Christian assemblies for what they have become--exclusive clubs. They are not only exclusive for people who fit in and who agree with things without ever needing or wanting a logical historical explanation, but also very often Christians talk about Jesus exclusively at that place. This is causes lingo to become widespread, hindering communication with the outside world and causing the problem of exclusiveness to become a self-reinforcing cycle.

I once discussed this issue with an upperclassman roomate while we were both attending PBU, and he responded that lingo is necessary otherwise we would spend so much time explaining what we are talking about that we would never get to our point. But, I can give examples of how creative use of language could avoid both problems. The example I gave during that conversation was "Eschatology"--I never liked that word, and it sounds like far too much like Scatology (I didn't mention that at the time). He said that if we didn't have lingo, every time we wanted to refer to Eschatology, we would have to say "the study of prophecy and the end times". I decided I would think about it. I came up to him later that evening with my new way of saying it: "End Times Study", and I also pointed out that this phrase had fewer syllables. That made him think. Of course we were friends and this casual discussion didn't get either of us upset at eachother and we both reserved the right to come to our own conclusions. My new solution is to call it: "Prophecy Studies". I challenge you to find any place where the word "Eschatology" is not rendered obsolete, in favor of this creative use of common language. While scientists use lingo (such as Greek or Latin terms) to communicate with the rest of the world, it is not as though Christians would be hindered talking to other Christians by using normal (and if necessary, easily translatable) language. Here are some examples of creative use of language, followed by their Christianese version:

• "Prophecy Studies" instead of "Eschatology"
• "Here are some ways that affects us" instead of "I have a methodology for you"
• "We learned about the Holy Spirit" instead of "We learned about Pneumatology"
• "I have a book about what makes a Christian", instead of "I have a book about Soteriology"
• "Let's talk about who Christ is" instead of "Let's begin studying Christology"
• "statement of faith" instead of "creed"
• "methods of assembly" instead of "ecclesiology"
• "interpreting" instead of "exegesis"
• "method of interpretation" instead of "hermeneutic"

I can't believe Christians actually use these terms. Theological terms could continue on and make a list many times longer, unfortunately. Hopefully though, you get the point and agree that there is a problem.

Now, let's look at some terms in the Bible and look at Strong's Greek Dictionary to find more accurate translations:

• "speaking other languages" or "speaking in an unknown language" instead of calling both "speaking in tongues", which unfortunately we do despite that the Bible makes a distinction and the latter is not allowed in the assembly (1 Corinthians 14:28). (from Biblical Greek: glossa)
• "associating" (or "association") instead of "communion" (from Biblical Greek: koinonia)
• "giving thanks" instead of "eucharist" (from Biblical Greek: eucharisteo)
• "immerse" instead of "baptize" (from Biblical Greek: baptizo)
• "adhere to Jesus" instead of "believe on Jesus" or "Believe in Jesus" (from Biblical Greek: pisteuo)
• "assembly" instead of "church" (from Biblical Greek: ekklesia)

As George Orwell very tellingly said in his 1946 novel "Politics and the English Language", "...if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better... debased language... is in some ways very convenient."

Because of the misuse of language, some Christians have come to believe that "associating" is the same thing as "giving thanks" and that they both mean drinking non-alcoholic grape juice out of little cups and eating tiny little pieces of crackers in a big building with a point on it, while others have come to believe that "giving thanks" means paying a man in long robes ( Matthew 23:5-13 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2023:5-13&version=AMP ) to use rituals and objects borrowed from the law (incense) and ancient paganism (wafer shaped like and held up as a solar disc) attempt to conjure up Jesus' blood and body, and re-crucify it (Hebrews 6:6, Hebrews 9:28, 1 Peter 3:18). It is amazing, isn't it? You can see how as long as all the terms have been redefined, all of this seems Biblical. I guess George Orwell was right.

It is important for Christians to be able to communicate without using lingo, in order to avoid cutting off communication with the rest of the world, and to avoid Christian leaders from redefining Christianity while still appearing Biblical.

To make the problem worse, even whole phrases made up of simple words can have a Christianese meaning. I actually heard about an incident in a Christian Elementary where I attended where a new girl began attending. I was in the same class as this girl in High School with most of the same classmates for years following the event. It wasn't until after graduating that I heard the story. The girl went to a church that wasn't as rigid about 50's american values (which for a broad array of application replaced the Bible at this Baptist Church's school). The girls in the Christian school were talking about the supposed problem of this girl's supposedly liberal views and one said to the other friends, "we need to get [so and so] saved, because she wears pants." Ponder that for a moment. With the utmost respect for the girls involved in the incident, and keeping in mind how much we (hopefully) have matured since then, I am amazed at the sheer number of errors packed into such a small sentence!

When the girl said, "We need to get [so and so] saved" she was using the word saved, which is lingo and does not explain the problem, nor even gives details about the solution. I'm not trying make the girls feel silly, and I know they were only in elementary but their ideas came from somewhere--probably from someone who should know better--to continue, I also don't like the way the process is worded, because it sounds like taking a dog to the bathtub to get washed. While there may be truth in that metaphor (assuming their is guilt, which in this case their probably wasn't), but it doesn't provide a respectful way of wording the process. But wait, there's more. It also assumes that they are the ones who must accomplish the act. But wait, there's even more. It also completely ignores that the girl needs to make her own decision--ignoring that is also disrespectful. Now, let's look into the next part--I know I am getting wordy but this is very important--"because she wears pants": Wow. Wow...Okay...let's see...this is really, really something. It assumes that a girl wearing pants means the girl is not saved...but wait...we missed a couple steps...It assumes that wearing pants...is crossdressing...and that not realizing something is sin...makes one not saved. Wow. I can't talk about that anymore. I think you get my point.

Now, one step beyond just cramming spirits into peoples' heads as in the story of the Hindu girl, there are Christians who have answers for their faith that depend on nothing more than ingorance. Allow me to explain. Beyond saying words that are Christianese, and even beyond phrases that are Christianese, one can actually make the error of interpreting actual events as Christian that are not. This goes beyond language and creates a kind of "Christianese Worldview". Interpreting normal events that are part of the world system (whether satanic or neutral) as being Christian is believing in a "God of the Gaps" which has been seen as the Achilles heel of Christianity by many: because in this false (and not biblically-oriented) model that many Christians unknowingly believe, explanations of nature seem to reduce the need for God.

I once heard a dear woman say in front of everyone during a meeting in a Baptist Church, "Every time we get sick, God heals us!" and really believed that the phenomena proved that Jesus heals people! Perhaps she should thank God for the immune system, and save her public speaking for saying it is so amazing how the immune system exemplifies how ecosystems are impossible to evolve because they only function when all the complex parts are in place and otherwise die or are a waste. This way of explaining people becoming well from common illness focuses more on origins of things that are describable (like the Bible does!) as opposed to saying that things not able to be described (at least from her knowledge) prove that God exists.

Some Christians believe that "America is a Christian nation" and that Christianity must be therefore enhanced somehow by that fact. They are making a big mistake, and this is also painting America as a "miracle" and painting "God of the Gaps" as the explanation. America is a freemason/cabbalistic nation, and that is very easily provable. Speaking to Christians, do you think you live in a Christian nation? Take off the blinders that your favorite politicians gave you. Your false belief in a Christian America is only allowing the "tyrants among us" (to borrow a term from Gore Vidal's interview with Charlie Rose), to manipulate you. Freemasons are taught that people are cattle, and you become part of that system when you believe that either of the two major parties is "right", "left", "center" or anything other than very far below anything good. The nation of America succeeded, at best, by following the aspects of freemasonry that are borrowed from the Bible; not because we say "God Bless America" and "In God We Trust", proving his existence by our resultant national strength. Saying those things is a disgrace in the first place since our nation has been cursing him and bringing shame to him for hundreds of years just like any other nation, because people are imperfect and so are their institutions. Instead, maybe we should proclaim the power of Christ to free us from the materialistic slavery induced by the monopolistic corporations that have controlling interest in our government, and by the government now having controlling interest in monopolistic corporations via bailouts.

If every time you learn the explanation for something your evidence of God gets smaller, you probably believe in "The God of the Gaps". Because your idea of God is based on ignorance! Here are some things that do not prove that God exists in and of themselves without further explanation of your point: "a baby's laughter", "a beautiful flower", "a delicious plant", "the sparkle in a father's eye". People may be able to be a witness of spirits and an unexpectedly changed life, but only some kind of knowledge can show someone which spirit is the right spirit. The Bible does speak about the awesomeness of nature--but instead of saying that it's operation defies explanation, it says that it's operation is awesome (many of the Psalms); and then goes on to say that it's origin is what defies explanation (Romans 1). Christians could appear much less ignorant by not using "The God of the Gaps" as evidence for God, but instead focusing on cosmogeny like the Bible does, and learning about things like Complex Specified Information. To prove that Yahweh is the creator, Christians have to also learn about the Bible, history, and at least have a simple understanding of other religions.

For something to be truly evidence of the supernatural, something would have to truly defy an explanation within the natural universe. Step one is to learn about the natural world. If you intend to use a piece of evidence, try researching it first to make sure that the "gap" hasn't been filled (like in the example of the immune system above). Maybe, as I did above, you could even use the science to show how amazing something is instead of making a claim that it is a miracle without even knowing what is happening. Of course, to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that something is miraculous and needs an explanation outside of our normal understanding of the universe, one could speak about the ubiquity of spiritual experiences and some specific instances of it that match the Bible's pre-existing view of the other realm (try Spirit of the Rainforest). Other starting points may include Complex Specified Information, and fulfilled prophecy (see Josh McDowell's "More Than a Carpenter"). Hopefully typical North American Evangelicals can learn to speak English, so that the dialog with the outside world can be re-opened.

Recommendations:

Make sure that you are willing to listen when people have questions or want to say something. If you don't know how to respond to something, be willing to say that you don't know how to respond to something but would like to think about how you would respond to it. This willingness can come from letting go of fear of failure by trusting God to work, and from humility. "So neither he who plants is anything nor he who waters, but [only] God Who makes it grow and become greater." (Amplified Bible, 1 Corinthians 3)

If you're having trouble communicating, don't give up! I was jittery and unsure of myself in high school and even for many months while I was first doing street evangelism as I chose street evangelism for my "ministry credit" at PBU. But since I didn't give up, and since I researched each question I couldn't answer, I learned a lot. Some people shy away from talking about religion and politics just because it can be awkward. But if people learn to be mature about these issues, there is no reason to avoid talking about the two things that shape our world the most--and if someone finds out they don't like you, at least you don't have a shallow relationship. Perhaps you can even cooperate with people who have different views where necessary, and both parties can even learn and listen. If either party is unwilling to even discuss things that come up in conversation that are a point of disagreement, perhaps that is time to let go of an unhealthy friendship, as long as specifying this behavior is given as the reason instead of "you're not a Christian".

If someone is a blank slate you must try to teach them what Christianity is before asking them to accept the Spirit of Jesus. If they don't understand or don't know enough about it, just share your faith and let God do the rest. Then later if you think God wants you to say more about it, say more about it, but it is an unfair request for you to ask someone to accept a spirit whom they know nothing about. Even the idea of asking Jesus to "come into your heart" is like asking a person not a part of your company to come to a job and work before you hire them. "Jesus to coming into your heart" must be prefaced with who Jesus is and committing to follow him. Even Jesus said "...which of you, wishing to build a [a]farm building, does not first sit down and calculate the cost [to see] whether he has sufficient means to finish it?". (Luke 14:28, Amplified Bible) Of course it is obvious that any cost would be worth going to heaven (keeping in mind a correct view of heaven which is a new earth, not sitting on a cloud playing a harp); but, knowing what you must turn away from is necessary in order to turn from it and be saved--turning from a life dependent on sin, on the diabolical world system, and on man-made gods. The Holy Spirit coming into your being is Jesus' job--it is his immersing you to cleanse your spirit, in a real way and not an imaginary way, giving you new life and making you born again.

"Because if you acknowledge and confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and in your heart believe (adhere to, trust in, and rely on the truth) that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart a person believes (adheres to, trusts in, and relies on Christ) and so is justified (declared righteous, acceptable to God), and with the mouth he confesses (declares openly and speaks out freely his faith) and confirms [his] salvation." (Amplified Bible, Romans 10:9-10)

Still, you have to know who Jesus is and what he expects before you can rely on him.

But, you may say, "this sounds hard! I don't want to learn things!" Well, you can share your experience with people, but experience of the supernatural might only succeed in proving that you have encountered a spirit, not that you have the Creator Spirit nor that the Creator Spirit is Yahweh, nor that Yahweh's Son is Jesus; so it won't be a good enough explanation when people begin to ask questions, and if you don't identify the spirit the way the scripture does you or the person you speak to might not acquire the right spirit. You may respond, "well that's why we have smart people, to explain things!" Well, you may not be able to explain to a cosmologist that time dilation caused by God stretching out the universe (Job 9:8, Psalm 104:2) accounts for redshift (maybe one day you will), but you can at least listen to people and be okay with looking into things that you would be willing to discuss further, and let people know what the Bible says in English instead of Christianese.

Herald and preach the Word! Keep your sense of urgency [stand by, be at hand and ready], whether the opportunity seems to be favorable or unfavorable. [Whether it is convenient or inconvenient, whether it is welcome or unwelcome, you as preacher of the Word are to show people in what way their lives are wrong.] And convince them, rebuking and correcting, warning and urging and encouraging them, being unflagging and inexhaustible in patience and teaching. For the time is coming when [people] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold, And will turn aside from hearing the truth and wander off into myths and man-made fictions.

(Amplified Bible, 2 Timothy 4:2-4, emphasis added)

I recommend the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Ben Stein (Ferris Bueller's Day Off) plays a professor that is fired for questioning evolution. It is a great docudrama on academia.

Friends can comment on facebook (comment under the link for this article title).

Contact Page