Background: In my post on Sunday “Twitter attack on #SoulVultures and the Nepalese Earthquake,” I noted that there are Hindus and others on Twitter harassing those Christians who expressed evangelistic prayers for Nepal in light of the recent earthquake and Christian evangelistic relief efforts. In Sunday’s post I gave a compact summary of the Gospel since people kept on misrepresenting it and I also dealt with the objection to Christian evangelistic relief effort and evangelistic prayers. Specifically I dealt with the objection by noting how the objection faces a self-defeater that is provided from within these guys’ own respective worldview. As of this moment that I am writing this, those who have commented on the post against us have yet to interact with the arguments that was presented. But overall at least the comments were civil. But this is not true on Twitter. We’ve been called many things and have many nasty things said about Christianity the last 48 hours. I want to share one of the better exchange that was not filled with profanity. I want to share this dialogue as a window for others to see the folly of opposing Christians sharing the Gospel when one’s own faulty worldview and religious outlook undermine the rational basis for making that objection. I want to note that since EvangelZ and I (SlimJim) both used the blog’s Twitter account, it is hard to distinguished my tweet and those by EvangelZ. Here I limiting the record of this dialogue to the tweets that were my own words. I also left out other Hindus ganging up against us during the dialogue as these tweets were largely distracting, harassing and not fruitful. I also focused only on the tweets of our dialogue partner directed towards my own words; and the tweets from our Hindu friend that I am responding to.
Apologetics Illustration:
I want to explain what I see the direction of the dialgue with the following illustration. Wouldn’t it be strange if a boxer ended up knocking himself out? Kind of like this guy did to himself:
I think this describes what our Hindu friend did to himself here. I think it was not so much I was “beating down” on him as it was more that his own beliefs were delivering his own knockout punches. The point of my dialogue was merely to point out that his own beliefs were refuting his objection against Christians engaging in evangelism to Hindus.
The Dialogue:
Our Hindu friend’s main thesis was, to put it in his words, “The ppl u seek to cnvrt have their own religion,y not accept that his religion is as precious/true for him as urs for u.”
We pick up where he started to describe his beliefs that religious claims are no more than mere preferences:
Hindu: u have the right to say my dad is the best dad in the world,as long as u add two words; “for me”.Sadly ppl dont realize this
The Domain for Truth: so religious claims are just subjective?
Hindu: certainly. Not all people think alike,hence there are different ways to approach the divine.Depending on ur culture/country.
The Domain for Truth: Ok so if you believe this why are you railing against another cultural way of giving aid? #contradiction
Hindu: u may like baked potatoes,i may like french fries.The potate does not change,how we consume it does.
The Domain for Truth: You say we should not condemn as wrong yet you do so? #Contradiction
The Domain for Truth: If you believe everything is mere preference; then you can’t condemn someone else’s preference including those of Christians
Hindu: because u are demeaning someone else’s religion/faith in the process.Also the whole idea that my god is superior to ur god.
The Domain for Truth: But your belief in religious relativism is an undercutting defeater to your complaint of Christianity; you can’t say its wrong
Hindu: Think of god as an all loving parent.IsHe GoingToSend 1 to hell and another toHeaven JustCos 1 called him DadAndAnother pop?
The Domain for Truth: But that’s just your relative view remember? You assert all religious propositions are mere preferences; r u evangelizing?
Hindu: i am just saying u dont have the right to say that baked potatoes are the only way,other ways of consuming it is wrong.
The Domain for Truth: Who made you one who gives right when its all up to individual preference? Do you see the irony?
Hindu: We dont because we respect all faiths.We accept that any effort made to reach god in any form is acceptable to god.
The Domain for Truth: Will you accept the Christian faith? Hm…
Hindu: How is it evangelizing,didnt ask anyone to leave their faith.
The Domain for Truth: Evangelism is sharing one’s faith
Hindu: no.
The Domain for Truth: Let me explain: If you say religious claims are preferences its just their choice. But then you say “u dont have the right”
Hindu: nope.Accept that the religion in which u are born is the best for u.Its called swadharma(ones own dharma) in hinduism.
Hindu: ur mom might be best for u,not for me.for me my mother is the best.Always remember that and there will be no quarrels.
The Domain for Truth: Thank you for that term Swadharma
The Domain for Truth: But then you quarrel with someone’s else view? Do you see the irony of your claims and what you are doing?
Hindu: did not ask u to leave ur faith.U asked me a question and I responded.
The Domain for Truth: But you attacked our faith and our God
Hindu: Saying Whites are better than blacks is blatant racism.Same holds true for religions,shoudlnt it.religious racism.
The Domain for Truth: But is this objectively true? Remember you assert claims that are religious in nature is just subjective preferences
Hindu: nope.Discussing is different from abusing/calling names.didnt ask u the convert or speak ill abt Christianity,now did I??
The Domain for Truth: You didn’t ask us to convert; true; but you did argue against it how is that accepting?
Hindu: haha when did i attack,using the victim card now are we??
The Domain for Truth: Look at the thread and see what you have to say about Christianity
Hindu: Saying my version is the only version certainly is silly.
The Domain for Truth: No it’s a logical observation that two contarry claims can’t be right
The Domain for Truth: But is the Christian version silly in light of your mockery against it in this thread? #Contradiction
Hindu: my atman was already created divine.Only I have not realized it yet.no concept of sin with atman.
The Domain for Truth: “my atman was already created divine.Only I have not realized it”<–You know this but you didn’t realize it? #Contradiction
Hindu: no saying my way/religion is the “only” religion certainly is.
The Domain for Truth: If you really are tolerant can you tolerate a religion that says it’s the only way?
Be sure to check out Gospel is Desperately Needed for the Lost in Nepal.
The Domain for Truth 
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
Thanks for re-blogging this!
You’re welcome Jim!
I like this part:
Hindu: We dont because we respect all faiths.We accept that any effort made to reach god in any form is acceptable to god.
Michael: So you respect the effort to reach god in the form of Christian evangelism? Great, do you think you’re a good person?
Keep fighting for the faith, Jim. God sees.
Ah, I see what you did there. That was a good door to the use of the Law to show one’s need for the Savior. Nice move! Michael, thank you for your comment and your support brother! I’m glad you are a brother in Christ in the faith!
Thanks for this great example SJ of whorking iwth the lost compassionately and yet firmly.
Thank you Rob for your support and comment
It completely shows how this sic opportunist missionary is trying to show his religion is the only way & also he has no respect for others belief. Why u try to impose ur beliefs on other and when a person say i do respect ur belief but i will practice my own u practice ur own this sic retard manipulates words and attacks his religion so sic of u idiot
Hey Solefighter,
1.) “It completely shows how this sic opportunist missionary is trying to show his religion is the only way”
Response: First off, like you this Hindu didn’t like Christianity’s claims to be the only way. In my dialogue I addressed how his case based upon relativism is self-defeating. If you see me as an “sic opportunist missionary” for pointing out the problem so be it. But I don’t think it is ever “sick” when one takes the opportunity to point out fallacies in one’s argument. Secondly, don’t just express displeasure of the position I hold during the dialogue: please, address the substance of my argument. Thirdly, can someone who is a Hindu say a Christian is wrong for saying his religion is the only way? I submit a Hindu cannot in light of his beliefs from Hinduism. I argued that here: https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2015/04/26/twitter-attack-on-soulvultures-and-the-nepalese-earthquake/. If you disagree with that also, please present a sound argument and not just express disagreement with my conclusion.
2.) “also he has no respect for others belief.”
Response: First off, should beliefs be respected? I don’t know if we should respect all beliefs. There are irrational and dangerous beliefs out there that I’m not going to respect. Secondly, you also would agree with my position as your own comment have expressed that you don’t respect the beliefs that I hold to. Thirdly, don’t misconstrue what I’m saying. I think not all ideas is worthy of respect but that doesn’t mean I hold no respect for persons. Respect the person even if you disagree and refute their beliefs. I don’t think it’s right to disrespect the person because everyone is still made in the image of God. Note I have not disrespected you or the Hindu I was dialoguing with. I did not cuss at them, wish harm upon them nor called him names. I did not call anyone “sic opportunist,” “ sic retard,” nor “idiot” like one comment on this post.
3.) “Why u try to impose ur beliefs on other”
Response: First off, your word choice of “impose” is a loaded term. It draws connotation of oppressing someone to believe against their will. I don’t think this term reflect what I am trying to do. I cannot force someone to my beliefs. I may present my view, give arguments and refute those contrary to it, but at the end of the day I don’t have that power to make them hold to my beliefs if they don’t want it. That is not my prerogative. Secondly, your question here is self-refuting. If it is wrong to share what one believe is correct, what are you doing here? There’s an irony to your words when you come on this blog, comment on it and tell us our beliefs are wrong.
4.) “and when a person say i do respect ur belief”
Response: I must add that the Hindu I was dialoguing with did attack our Christian beliefs although he said he respected it. I did not include them as they were “noise” to the more substantial part of our conversation which I included here.
5.) “but i will practice my own u practice ur own”
Response: If he really meant it when he said that he wants me to practice my own faith then why did he come over to our twitter against us? All this began when I said I wish to pray for Nepal with the Earthquake and for the Gospel to be spread. Sharing the Gospel and praying is my religious practice and yet he chose to come to disagree with it. The contradictions are piling.
6.) “this sic retard manipulates words”
Response: It’s always possible I misunderstood something someone says. I’m not perfect. So if you think I manipulated words, don’t just say it, prove it.
7.) “and attacks his religion so sic of u idiot”
Response: First off, remember my previous point that a bad belief is not immune to criticism. I don’t think there are good reasons that religious beliefs should be an exception. Secondly, if you think my criticism of his religious beliefs was not fair or logically sound, please address that rather than give us a comment that fail to interact with the content of this post.
Reblogged this on oogenhand and commented:
Post-Modernism and any other forms of relativism are hard to hold, unless you state that there is one truth: there are no OTHER truths.
Hell is eternal, Hell is eternal, Hell is eternal…
Thank you for reblogging this!
Great dialogue and demonstration of patience. Very tough to deal with blatant contradiction like that when the other person refuses to see it.
Appreciate your comment J.W! You are right about it being difficult to deal with such a person. Thanks for your support J.W. in more ways than one. My brother in Christ.
[…] Self-knockout: A Twitter dialogue with a Hindu against Christian Evangelism– The Nepalese Earthquake led to many Christians praying not just for the physical but also spiritual needs of those impacted. This led to major pushback from many Hindus who argued that Christians are “soul vultures” and should not evangelize. Here’s an interesting look at a dialogue with one of these Hindus who attacked Christians for sharing their faith. […]
Thanks for sharing this!
[…] Self KnockOut: A Twitter Dialogue with a Hindu against Christian Evangelism […]