Where Raucous Is the Norm, Bible Study

[laylo]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

So you've moved from confidence to doubt?

Nope, confident they didn't- doubt they did.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

My point is, that based on the entire tone of the article - one of evangelizing to fraternities and sororities which is, AFAICT the entire purpose of IV and Greek IV - that statement is not out of left field. It fits in pretty well with the sentiment of being a missionary among one's GLO, confronting other Christians who aren't living up to one's own standard and so on. You said you saw NO pressure in this article, and put all the responsibility on the people who felt pressured. Funny thing is, if you're the one evangelizing - and I'm going to assume you've been a member of this group and thus have participated - your opinion about whether you're pressuring someone else or not doesn't actually matter. If they tell you you're pressuring them, you are. I can state for me that whether when I was Christian or now, such things would have been annoying, and if persistent, most certainly pressuring. People have tried to 'save' me before, and that was while I was Christian. It's pressuring, particularly when those people are not people you can just ignore because you live with them, or they're the financial chair, or whatever. It's not just about 'declining' something you're not interested in.

That's not even getting into the idea of evangelizing to/around gay brothers and sisters and the intolerance that can entail even in a college environment. I don't know what IV's attitude towards homosexuality is, but I can guess.

Maybe on your campus, maybe in your experience things weren't that bad, but these things do exist and the statements made in this article are reflective of THAT attitude. "Rubbing shoulders with sinners" is merely an extension of that attitude, and whether the words themselves are literal, or were said in a joke, or reflected the overall feeling of the conference, they're not some sort of ridiculous extreme past what was already represented in the article.

To address what you said about me, the form of evangelism that I participated in didn't involve anything other than holding events and inviting people to them. My campus was hostile to religion, yet I never heard a complaint about pressure. Evangelism with tact and respect and without unwanted discussions is very possible.

My point is, regardless of what some Christians do, all these students are talking about doing is starting conversations and having bible studies. I don't see how this causes more pressure than starting conversations or holding events supporting any kind of cause. We disagree on what makes pressure- I think of pressuring someone as compelling them in a way that purposefully causes discomfort if they don't go along.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by laylo

Nope, confident they didn't- doubt they did.



To address what you said about me, the form of evangelism that I participated in didn't involve anything other than holding events and inviting people to them. My campus was hostile to religion, yet I never heard a complaint about pressure. Evangelism with tact and respect and without unwanted discussions is very possible.

My point is, regardless of what some Christians do, all these students are talking about doing is starting conversations and having bible studies. I don't see how this causes more pressure than starting conversations or holding events supporting any kind of cause. We disagree on what makes pressure- I think of pressuring someone as compelling them in a way that purposefully causes discomfort if they don't go along.

Welcome to the oblivion of the majority to the minority. If you're the one being evangelized to (by the majority religion in the country particularly) you're the one who gets to decide when enough is enough. You missed the point that it wasn't about how awesome you were about evangelizing nicely, but that "your" opinion as the evangelizer doesn't matter

Being told you're going to hell if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Personal Savior (once happened to me at a New Year's Eve Concert. Yes it was at a church, but no it wasn't advertised as a religious event) is pressuring. But so is someone repeatedly trying to 'start a conversation about Christ' with you because they're genuinely worried about your soul. As sisters, you generally feel some sort of obligation to each other, and as housemates you might not have the ability to escape it. Consider particularly if there are only a few non-Christians in the chapter, how quickly a bible study goes from 'optional side event' to 'essentially mandatory.'
You might not have been 'that person', but your assumption that none of these people are 'that person' is probably wrong. Just as 'those people' exist among the general population, so 'those people' probably exist within the smaller selected population. .

And frankly, the more I read, on their own site, of the organization the less I can support any of them. I'm sure some of them are nice people, but I'll be judging the hell out of them. You know, loving the sinner and hating the sin. I'm sure they understand that.

[laylo]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Welcome to the oblivion of the majority to the minority. If you're the one being evangelized to (by the majority religion in the country particularly) you're the one who gets to decide when enough is enough. You missed the point that it wasn't about how awesome you were about evangelizing nicely, but that "your" opinion as the evangelizer doesn't matter

Being told you're going to hell if you don't accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Personal Savior (once happened to me at a New Year's Eve Concert. Yes it was at a church, but no it wasn't advertised as a religious event) is pressuring. But so is someone repeatedly trying to 'start a conversation about Christ' with you because they're genuinely worried about your soul. As sisters, you generally feel some sort of obligation to each other, and as housemates you might not have the ability to escape it. Consider particularly if there are only a few non-Christians in the chapter, how quickly a bible study goes from 'optional side event' to 'essentially mandatory.'
You might not have been 'that person', but your assumption that none of these people are 'that person' is probably wrong. Just as 'those people' exist among the general population, so 'those people' probably exist within the smaller selected population. .

And frankly, the more I read, on their own site, of the organization the less I can support any of them. I'm sure some of them are nice people, but I'll be judging the hell out of them. You know, loving the sinner and hating the sin. I'm sure they understand that.

I don't think I missed the point, I just don't agree with your definition of pressuring. However, even if I did agree, we aren't talking about a situation in which people have expressed that they feel pressured- you're assuming that if students are evangelizing, others must feel pressured, and I don't think that assumption is correct. The students who wanted to propose bible studies said that they feared ridicule and rejection, which doesn't sound like the majorities of their chapters studied the bible whether they considered themselves Christian or not.

Telling people they're going to hell is pressure, as would be making a bible study mandatory or repeatedly trying to start a conversation with the same person, but none of these things are in the article. The student who said he was hoping to start a conversation went on to discuss how the conversations began with others asking him about his temperament. I'm not assuming those things don't happen and haven't once stated that they don't. I'm saying there is no evidence from the article that it does, so to say that it does is an assumption.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by laylo

I don't think I missed the point, I just don't agree with your definition of pressuring. However, even if I did agree, we aren't talking about a situation in which people have expressed that they feel pressured- you're assuming that if students are evangelizing, others must feel pressured, and I don't think that assumption is correct.

It's not about assumptions, it's about people in HERE saying that they see it in the article. Or that they would face it in certain circumstances.

Because when you say this:

I don't think anything in the article demonstrated these kids putting pressure on non-Christians. People are projecting their own experiences of pressure onto this group.

You're apparently the only one who doesn't see it, so I encourage you to examine the lens through which you see the world. Every other poster on here has said this article was problematic at best, offensive at worst, and you just keep on white knighting them.

Also, funny that you keep ignoring the pretty horrid things that the organization believes/supports about homosexuality.

[ASTalumna06]

I know I'm late to this party, but I had to chime in:

“Our goal is to help students lead a Christian life inside the Greek system, as contradictory as that may sound,” said Eric Holmer, the communications director for Greek InterVarsity.

…

Jesus turned water into wine “to get the party going,” said a young woman who traveled here from Willamette University in Oregon, adding that parties were an opportunity to show that Christianity could be fun.

…

Kurt Skaggs, a junior at Indiana University, sees himself as something of a missionary. “Some people go to Africa or South America,” he said, explaining his decision to join Sigma Phi Epsilon. “I can go to my frat house, where my single goal is to glorify God and share the Gospel.”

…He said that he tried not to be preachy, but that he was not shy about confronting other professed Christians if they started drinking too much or engaged in casual sex.

…

Kaitlyn Boyce, a junior at the University of Cincinnati… said [at parties] she tries “to take care of friends as much as I can, trying to minimize the damage” by, for example, telling a sister she has drunk enough.

It is not solely the New York Times that made Greek IV sound bad (unless they misquoted everyone and no one had a problem with it).

Originally Posted by laylo

I don't think it would be different- as I said, I've been invited to many things I don't believe in. The word "missionary" means different things to different people. Preaching without invitation, taking away people's choice in whether or not to listen to you, or expressing judgments on their activities is pressure. Saying, "I'm going to have bible study in my room, you're welcome to join," is not pressure in my eyes.

Clearly you can see from the quotes above, and from this one here:

Joe Grotheer, a member of Phi Gamma Delta at DePauw University in Greencastle, Ind., said some Jewish brothers had objected to Bible study in the common area, so he and others moved the sessions to a bedroom.

… they’re not just inviting people to events and having bible study in their rooms. I know that I would also feel awkward if I walked into a common area of my sorority house and there was a bible study going on. It’s not even so much “pressuring” people as much as it is making others uncomfortable.

Originally Posted by laylo

I'd bet my entire salary that no one in this interview called non-Christians "sinners." This is the way people often assume Christians think about others.

So it’s ok for you to say that non-Christians are judgmental, but it’s not ok for non-Christians to say that Christians are?

Originally Posted by laylo

but we're not talking about any random Christians, we're talking about a specific organization with specific goals. As someone very familiar with this organization, I am confident that this wording does not fit the doctrine of its members.

Oh, so as long as Christians have goals, they don’t believe that non-Christians are sinners. Yea, I get it now..

Originally Posted by laylo

I'm saying that they are a specific group of Christians who agreed to certain statements before becoming leaders in the organization. I have extreme doubts that they would use these words knowing what those statements are.

Originally Posted by laylo

No, I don't know all of the members, but I highly doubt that someone said this particular quote…

Just as I wouldn’t assume that every member of this group is a “missionary” who has been sent from God to “save the sinners,” you shouldn’t assume that not one member of this entire organization does think that way.

Originally Posted by laylo

Sorry if the analogy was whack. My point was that my feelings aren't about knowing these individuals, but about knowing what the organization requires.

To make sweeping generalizations about all members of any group cannot be done with absolute certainty. Organizations can require one thing, but people are still free to do as they please. Just look at our fraternities and sororities – all of our members say our creeds, believe in our mottos and perform our rituals, yet I'm willing to bet that every GLO has had at least one member who hasn’t lived up to those creeds, mottos and rituals at all times. Most, if not all GLOs have a GPA requirement.. not everyone reaches it all the time. Many GLOs have required meetings that everyone must attend.. I’m sure at least a few people have missed a meeting with no legitimate excuse. And don’t even get me started about what other people think… I couldn’t tell you, because I don’t know every member of my sorority, and I don’t pretend to know them. We are all individuals who are free to say, think, and do as we please, regardless of what organization we are a part of.