John Longlois' response to P.N Benjamin's article

Dear Mr Benjamin
Thank you for your email in which you ask for comments on your article which you wrote in May 2005. In brief my comments are that:
(1) the uniqueness of Christ as the sole Saviour of humankind is the basic issue in what you have written,
(2) the uniqueness of the Christian message of salvation is applicable to all peoples at all times,
(3) this does not mean that the Christian message cannot be contextualised in local situations and
(4) through 2,000 years of historical tradition the Christian message often bears with it non-biblical accretions (both "Western" and "non-Western") that can be discarded.
My detailed comments are as follow:
1. The answer to your question in the title: "Convert to God or Christianity" is "neither". One "converts" (or "turns") to Jesus Christ alone for salvation, as the promised Messiah, not to Christianity. Jesus himself said: "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father [God] except through me". Across the world and in many languages "God" is a generic word, which refers to any supreme deity and not always to "Yahweh", the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2. Conversion to Jesus Christ, that is, coming to a living experience of Christ as Saviour and Lord, is a common experience throughout the Christian churches worldwide, although it takes many forms. It makes no difference whether one is in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox or Evangelical tradition. There are people in all churches with a living faith in Christ and those without such a faith.
3. You write: "If the churches were engaged in conversion spree, the whole of India would have been Christianised," claimed Richard Howell of Evangelical Fellowship of India". Maybe, but "Christianised" does not mean that they would have found salvation through Christ. Being "Christianised" is not enough. (Since writing this I have received Richard's denial of having said it.)
4. I would not personally have referred to Richard as "the guy", as I try to treat everyone with respect even when "I react swiftly and sharply" or disagree with them. It is for Richard to respond as to whether he is "living in the proverbial fool's paradise" and "touchingly naive and provocative".
5. Please let me know which "body" you are talking about when you write "But when a well-organised body financed by foreign money begins to shift a whole herd of people from one caste to another one begins to suspect their motives.". I feel certain that not all follow the same modus operandi. Incidentally, I do not know what caste you belong to, but as a non-Indian I would never refer to Dalits as a "herd of people".
6. Dr Kaaj Baggo may have been "a brilliant Danish Professor" but that does not mean that he was right when he said that "Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists should never give up their religion for the Christian Church." There are undoubtedly good aspects in other religions but Christians believe that salvation is only found in Jesus Christ.
7. I agree with you that "the Church should humble itself and find ways of identifying with other groups, taking Christ with them". We can and should all identify with the humanity and sinfulness of humankind.
8. Dr Baggo was right when he said that "Christ…was not the chairman of the Christian party". There is, of course, no such thing as "the Christian party". I do not know if Dr Baggo thought there was one or not.
9. If God is the Lord of the universe he "can" (not necessarily "will") work through every culture and religion but any revelation will be of the truth as revealed in His revelation to humankind.
10. I agree with you regarding "the crusading spirit". I am no admirer of the crusades which occurred from 1094 to 1450. They were a disastrous demonstration of what was not real Christianity. I am an admirer, however, of the evangelising work of St. Thomas and others in India in the first century A.D. and many missionaries to India since, including William Carey, who did much work on the translation of the Christian scriptures, and Mother Theresa, who as a superb example of the spirit of Christ.
11. I agree that we should stop singing hymns such as "Onward Christian soldiers marching as to war". It should be remembered that that particular hymn was written for children for a particular occasion in England in 1865 by the Rev. Sabine Baring-Gould, an Anglican clergyman. It was never meant to be sung in India. The hymnwriter explained it as follows: "One Whit-Monday, it was arranged that our school should join forces with that of a neighbouring village. I wanted the children to sing when marching from one village to another, but couldn't think of anything quite suitable; so I sat up at night, resolved that I would write something myself. "Onward, Christian Soldiers" was the result. It was written in great haste, and I am afraid some of the rhymes are faulty. Certainly nothing has surprised me more than its popularity."
12. I can remember the first time I came to work in India in 1969, I attended a Methodist Church. We sang "From Greenland's Icy Mountains". I was amazed as it was so out of context. I had hoped to learn some Indian hymnody.
13. I am not surprised that the Indian Christians were furious at Dr Baggo's comments and conclusions, as it is difficult to see how "Hindu Christianity" or "Buddhist Christianity" can be Christocentric Christianity at all in their pantheon of deities.
14. I note what you say about the very important Anglican Church dignitary who was Metropolitan of Calcutta. I personally have no time for opulent Christianity. We can so easily fall short of the example of Christ. To me Mother Theresa was an immensely greater example of Jesus Christ in Calcutta.
15. I entirely agree with you that "The most precious freedom that Indian Christians enjoy is to hold Jesus Christ as their Saviour, as the Son of God, as the "only true divinity"" and that "It is their absolute right to cherish that belief".
16. I have not heard that Christianity in India tries to impose this belief of only one true God, Jesus Christ, on the world, although you are better placed than me to know who has sought to make such an imposition. God has given all of us freedom of choice. To the best of my knowledge Indian Christians have always proclaimed and continue to proclaim the truth of Jesus Christ as the only way and it is then for others to accept this or to reject it. Imposition of belief is not a biblical concept.
17. You write: "If "all religions are ultimately for the welfare and salvation of humankind", then conversion is absurd". It is a big "IF". We Christians believe that Yahweh has revealed the truth to us through Jesus and it is our duty to proclaim that truth to the world, irrespective of whether it is accepted or not. Conversion to truth is rational. Adherence to non-truth is not.
18. If as you write "the Church leaders have miserably failed to take care of the 16 million Dalits converted to Christianity" this does not mean that conversion to Christ is wrong. It merely means that this unsatisfactory state of affairs must be addressed. I trust and pray that this will change and that they will see true Christlikeness in Indian Christians.
19. When you write: "Besides, indiscriminate conversion has ruined the spirit of Christianity into savagery." I assume you are referring to the Dalits. Conversion is an individual decision to follow Christ, not "indiscriminate". I agree with you that the Christian life is a path paved with suffering and service.
20. I agree with you that "Christians in India can play a creative and critical role in the life of our nation. What matters most is the quality of their life as Christians and the courage of their faith." Christ's call to conversion is a turning towards Yahweh, His Father.
21. If the Christian Church in today's India is to be true to its calling it has to proclaim the Gospel as written in the Christian scriptures without unbiblical occidental accretions. The Indian church has had long experience of this since the times of St Thomas and there is no reason why it should not rise to the challenge.
My belief in the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as sole Saviour is not through arrogance but through my humbly accepting the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible as God's final revelation to humankind.
John Langlois 19th August 2007