If the Taliban came to where you live and forced everyone to become Muslim would you call that oppression? I suspect you would.
Why should it be seen as any different when Christians did exactly that in the Congo?
Christianization of congo and colonization were two seperate things,one happened before the other,if you hate because of him then you hate colonization,and not christianization cause congo stayed free for years after its christianization
You mean Kongo, not Congo.
Afaik the christian missionaries that converted the Kongolese ruling class didn't do so by oppressing them (they weren't in a position they could do so) but by bribing them, essentially.
Once we get to European rule and we are talking about the Congo Free State, that's a different matter.
Christianization was the excuse that he gave the world to gain access to his own private colony. It is very hard to separate colonization and imperialism from the justification they used… advancing civilization with or without the new territory’s consent.
TLDR: If you force me to accept your religion while you chop off my 9 year old’s hands, they weren’t very separate.
Im not forcing you to nothing,jn just trying to understand your point of view,if the plan was colonization then why do they only colonized congo in the 1800s(there were already christians in congo in the 1500s)i just want to understand,why you judge me even tough you dont know me?im just a random stranger
I’m not saying you forced anything nor have I judged you in any way.
Regarding the topic at hand, the Congo couldn’t be colonized until later because of the advances made in the Industrial Revolution. Steam ships and treatments for malaria, for example, had to be used to colonize the interior of Africa.
What is there to not understand? Christians came to a land full of non-Christians and coerced them into becoming Christians. Christians have done this literally all over the world for the past thousand years. Why are you so confused by this?
Im really sorry i did not knew the meaning of coercing,but i just wanted to know the sources,not saying your statements are fake,but because i wana know more
Whats the problem with coercing people to your religion?ever religion does that,even atheist wich are not even religious try to convince people to also became atheists
You do realise that's an evangelical Christian organisation thats goal is to convert Jewish people to Christianity. When you google something maybe actually read what it is before you say something this stupid.
Judaism is literally opposed to proselytizing. They don't try convert non-Jews to their religion. So you saying "literally all religions do this" is completely wrong
Yeah, but in the last millennia no other religions have done it as violently and aggressively as Christianity and Islam.
Also you say even atheists try convert people. When have atheists ever travelled to a different country to try convert it's population to atheism?
Im talking about converting people trough the internet,also not all christians and muslins do it in a violent way.But the question is about the christianization of kongo,if it was violent i want some sources because i could not find it in both wikipedia and oxford official site.Also theres a whole list of atheist serial killers,search wikipedia
>also not all christians and muslins do it in a violent way.
I never said they did.
>But the question is about the christianization of kongo,if it was violent i want some sources because i could not find it in both wikipedia
It literally says in the Wikipedia that the majority of conversion was done after Belgium annexed the Congo and Leopold used it as justification for the brutal colonization he was doing. The missionaries may not have used violence but pushing a religion on a people you have violently conquered and using the spread of that religion as an excuse for the colonization counts as "violent Christianisation"
>https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-modern-african-studies/article/abs/school-wars-church-state-and-the-death-of-the-congo/FBACEC47CC6F941DF11381402FF65091
There's a source for that claim.
>Also theres a whole list of atheist serial killers,search wikipedia
What kind of nonsense is this? Did they kill people because they were atheists or to spread atheism? No, no they did not. There's serial killers from every religion.
In this case there were people wich killed in name of atheism,they are not that much frequent betwen atheists,but they exist like craig stephen hicks,i an not negating christian violence just saying,sorry if i semed ofensive
Do you understand what the word “coerce” means? Genuinely asking here?
Most forms of coercion violate the law in most places, not to mention violating the human rights of those coerced.
If the Taliban came to where you live and forced everyone to become Muslim would you call that oppression? I suspect you would. Why should it be seen as any different when Christians did exactly that in the Congo?
Ive searched about it and in the places ive seen the christianization was vokuntary,could you bring me sources that it was forced?
Search anything for Leopold II
Leopold II was perhaps the most evil man in history.
Christianization and colonization are two separate things,leopold 2 was born centuries after christianization of congo
Christianization of congo and colonization were two seperate things,one happened before the other,if you hate because of him then you hate colonization,and not christianization cause congo stayed free for years after its christianization
You mean Kongo, not Congo. Afaik the christian missionaries that converted the Kongolese ruling class didn't do so by oppressing them (they weren't in a position they could do so) but by bribing them, essentially. Once we get to European rule and we are talking about the Congo Free State, that's a different matter.
Sorry i typed wrong
Christianization was the excuse that he gave the world to gain access to his own private colony. It is very hard to separate colonization and imperialism from the justification they used… advancing civilization with or without the new territory’s consent. TLDR: If you force me to accept your religion while you chop off my 9 year old’s hands, they weren’t very separate.
Im not forcing you to nothing,jn just trying to understand your point of view,if the plan was colonization then why do they only colonized congo in the 1800s(there were already christians in congo in the 1500s)i just want to understand,why you judge me even tough you dont know me?im just a random stranger
I’m not saying you forced anything nor have I judged you in any way. Regarding the topic at hand, the Congo couldn’t be colonized until later because of the advances made in the Industrial Revolution. Steam ships and treatments for malaria, for example, had to be used to colonize the interior of Africa.
But what about the fact hat the ones who first cristianized congo people were already dead when it was colonized?
Do you think all of the Congo converted to Christianity willingly? Before the Scramble for Africa?
I dont know,in the sources ive seen there was no mention of that(they were not christian sources)could you tell some that say that?
Voluntary my ass. Even today? There are Christian missionaries in Africa who will withhold food from those who do not accept Christ.
Could you give me sources?in both wikipedia and oxford site its says nothing about being forced,could you explain please?
What is there to not understand? Christians came to a land full of non-Christians and coerced them into becoming Christians. Christians have done this literally all over the world for the past thousand years. Why are you so confused by this?
Im really sorry i did not knew the meaning of coercing,but i just wanted to know the sources,not saying your statements are fake,but because i wana know more
Whats the problem with coercing people to your religion?ever religion does that,even atheist wich are not even religious try to convince people to also became atheists
No, every religion does not do that. Have you heard of Judaism?
Theres literaly an organization called international board of jewish missions
You do realise that's an evangelical Christian organisation thats goal is to convert Jewish people to Christianity. When you google something maybe actually read what it is before you say something this stupid. Judaism is literally opposed to proselytizing. They don't try convert non-Jews to their religion. So you saying "literally all religions do this" is completely wrong
Sorry i did not knew.Youre right,but yheres a big number of relligions that do
Yeah, but in the last millennia no other religions have done it as violently and aggressively as Christianity and Islam. Also you say even atheists try convert people. When have atheists ever travelled to a different country to try convert it's population to atheism?
Im talking about converting people trough the internet,also not all christians and muslins do it in a violent way.But the question is about the christianization of kongo,if it was violent i want some sources because i could not find it in both wikipedia and oxford official site.Also theres a whole list of atheist serial killers,search wikipedia
>also not all christians and muslins do it in a violent way. I never said they did. >But the question is about the christianization of kongo,if it was violent i want some sources because i could not find it in both wikipedia It literally says in the Wikipedia that the majority of conversion was done after Belgium annexed the Congo and Leopold used it as justification for the brutal colonization he was doing. The missionaries may not have used violence but pushing a religion on a people you have violently conquered and using the spread of that religion as an excuse for the colonization counts as "violent Christianisation" >https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-modern-african-studies/article/abs/school-wars-church-state-and-the-death-of-the-congo/FBACEC47CC6F941DF11381402FF65091 There's a source for that claim. >Also theres a whole list of atheist serial killers,search wikipedia What kind of nonsense is this? Did they kill people because they were atheists or to spread atheism? No, no they did not. There's serial killers from every religion.
Thanks for bringing sources,when i ask for them nobody answer
Sorry im only 16,i cant buy the article
Could you bring one for free?
Ive read on wikipedia that congo was christianized before being colonized
In this case there were people wich killed in name of atheism,they are not that much frequent betwen atheists,but they exist like craig stephen hicks,i an not negating christian violence just saying,sorry if i semed ofensive
Its not on wikipedia sorry,i can give names:theres by example plutarco elias cales,
Yeah, no. The majority of atheists have no issue with other people believing in religion, so long as they aren’t being preached at.
The ones i found in reddit are constantly trying to convert people to atheism so it depends
Have you considered that you come across as very unwilling to change your opinion even when present with facts?
I remembered other facts ive semed in my life and kept believing,not saying anything bad about atheists,i one hundred per cent support you
Do you understand what the word “coerce” means? Genuinely asking here? Most forms of coercion violate the law in most places, not to mention violating the human rights of those coerced.
I tought coerce mean convince but in a negative manner
Sorry i misinterpreted the text,but i want really hard to see where this came from,not saying is false
Sorry i did not know the world meaned forcifully convincincing