Christian "charities" are spritual predators. Aid is given in hopes of acquiring souls.
It isn't a matter of giving, it is a matter of seeking out persons who are distressed materially and emotionally, as vulnerable targets to recruit for their religion in exchange for goods or services.
Subscriptions are free.
Christian charities are spiritual predators
What is giving and what isn’t giving? What is predation?
Giving is different than an exchange. Giving is when you give something to someone without expectations of getting anything in exchange. Giving is that you gave something and got nothing in return.
Exchange when you transfer something in expectation of something in return. It can be purchasing where money is exchanged for a good or service. It can be bartering of one thing for another. It can be gifts in the hope of favors. Investing money is offering money for something, stocks, equipment, land, enterprises in hopes of future returns of money.
Charity is when you give. It is not charity when you are doing it with expectations of returns whether you realize them or not. It is not charity when the money is expended for potential opportunities or prospects for sales or other returns or recruitment.
Christian so-called charities are offering services or goods in exchange for the opportunity to gain converts.
These charities aren’t giving, they are engaged in an exchange of services or goods for people’s spirits, their hearts and minds, their souls, their inner beings. They are engaged in exchange, not giving.
Christian charities are directed towards those who are in need and often lack access to resources and services they need to relieve their distress. They are often the disadvantaged in society.
The persons who are the objects of Christian charity are persons in distress both materially and emotionally.
The persons who are the objects of Christianity are the vulnerable both in their material condition, emotional condition, and psychological abilities.
As observed in nature, many predators have a strategy of seeking the vulnerable to be their prey. Lions go after the sick, aged, weak, injured in a herd.
Christians go after those who are vulnerable in society.
They are predators.
Like the lions they seek out opportunities. Sometimes the persons are not just materially needy, their situation has emotionally impacted them, they are psychologically weakened. They are vulnerable.
There are drug addicts who are psychologically in server distress. They can be offered rigid doctrines to keep themselves off drugs and be emotionally dependent on the Christian doctrine given them. Persons who become drug addicts are often people who make bad decisions or lack critical thinking and so make excellent targets for religious recruitment.
There are people disadvantaged and in need and distressed materially, but importantly emotionally distressed, and they can see the Christians as emotional support as well as material and spiritually superior and their doctrine as credible.
Presenting Christian activities as giving rather than the exchange they really are, gives Christian’s reputations as being moral actors and morally superior than society in general. Missionary charities act as a reputational shield also from their actions being recognized as part of an activity to seize control and extinguish the existing society.
Every nationalist in a non-Christian society should recognize the danger they present to their society.
Missionary work in non-Christian nations resolves around providing schools, medical care, food, material support to those in nations where the society is unable to provide these resources because of general lack of resources. It is how non-Christian societies are targeted.
Missionaries in non-Christian nations note where the local culture is vulnerable to subversion and where existing social institutions won’t be obstacles.
In Assam, Myanmar, Thailand and Taiwan, Christians are often indigenous peoples or remote rural people where there is want, neglect and lack of resources and the strength of the national cultural institutions are weakest or nonexistent. In New Zealand the Maoris were some decades ago Christian, but with increasing strength have given up Christianity as part of decolonization.
From March 27, 2024, Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences,” “Maori atheism: a decolonizing project?”
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1177083X.2024.2333544
Christians are also adept predators in seeking prey following other predators or acting in conjunction with them. So as European imperialists invade and conquer, they aid the imperialists and in turn are aided by them.
Whole nations are distressed and made vulnerable by economic exploitation, violent conquest and subjugation, oppression, denigration and humiliation. The conquered people’s social systems fail to provide protection and can be discredited.
It isn’t accidental that Vietnam, conquered and oppressed by the French has 6% Catholic population and Thailand, having triumphally resisted colonial powers has only 1%. The Philippines which has endured centuries of colonial oppression since the Spanish arrived in 1565, is 89% Christian.
If Christians were truly concerned about social problems, they could support secular charities or agitate for government to support charities or take direct governmental action.
More revealing is that Christian denominations don’t form joint cooperative efforts with each other. There are Baptist, Episcopal, Catholic, Methodists, etc. each running their own separate operations. They are hunting souls and they aren’t going to be hunting them for another denomination.
Churches in an area might form cooperative efforts, but their denominations don’t. Where there is a cooperative effort, it is a focus on a local area and those churches that are somewhat not strongly denominational in character or independent, or where they are similar in nature and aren’t denominationally competitive and where practical requirements for successful predation override denominational distinctions.
Also, revealing, is even when their “charitable help” isn’t wanted, they try to force themselves in. An example is the School Chaplain Counselor project in Texas. School districts generally didn’t want to have chaplains as counselors in their schools. So the Texas law was passed forcing the school districts to vote on accepting or not accepting chaplain counselors so if they refused, they could be target of political pressure to force the school board to accept the “charitable” offer of school chaplain counselors.
School so-called counselors would be involved with students having problems, precisely the targets predators would most want, young people having emotional problems and not wise in the ways of propaganda. Organizations promoting school chaplains present it as a charitable action to some audiences and an evangelical opportunity to bring Jesus to students to Evangelical audiences.
When Christian so-called charities and social programs target the distressed they are seeking vulnerable populations.
We need to always point out that Christian charities are predators.
The services and goods maybe beneficial to individuals, but is not giving, but an exchange and should be understood as such.
Christians always state:
Mark. 8 Verses 36 to 37, KJV.
[36] For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? [37] Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
Surely it applies to the Christian’s predatory activities where they seek to exchange services and goods for people’s souls.
Societies which seek to preserve themselves from Christian predators need to make sure that social services and support are given to the marginal in society.
Often Evangelical Christians are opposed to government programs for social welfare. Though they make not be conscious of what the impact of this policy is, it is obvious to even a casual observer that if the government had effective programs, there would be no scope of action for the Christian predation.
We need to call out Christian charities as the predators they are.
Watch out for this logo. To meet this standard they have to be homophobic.
