Conversion to Christianity

==Psychology==
While conversion is the most studied aspect of religion by psychologists of religion, there is little empirical data on the topic, and little change in method since William James' classic ''Varieties of Religious Experience'' in 1902. {{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|pp=204-206}} James Scroggs and William Douglas have written on seven current concerns in the psychology of conversion.

1) ''Definition''. Calling this the "oldest issue in the field",  Scroggs and Douglas indicate psychologists ask whether conversion requires a sudden about-face or gradual change. There is no consensus.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=206}} The word connotes a sudden about-face, but psychologists are unwilling to let go of the possibility of gradual conversion.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=206}}

2) ''Pathology''. Freud saw religion as a pathology, and those who follow his school of thought have continued to do so.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|pp=208-210}} Empirical studies indicate religion is associated with good mental health among women, that it aids with depression and overcoming serious problems like heroin addiction, and that generally, there are significant links between religion and spirituality and good physical and mental health.{{sfn|Ng|Shek|2001|loc=abstract}}{{sfn|Hill|Pargament|2008|loc=abstract}}{{sfn|Shaver|Lenauer|Sadd|1980|loc=abstract}} In Scroggs and Douglas's view, which view a psychologist takes depends on their training and personal commitment to faith or non-faith.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=208}}

3)'' Type of person.'' Many wonder if there is one kind of person that is more likely to be converted than others.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=209}} Sociologists stress the importance of such variables as social class, group expectations, and social change (as in American frontier society or contemporary China). According to Scroggs and Douglas, William "James regarded the sick soul as the most likely candidate for conversion. The sick soul lives 'close to the pain threshold.' He is generally introverted and pessimistic in outlook, taking the evil of the world profoundly to heart. The sick soul is brooding, steeped in existential angst. He is Kierkegaard's man who is in despair and knows he is in despair".{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=209}}

Trauma and existential crisis can lead to conversion. For the already converted, trauma is also often associated with "beneficial changes in self-perception, relationships, and philosophy of life, and positive changes in the realm of existential, spiritual, or religious matters" according to a study by psychologists Rosemary de Castella and Janette Simmonds.{{sfn|Tedeschi|Park|Calhoun|1998|p=13}}{{sfn|de Castella|Simmonds|2012|loc=abstract}}

A 2011 study indicates conversion can take either an inward form, wherein religion becomes the primary guiding principle and goal of the convert's life, or it can take an outward form where religion mostly serves other purposes, such as political or economic goals, which are more important to that individual than religion. For those who experience inward conversion, lower levels of depression, anxiety and stress are associated, while higher levels are associated with those who practice outward conversion only. {{sfn|Bazmi|Khalil|2011|loc=abstract}} 

4) ''Age''. Scroggs and Douglas say that early writers on the psychology of conversion were unanimous in regarding adolescence as the most probable age for conversion.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=210}}{{blockquote|In surveys of three churches, psychologist Robert Ferm found the average age of conversion to be 43, 46, and 41 years respectively.(Ferm, Robert, The Psychology of Christian Conversion. Westwood, N. J., Fleming Revell, I959,p. 218.) Converts made by Graham's first British campaign averaged in their middle twenties.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=211}} Jung emphasized mid to late thirties... Hiltner writes that conversion "is most important, most likely, and most cultivatable in the thirties, rather than being regarded primarily as an adolescent phenomenon".{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=211}}}} Accordingly Ferm writes that, "It is probably fair to conclude from Erikson's theories that both the identity crisis in adolescence and the integrity crisis in the middle years constitute ripe moments for conversion".{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=211}}

5) ''Conscious or unconscious''. How much of the conversion experience is brought on by conscious control, and how much by unconscious factors behind or even beyond an individual? {{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=211}} Forces beyond conscious control are cited by the majority of converts. "Most psychologists agree the role of unconscious factors is extensive and often decisive in conversion, and that a long period of subconscious incubation precedes sudden conversions" write Scroggs and Douglas.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=211}} Allport, Maslow, Rogers, and others stress the role of conscious decision.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|pp=211-212}}

6) ''Science-versus-religion''. Psychologists as social scientists tend to operate according to a nothing-but reductionism. Conversion must be described as a natural process. Theologians and others who accept the possibility of the supernatural, have tended to take a something-more, hands-off-the-sacred-preserve approach to studying conversion.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=213}} Different worldviews can bias interpretations. Scroggs and Douglas write that "No solution to this very difficult problem appears in the immediate purview", but they do suggest that acknowledging bias and incorporating both views in "not only interdisciplinary but interbias research is necessary".{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|pp=213, 215}}

7) ''Which approach?'' Because there are different schools of psychology with conflicting theories, determining which is most appropriate to the study of conversion is one of the issues Scroggs and Douglas perceive.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=214}} "Behaviorism, operationalism, and learning theory have rarely been applied to the study of religious conversion," and the overwhelming majority of works have been written from a single perspective: "functionalism" which defines what is true as what works.{{sfn|Scroggs|Douglas|1967|p=214}}