I do agree to an extent, MMW. I wouldn't call teaching your child what you believe to be "indoctrination".

I think not teaching specific religious/spiritual beliefs is easier for non-religious people than it is for religious. Let me explain - a non-religious person can go through day-to-day life and never mention God (or no-God) to their kids. But a religious person? What happens when the kid walks in on mum-and-dad's Bible reading time? They look at the book and say "What's that"? How do mommy and daddy respond? What happens on Sundays when the parents want to go to church? Do they leave their 3-year old kid at home all alone? Do they take turns going to church? What if they are both active in the church community (let's say one cooks the lunch for church while the other is a Sunday School Teacher) - they both ahve to be at church. Do they quit their duties for the next 14 years simply to stop having to bring up their children in a religious community?

For a religious couple, it would be impossible to maintain ties with their religious community while simultaneously keeping their child away from taht community.

I know when I have kids I will bring them up to believe in the Christian God. Once they are old enough to choose for themselves, I won't force them to go to church or to read the Bible or to pray. But until that time comes, I think to do any less than what I feel is best for my children would be dishonest to myself, my partner, my child, and to the God that I follow.

Just something to think about,

I think you know what I mean given the context of my last two posts. There are two definitions for that word. You chose to pick out the most negative definition. Interesting.

Ever heard of baby sitters? Anyhow. By the time they are old enough to decide, the damage has already been done in my opinion. I don't know many who would disagree with me when I say it'd be easier for an 18 year old to accept a specific religion as truth if they were brought up and raised around people who acted as if it was 100% truth, than it would be if they weren't. 10 fold, at that.

Not being raised around it minimizes their ability to look at it from a biased viewpoint. That's assuming they aren't brought around any anti-religious things growing up. Leave it neutral.

Teach a kid nearly anything from a young age in the same way people do with Christianity, and odds are they'll believe it. It's the main reason why I was a Christian before I even had a choice to be. It was "hardwired" into my brain that there was a God. It was natural to me to just accept the idea that God exists. It felt like a common and obvious truth to me, even though there were no reasons for me to feel this way other than being raised to think it.

So no, it's not a good idea. My girlfriend is a Christian, and we agreed NOT to teach our kids that God DOES exist, but let them read the bible and other religious texts when they are old enough to make their own choice.

The question that always comes to my mind when I see people who think not teaching religious values is an enlightened position is: Are you that unsure of the truths you live your life by? Whether they are atheist, agnostics, Wiccan, Satanist, Buddhist, or Christian, those are the beliefs you are basing your life on, so what exactly are you communicating to your children if you won't teach them the values you live by?

I'm not trying to insult anyone here... this is really a question that runs through my mind.

Should we also not teach our kids not to lie or cheat or steal? Should we maybe not teach them that 2+2=4? Maybe it's also 7.35 x 10⁶ but since we've been indoctrinating every kid by telling them that it's 4 we've never known.

But objectively speaking, you are absolutely right that if a person is raised to believe they are probably more likely to accept that belief than someone else not brought up in that belief. But by the same token, I don't think that this should then mean that a religious couple should be stopped from teaching their child what they believe to be truth.

I don't think they should be "brainwashed" in the sense of never being exposed to anything other than these religious ideologies, but it is the right and responsibility of every parent to raise their child in the way they deem best.

Should we also not teach our kids not to lie or cheat or steal? Should we maybe not teach them that 2+2=4?

Maybe it's also 7.35 x 106 but since we've been indoctrinating every kid by telling them that it's 4 we've never known.

If you believe the best form is exposing your child to many different beliefs that is fine and it is your child. For someone else who just wants to practice one form of belief it is not 'near brainwashing'. It is no where near 'brainwashing' since the term means thought reform or reeducation. You cannot reeducate a child who has no education to begin with or reform their thoughts when they have no thoughts formed yet. The word 'brainwashing' is being misused ITT

Explain how it's not near brainwashing. If you teach a child that something is TRUE, even when it's not established truth, they will grow up believing in it regardless. Why is it that brainwashing is only yelled out when it's someone believing in something wacky. What if I taught my child to believe in the flying spaghetti monster from a young age, and actually convinced the child it was true. I bet someone would call it brainwashed.

It doesn't need to be established truth. You can show the child that it is true.

You are not showing a child that a religion is true, you are teaching them that you believe it is true. The only way you can show someone a truth, is if you can prove it is true. Faith does not entail truth, and if it did, then everything that anyone has faith in is now true.

I mean show as in show them God. Teach them the religion, and SHOW them that it works. After all, it'd be illogical to deny that which is right in front of you.

I mean show as in show them God. Teach them the religion, and SHOW them that it works. After all, it'd be illogical to deny that which is right in front of you.

The Bible states that if you believe in Jesus and accept him as your savior then you will be granted eternal paradise when you die, and that you must convert others to save their souls. BUT where does one draw the line in this mandate? Is brainwashing children into believing in nothing but God and the Bible really fair? Yes, I do believe it is fair to spread the word about Christianity to adults who can make decisions for themselves, but isn't brainwashing children completely immoral? Jesus didn't say that brainwashing people or forcing them to believe in his path was the correct thing to do, so why do fundamentalists do this? Should it be considered illegal because it's taking away a person's ability to decide for themselves what's true and what's not, even if it is supposedly saving their souls? God himself created people with the quality of free will, so who are we to take that away from people?

If it was right in front of me, I wouldn't deny it. That's the problem. I hate when people say "It's right in front of you". Saying something like that is synonymous with implying that it is easy to see, and can't be missed, which is obviously not true about Christianity, otherwise, I'd be a Christian. If it was easy to see in any way at all, I'd have seen it by now. And when we bring up how it's obviously a lie, we get the "You just don't want to see it!" arguement, which is obviously known to be false before you even blab it out, because many Atheists first seek God, and then end up being Atheists anyhow. That's besides the point.

I can show them the flying spaghetti monster, and show them that it works. We all know I can't prove he exists, but that's ok. It's perfectly fine to teach your kids to believe in these kinds of things! That way their odds of not believing it will be low!

The bible doesnt actually directly state that if you accept Christ as your savior you will go to heaven. Christ however does say that whoever does the will of the Father who is in heaven will go to heaven. The whole 'accept Christ as your saviour and you will go to heaven' is made up. An interpretation (like my interpretation). In my view the dalai Lama is doing more of God's will than most morons from the pentecostal movements.

A Quick Question

Is Pentecostalism Christianity's next reformation?

The quick answer: It is, if one looks globally at the entire Christian world.

The longer answer: Christianity’s “next wave” may come in Pentecostal form. With an estimated 500 million followers, Pentecostalism now comprises the second largest communion of Christians in the world, more than Protestants and Anglicans combined. With its continued growth and its unique understanding of Christian experience, Pentecostalism promises to reshape Christianity in the 21st century.

“The Pentecostal movement is not simply a new denomination,” says Margaret M. Poloma of the department of sociology of the University of Akron. “The rise of Pentecostalism is more analogous to the rise of Protestantism in Christianity than the birth of a new denomination. It’s an example of the restructuring of Christianity.” Ms. Paloma authored the study, “The Spirit Bade Me To: Pentacostalism and Global Religion.”

What is Pentecostalism?

There are several classical Pentecostal denominations, including Assemblies of God, Church of God in Christ, Church of God (Cleveland, TN) and Four Square Gospel Church International. In addition, numerous independent and non-white indigenous churches consider themselves “Pentecostal,” “Neo-Pentecostal” or “Charismatic.”

What defines Pentecostalism, however, is not a single structure, uniform doctrine or ecclesiastical leadership. Pentecostals share a particular Christian world-view, which includes:

*

An emphasis on a transforming experience of being ‘filled with the Holy Spirit.’
*

A holistic world-view with God present in all events and causing all things to work together.
*

A belief that knowledge is not limited to the realms of reason and sensory experience.
*

A view of the Bible as a “living book” in which the Holy Spirit is always active

“The Pentecostal world-view holds that ours is a world of miracles and mystery, where healings, prophecy and divine serendipity are woven into the fabric of everyday life,” says Poloma.

Glossolalia, or speaking in tongues, represents another distinguishing element of Pentecostal experience. “Although not all Pentecostal believers have made glossolalia into a doctrine, and many do not themselves speak in tongues, tongues has a great symbolic value,” says Poloma. Many researchers consider glossolalia a “leveling force” among Pentecostals, an experience that gives “equal voice” to the poor and illiterate as well as the educated. As Walter Hollenwager says, “Tongues represent the ‘cathedral of the poor,’ providing a sacred space for those who cannot afford to build expensive church buildings.”

How much has Pentecostalism grown?

The current estimate of 500 million followers is particularly phenomenal considering that Pentecostalism had no adherents when the movement began in 1906.

As recently as 1970, Pentecostals and Charismatics represented only 6% of the world’s Christian population. By 1997 the figure jumped to 27% of the world’s Christians, or 497 million people, exceeding the total number of Protestants and Anglicans. (Source: David Barrett)

In the U.S., Pentecostals represent 5-12% of Christians, depending on the measurement used. That figure is outnumbered only by Baptists, Methodists and Lutherans.

Most of Pentecostalism’s growth, however, occurred in developing countries. While the growth-rate for Western churches has reached a plateau, Pentecostalism worldwide is growing at an exponential rate. The majority of Pentecostals around the world are found among the poor and the working classes, the same socio-economic groups that gave rise to Pentecostalism in North America in the early 20th century.

A good example of the sources of this growth is the Assemblies of God (AG), the largest Pentecostal denomination, which has 2.5 million adherents in the U.S. and 35 million worldwide. From 1987 to 1999, the number of AG churches in the U.S. increased about 16%; however, much of that growth came from immigrants, particularly Hispanics. Worldwide, the number of AG churches almost doubled within the same time period to more than 212,000.

Why this phenomenal growth?

Researchers point out that Pentecostalism is a “movement” rather than a denomination. Instead of a centralized, bureaucratic organization, Pentecostals form a network linked by personal ties and similar beliefs. Pentecostals’ mission travels along pre-existing daily social relationships such as family, friends or work companions.

Missionary activity is another source of growth. Pentecostals link the outpouring of gifts of the Holy Spirit to the “end times,” which gave a sense of urgency to early missionary activity. Thousands of Pentecostals have taken off for foreign lands within the past century, spurred by Biblical mandate, a personal sense of calling and an empowering experience of the Holy Spirit. Many missionaries, for example, often cite stories of how “the Spirit bade them go.”

A second Reformation?

“Reformation” is most commonly understood as a “change from worse to better,” but a secondary meaning of reformation is “the act of forming anew.” In the latter sense, Pentecostalism may indeed represent Christianity’s “next Reformation.” With its exponential growth in developing nations, and its unique understanding of Christian experience, Pentecostalism could “form anew” Christianity in the 21st century.

I am a pentecostal and see your views as hate-driven towards this particular movement and the denominations that make up this part of religion. Was that comment really necessary?

Fair enough and I understand your view. There are many new Christians throughout all denominations who do not believe in attempting to convert others through simple persuasion of speech of fear tactics. Some of us believe we should not have to use any words unless someone asks us a question specifically but up until that moment it is purely allowing the Spirit to flow within us, and Spirit calls to spirit, I know you will disagree with that view since you believe all have the Spirit already, but I am sure you can appreciate the metaphysical aspects of this type of evangelism, pure spiritual evangelism, no fire, no brimstone, no speeches...

I know when I have kids I will bring them up to believe in the Christian God. Once they are old enough to choose for themselves, I won't force them to go to church or to read the Bible or to pray. But until that time comes, I think to do any less than what I feel is best for my children would be dishonest to myself, my partner, my child, and to the God that I follow.

Just something to think about,

l"]"Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man" -- Francis Xavier


fullywired

And not once have I witnessed it yet! I have found more or less every evangelist I have met about as metaphysically open as a shut shop. Dogmatic is the word. With God all is possible and yet I have met so many Christians that wont even look down other avenues of God's possibilities.

Ah well no need that 'looking down other possibilities' and the Spirit as described in the Word' as having to be one and the same they can be mutually exclusive of each other. It is doubtful you will what I describe in those that are going to compromise their faith just to appease another belief set. Rather they will not treat the real world as a forum and debate such issues with others unless it is a true exchange of discourse to understand another view. That is not evangelizing though in the Spirit that is theological discourse. Those evangelizing in the Spirit also might not be noticed at all, some can just tell they are true Christians, not cause they have to say it, but because they simply act it genuinely, and they will not be spirit magnets for all to see, but someone who is thirsty for something and has yet to find it in other places might notice, and they might want some of what that person has.

Dogma (the plural is either dogmata or dogmas, Greek δόγμα, plural δόγματα) is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization, thought to be authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted or diverged from. While in the context of religion the term is largely descriptive, outside of religion its current usage tends to carry a pejorative connotation—referring to concepts as being "established" only according to a particular point of view, and thus one of doubtful foundation. This pejorative connotation is even stronger with the term dogmatic, used to describe a person of rigid beliefs who is not open to rational argument.

There is nothing wrong with dogma in the primary sense of the definition which is a synonym for doctrine. That though is not the same as dogmatic, do not let the similarity of the two words fool you, and it is dogmatism which is your concern, and that does not describe my faith or belief in the Word. You can feel free to believe what you want, you are not expected to believe the Word as I do, that is not dogmatic at all.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma

As per what is in bold above those who believe in the Word do so because we believe it is authoritative (for us only not you), we do not naturally doubted (if one wants to they are free to become like you, a non-believer), and we do not diverge from it (and on is easily able to do so if they wish).

Outside of religion is the definition you are using. I understand both definitions including the definition of dogmatic and see how they are different. Can you differentiate between them? Maybe not and might likely not understand and consider them all the same.

dogmatic theology often results in traditional formulations that are so abstract they hinder and conceal faith rather than facilitate and reveal it. Although the source of dogmas-the gospel-connotes Spirit, freedom, and life, the language of dogmas sometimes suggests the institution, law, and fixed belief. When this happens, it does violence to human freedom and all but rules out personal faith in the person of Jesus Christ.

...

First, whereas real faith sets people on the side of peace, social justice, and responsible use of world resources, dogmatic theology has too often caused them to stand for divisiveness, destruction, and oppression. The fierceness with which dogmas have been defended has often surpassed the zeal spent on inciting believers to right living. Theologians have to establish a correlation between dogmas and social problems of the day, between the ultimate questions raised by human beings and the ever new challenge of the word of God (Paul Tillich). Second, whereas real faith directs people toward the personal center of its life, namely Jesus Christ, dogmatic theology has too often succeeded in scattering people in their faith. Dogmas are never ends in themselves, however, and theologians have to make them function as expression of the church's understanding of the Christian mystery, as given to it by the Holy Spirit.

The accusation of legalism is also not relevant to most within Oneness Pentecostalism, we are as dependent upon God’s grace as any other man who calls upon Jesus’ Name. It is no surprise then that one of the most popular songs sung are ‘amazing grace’, ‘your grace and mercy brought me through’, ‘I know it was the blood’… I have never heard anyone sing: ‘I know it was my praying 3 times a day’.

“They do not preach the true gospel”. All that I and those within the Apostolic faith preach is the Bible, ’sola scripture’, we do not preach Creeds, Traditions or other extra-biblical dogma. Therefore, I find it offensive to be labeled as not preaching the true gospel. I believe in His death, burial and resurrection. I believe He died to save me from sin and is coming back to earth again… I believe in salvation through His Name (Acts 4:12).

The New Birth attempts to present biblical truth in an understandable yet scholarly way, not from the viewpoint of denominational dogma but from the viewpoint of what the Bible itself says. Numerous biblical references have been included so that the reader can search these things out and come to his or her own conclusions. If the reader approaches this subject with a prayerful, sincere, truth-seeking, studious attitude (rather than with a prejudiced or even a gullible mind), God will illuminate the truth of His Word as it relates to salvation.

I won't even teach my child that Atheism is correct, or maybe even Deism. I will tell them the TRUTH, which is "I don't know", and that no one knows. However, I will teach them to use reasoning and logic. And explain to them what evidence is(When they are old enough) and to not be so gullible when it comes to certain claims. There's a reason why kids stop believing in the tooth fairy and Santa Claus, it's because once they are old enough to slap on that cap of logic, they realize there's no evidence to back these stories up.

If it was right in front of me, I wouldn't deny it. That's the problem. I hate when people say "It's right in front of you". Saying something like that is synonymous with implying that it is easy to see, and can't be missed, which is obviously not true about Christianity, otherwise, I'd be a Christian. If it was easy to see in any way at all, I'd have seen it by now. And when we bring up how it's obviously a lie, we get the "You just don't want to see it!" arguement, which is obviously known to be false before you even blab it out, because many Atheists first seek God, and then end up being Atheists anyhow. That's besides the point.

I can show them the flying spaghetti monster, and show them that it works. We all know I can't prove he exists, but that's ok. It's perfectly fine to teach your kids to believe in these kinds of things! That way their odds of not believing it will be low!

How do you SHOW children that your God works? My Gods works & I do not feel I have to SHOW them I figure they can figure that out for themselves.


BTW when you imply the word SHOW like you do it sounds very sinster not sure I like the sound of it.

You don't understand what I mean. I don't mean just telling your child that it's there, I mean actually showing them.



It's quite easy, you merely live your religious life and let your children watch. They will then be able to determine whether or not what you're saying is true. If your beliefs are false, they will see nothing fruitful or substantial in your belief system. If your beliefs are true, then they'll see it.

The best witness is to act out your beliefs, not just to give them lip service. If you live according to your religion, you child will be able to see whether or not its a true religion, or if its a false religion.

The best witness is to act out your beliefs, not just to give them lip service. If you live according to your religion, you child will be able to see whether or not its a true religion, or if its a false religion.

Just curious, but hypothetically, if your son comes home and says "Daddy, a kid at school today told me that Jesus is the only way to heaven - is this true", what would your answer be? Could you answer in a non-biased way?????

Ugh, what I MEANT was it's not worth her time and energy to prove herself to people like YOU who would deny she exists even if she did prove herself. You're on the path she set you on, she doesn't need an ego boost by proving that she exists. She does not "hide" herself either. She simply doesn't go around CONVERTING people to a religion they aren't destined to follow. Everyone follows their religion for a purpose, not because it's right. And why doesn't YOUR God prove himself? HM? If he's the real God, shouldn't he prove it instead of "hiding"? And there's plenty of personality flaws with him too, because unlike my Goddess, he actually has one, which is a flaw in itself.

Ugh, what I MEANT was it's not worth her time and energy to prove herself to people like YOU who would deny she exists even if she did prove herself. You're on the path she set you on, she doesn't need an ego boost by proving that she exists. She does not "hide" herself either. She simply doesn't go around CONVERTING people to a religion they aren't destined to follow.

Pa since i have had this question i'll give it a go....

.I encourage research and discussions (from freinds that were beleivers from chrsitinaity and judasim) we would explore history literature bible stories etc.... and my posit and Daddy would share his, because i do not speak for Daddy..( my hubby is deist)a sec..... .i'd tell him it is a really good question one that many of a person has asked including me .....I would not tell him what he should think i'd point him in the direction of how to gather data..... let him conclude., we have been to churches of faiths that the has had an interest in and at 10 years old there have been a few.. right now he is into judiasm........I'd say be open, step back gather sources and discuss with as many people as you can.. have fun with it....

as guides we can start this early..kids ask the questions that they are interested in and ready for....the secret is there are no answers only bigger questions....a kid sees this often quicker than the adult...l

Well ... my answer would be somewhat different from your answer, Sheri.
Since the nipper was asking about Jesus, and seeing I do know Scriptures about Jesus; for starters I would show the young one that the idea of "going to heaven" is not a teaching from the Bible. Now "that" would give him some interesting points to raise with his school-friend.

After that -- (since we have two children of our own) -- I would not be surprised that very soon the conversation would spin off into different threads.
Karlis

... on religion questions of any kind we encourage research, not to engage in debates wth their little buddies or create conflict ...

...

On the surface that sounds reasonable, Kaizen -- but I see some potentially big pot-holes in that road of life.

Ok, let's say you set the perfect example to your children of your religious life, in your day-to-day living. All is going nicely, and your children see that you have set a wonderful example for them. Then, one day -- out of nowhere -- tragedy strikes. Mom and Dad are driving their car, and are involved in a major accident; you are both killed.

Now, how is your death an example to your children?

I know, I know -- not a good example, but a possibly tragic scenarioo to consider,
Karlis

I agree. But wouldn't that hold true for all beliefs and Faiths, if the parents truly followed it and lived by example????

As most of you know, those of us who are Christians know (you can insert "believe" or "think" or "hope" if it makes it easier to read this) that God created the universe and life, we also know that through our own actions we have severed a link which is essential to eternal life and we know that there is nothing we can do in and of ourselves to repair this link, but that God, in the form of the man Jesus, provided a repair for that link through his death and resurrection. Now, given that we know this to be true, wouldn't it be hateful of us not to let our children know this? Those of you who hold other beliefs may well see no problem with letting your child find their own way, but for Christians that is tantamount to the worst possible child abuse.

If you know that a cobra has a lethal bite would you allow your child to approach it so that she can learn about the cobra's deadly bite first-hand? Of course not!

If your child has just burnt his finger with scalding water would you sit back and watch him howl in pain waiting to see if he will decide to research the benefit of soaking the burnt finger in cold water or of lathering it with Aloe Vera? Again, of course not! We would jump in immediately and try to eliminate their pain and suffering of our beloved, heck we would be willing to assume the pain for them if we could! So how then can we simply sit back and wait to see if they will learn about their need for a personal relationship with God or if they will continue on a path to eternal death?

son quotes:
"Now, given that we know this to be true " may be the issue son...it seems that you have an astounding fear of life wthout religiion and this is what you will pass on... as guides our intentions and the underlying assumptions that feed our beleifs are critical also to consider.. you can be a christian of the most faihtful kind and in your example say to your child this is what works for me ,it be really nifty if we shared this but if we don't it will be really nifty to learn about what gets you passionate.....

why should you fear your relgion or diety?????

In essence not all christians teach of fear many teach of a loving diety such as Bm lady R.. i think pa will he certainly loves being christian thats what a child picks up on....


Judiasm doesn't use fear at all in its teachings let alone with their children........

Before you starting propping up Judaism and putting down christianity maybe you should clarify what you mean by fear? Christianity does not instill fear in its believers. A person doesn't need to fear hell because if they're scared of hell they can convert and not worry about it anymore....A Christian teaching his/her child about Jesus/God/Hell/The NT etc isn't teaching fear or whatever it is you call it. If it is, than so is Judaism because we teach that its a terrible thing not to keep the Law. Granted, you wont go to hell for it, but your life will be considerably worse eternally because of it.

kaizen, if it is okay with you I am gonna pass this question on to an expert of judiasm Dr. Mklsgl ..

i am a to new of a student at this time in judiasm to take this question . and its a good one 'kudos;' to you for asking it....

After reading some of these posts I have to wonder how many of you would really respect the path that your child chooses to walk. For the truly diehard Christians it's you I wonder about the most. Sandi has voiced her concerens about Satanist, what if that's the path her child choose to follow? Other have said that they can show them that thier God is real. How can you show them & make it so that see Said deity as real & not as chance?

I could go down the list but you get my point.

son quotes:
"Now, given that we know this to be true " may be the issue son...it seems that you have an astounding fear of life wthout religiion and this is what you will pass on... as guides our intentions and the underlying assumptions that feed our beleifs are critical also to consider.. you can be a christian of the most faihtful kind and in your example say to your child this is what works for me ,it be really nifty if we shared this but if we don't it will be really nifty to learn about what gets you passionate.....

why should you fear your relgion or diety?????

In essence not all christians teach of fear many teach of a loving diety such as Bm lady R.. i think pa will he certainly loves being christian thats what a child picks up on....


Judiasm doesn't use fear at all in its teachings let alone with their children........



religion/god can be a beautiful thing why shoudlnt' it be your choice and if you choose another why is it the worst possible thing as you said the equvalent of child abuse... oy vey ....

Your newness to the study of Judaism doesn't mean that you can't define what you mean by fear...if you don't know what "fear" means when you call Iams fearful, then maybe you shouldn't call him fearful anymore.


Live your religion, love God, have a relationship with him, do as he asks, and let your child watch. Let the child watch as you interact with God.


I once said I would be devastated if my child didn't believe as I do. However, I hope that someday my child will explore religions outside of Judaism. Because if he/she never does that, they can't truly say that they love Judaism.

Sheri, for someone who does not like to be questioned or examined you seem to have no problem making HUMONGOUS assumptions about the motivations of others. Unfortunately, your assumptions are as baseless as they are humongous.

You seem to assume that my certainty of the existence of God must be based on a fear I have, simply because you do not have this certainty. My certainty of God's reality is no more based on fear than my certainty that 2+2=4. I think your perception of "fear" in me is actually more your unwillingness to face the fear you have that despite your unwillingness to accept the reality of God, deep down you know He really is there and at some point (and I pray it is a point before it's too late) you WILL have to face Him and will have to face who you are on the basis of His reality.