I would tell my kid that I do not believe it is true, because I do not see any reason to believe it is. I would also explain how the idea of even heaven has no evidence to back it up, and that I personally don't believe in it for that very reason.



I would tell my kid that I do not believe it is true, because I do not see any reason to believe it is.



If you can SHOW a child God, then you can show me. So show me. If it's anything less than what you seem to be implying, then I'll still call it brainwashing!

Ya know, this has all been pretty interesting, but pretty predictable too.

One thing I would like to comment on, is the notion of brainwashing. Now, we could wiki it to death, but I don't think it's really required. Most of us can think for ourselves.

With that in mind, does it not seem possible, that one can raise a Christian child, a Muslim child, or a Pagan (I never know if it should be capitalized or not ) child, or for that matter an Atheist child, without resorting to brainwashing?

Let's face it, we ALL raise our kids and use manipulation techniques to modify behavior, encourage and discourage behavior, teach them about consequences of actions and reactions, be they natural (spit in the wind, you get spit on your face) or more spiritual (hurt Mommies feelings, you feel sad too). We all do these things, and they really don't qualify as brainwashing. Look at "feral" children. They are rare, but it is documented. Their state of mind is greatly different from those of the most enlightened children. They have a basic survival instinct and that's about it. Because they are not socialized. They have no notion of humanities norms and standards. Are we brainwashing our children then, merely by teaching them to say thank you, or your welcome? Is it brainwashing to teach your five year old NOT to comment on how fat Aunt Ruthie is (like we ALL haven't done that!)?

The OP is really about conversion. Is it possible to convert a child? Is it even right?

I suppose, but I honestly think age and circumstance would play a HUGE part in that. Maybe even the sophistication and educational background of the child. If you adopt a child from a Muslim background at the age of three, and raise him in your Christian home, and take him to church, send him to Sunday school, does that even qualify as conversion, or even worse, brainwashing? I personally don't think so. Maybe at the age of eight, nine ten...when they have a grasp of their own beliefs and the ability to speculate and form real questions on the matter (I mean beyond "Why is the sky blue?). That may be considered conversion.

Need I say a word after that?

I gotta stop being so sensible!

Here... I'll add to your cache of sensibilities... according to the Chicago Manual of Style (which is a reference source for the AP), no, it's not suppose to be capitalized. It's not a proper noun.

.

I don't have so much issue with individual faiths.

It's the pervasive indoctrination without cross-examination that troubles me.


No kid is ever told> now on one hand we have the story of Jesus death and resurrection, but on the other hand have you ever seen evidence of a person dying, being entombed and then walking away. What do you make of this ?

Or maybe the Gospels telling of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. Have you ever heard of anyone being raised from the dead in these days ? What do you make of that ? See what I mean ?

Ok, I see your point but I see a difference between teaching modern survival skills and making them believe in something. Modern survival skills is exactly what you described really. Consequences of actions whether physical or emotional. Children can understand emotions far earlier than they could ever willing grasp and embrace the concept of a god. You can teach children why, you can show them why with real world consequences. You tell it to them and then you show them. Kids ask why. Its part of their nature it seems. You can show them why with the real world stuff. The kids I have known have always embraced the whys. The love seeing why. Science can be fun and understandable at an early enough age. They love grabbing hold of real word concepts and understandings.

Spit in the wind? Here, watch. Dont touch a hot stove? Here, watch. Dont run in the street? Here, watch. Dont call Aunt Ruthie fat? How would you like me to call you short and dumb? Why say please, thank you and show respect? Because it is how you would want to be treated and there are consequences for disrespect (though not nearly as many as there should be). Here, watch.

God? Well umm.....believe.....because...Show you?.......um.......

I see a pattern here. Proof proof proof fluff proof proof. How exactly do you expect a kid to hit that curveball or even notice exactly what it is? Everything else in life has real tangible results. Kids learn this and then you toss them the curveball of belief. Is it any surprise they accept it? They know the pattern buy it is forced on them. Dont believe there is a boogieman in the closet because Dad comes in and shows you there is nothing there and nothing to be afraid. Now, believe in something just because a lot of people do, Mommy and Daddy does, and kind of brush aside the fact that when you look in that closet there is nothing there either.....

I dont see teaching with real examples, logic, reason, giving them a chance to try things and free thinking as brainwashing or any shade of it. Presenting any type of belief to a child as real (or perhaps even at all. Im still mulling that over) is a type of brainwashing and can become the exact definition of it.

Perhaps this is just a long winded agreement with you E? Its been a long day.

Some comments to the OP. No its not fair but I dont think it should be illegal. We have enough laws already. One other thought I have is that converting children or teaching a child to believe at a very early age is a cheap and successful way to pad the numbers. Its a given that if you impress something on a young mind it is going to stick for at least a while. Would that converters god smile upon this or what that god rather have sensible adults freely and willingly becoming a member of their believers? Also, you mention free will. Free will is a part of who we are. If there really is a god do you really think they would have been as messed up as to program into us a mental booby trap liable to be set off at any given time? Does that really make sense? "Here is your eternal self destruct button. Now dont you go looking to hard for that you little thing you" Sensible? No. Convenient to perpetuation of a belief system? You betcha.....

Personally, for my children, the religious books will be on the side of the library with the rest of the fictional literature. I plan on giving them access to all the knowledge, thoughts, beliefs and ways as I can. If I show them how to think for themselves, think logically, rationally, clearly and they still choose to worship a god, then so be it. At least I will have given them the skills to be successful at life and if part of their life includes a deity or something, then so be it. Its not my path but it may be theirs.

Kevin A.

kevin quotes: "Personally, for my children, the religious books will be on the side of the library with the rest of the fictional literature. I plan on giving them access to all the knowledge, thoughts, beliefs and ways as I can. If I show them how to think for themselves, think logically, rationally, clearly and they still choose to worship a god, then so be it. At least I will have given them the skills to be successful at life and if part of their life includes a deity or something, then so be it. Its not my path but it may be theirs."

now this is my definition of sensible . ...

Sooooo.... you put the Koran, the Bible, the Bahgavita, Book of the Dead whatever on the bookshelf and the kid reads it. Ok, well, that's niffty, yes, I say do that.

However, you can not tell me that when a child stumbles across something they don't understand that you will not help them understand and that your input will color their viewpoint and understanding. It does. I raised my kid with no specific belief, but I can guarentee that my feelings and bias' were made known to her.

My cultural, community, and moral beliefs are of course instilled in my kid. She retains those beliefs as well (just as I did).

Of course, one of my religious beliefs is that you can't "convert" a child anyway... it's virtually impossible, and you folks who "got out from under your parents religions and brainwashing" aren't all that different from anyone else. It's called .... growing up. We all do it... hopefully.

Hehe. Yup!

Again though, the only thing that stuck in my craw was the "brainwash" part. I don't think it's wrong to raise a kid as a particular religion, and when they ask "whys" about it, explain it to the best of your ability. Teach them in the same parables so often used in religion, pass on the bits of wisdom taught by Ghandi and the like, quotes attributed to Jesus, Mohammad, etc. Of course, as a Muslim you'll focus on one person, a Christian another. It's all about your perception and background. Expecting ANYONE to teach their child in a completely unbiased totally open minded manner is really a stretch. Good if you can do it as much as possible. I mean, I make it as clear as I can that different people have different beliefs, and no one is better than the other. But it IS all clouded by perception. Total clarity would require total enlightenment. And that state is exceedingly rare, don't you all think?

I capitialize all religion out of respect for them I even capitalize God/s & Christianty. I guess your not supposed to capitalize Pagan because it's not a real religion.

Aside from the raging battle of faith versus reason within this thread, I see a much darker force at work.

If in fact it is decided that parents should not raise their children with a moral/spiritual code, what is to stop "officials" from coming into our homes and taking our children from us to "protect" them from the "brainwashing"?

I think the OP is much more sinister in train of thought than any I have seen on this sight in the past. As a parent, who is a christian, and who raises my son in the truth that I have known, I would be very concerned if it became common thought that a child should not be taught religion in any form at home. I can imagine a time in the future when our children are removed "for their own protection", out of fear of christianity, islam, etc... Can anyone with children here say that they would gladly have their children (their own, their nieces, nephews, grandchildren, etc) taken for the sake of "having a religious choice"?

Frankly this thread has disturbed me greatly, and I think we should all be aware of the implications such thinking can have on our futures and our childrens futures.

Well, we have the freedom of religion, so that can not happen.

Thank you. Sensible yes, easy...perhaps not...



First thing that comes to mind is that I will explain why Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha or whomever did what they did the same way I will explain why Frodo did what he did.

Of course I will help them understand it and there is always the chance that some tinge of me will color their views. My thing is when I teach someone something I do my best to teach them what is, not what I believe. I also teach other views and options at the same time if I can. Sometimes I dont have a view and have to defer to someone of greater wisdom and understanding. Is there the greatest chance some of me will rub off on my children? Yes, but I hope its some good things like free thinking which will enable them to come to their own conclusions.

Sometimes there is one answer. Nail equals hammer(I know I know. Define "hammer"). Sometimes many answers or more specific many viewpoints. The afterlife? Sit down Timmy this is going to take a while.

I will do what I can to avoid any bias, teach them the skills and have them make up their own minds. This is really the best I can do.....




Agreed....more or less........

Kevin A.

Nice try Sheri! If anyone knows about ad hominem it would be you, but I was simply pointing out how defensive and obtuse you get as soon as anyone points the flashlight your way while you seem to feel perfectly within your rights to make uninformed erroneous assumptions about the motivations of others. You immediately brings up fear as a motivation for trusting in God, and since there is no way you can know my motivations, then it follows that you are merely reflecting your personal fear about the reality of God on to those who know Him.

Take a look at Texas and that little religion fueled ongoing nightmare down there for one shining example of an attempt at this.

My government can not effectively take children out of the homes of abusers, drug users/dealers, pedophiles and the like. They feed a mindset that harbors criminals, institutes a sever sense of entitlement and freely allows this mindset to spread to many. There is no way they will be able to effectively take our kids away because of religion. Its ether. Its nothing. How would they or any other government ever manage it?

Also look at the current mindsets around the globe. Family never really was there to give you a choice. Society is what gives you choices and around the world we as a whole are a society of choice.

Will it become more of a standard mindset that children not be taught religion in the home? Perhaps but I highly doubt laws would ever come into being in most countries. Some.....yes maybe I can see it though personal gain and power would be the motives, not free thought or "for the children". No government would ever take children away from a home and instill in them free thinking. Children are taken from homes to be brainwashed into one mindset or religion.

Kevin A.

I've done this before; I'm a hobbiest english-o-phile and my schooling is in Technical Communications. Generally, we don't capitalize anything out of "respect" we capitalize for its part of speech. "Pagan" is a noun (or adjective), it's not a proper noun--stick with me until the end of the post, I promise you won't be mad at me. LOL.

The example I'd use is: Zeus is a god.

God in this form is a noun, not a proper noun.

The Chicago Manual of Style suggests, in contrast to the Bible, that His, Him, and He, should not be capitalized. Those are pronouns, not proper nouns. You'll notice I never ever capitalize those pronouns. (but I'm retentive that way. lol)

It starts to get dicey when you begin using words like pagan, buddhist, and christian. Typically speaking, Buddhist and Christian are capitalized because they are derived from a proper noun (Buddah and Christ). Pagan however is not. Pagan is a noun or an adjective depending on how you use it.

Now, here comes the loophole... English-o-philes are making a case to capitalize words like pagan and atheist for one very simple reason; Consistency. There are only a few hard fast rules in the English language and all rules are subject to change as the language evolves. I have a tendency to capitalize depending on how I use the word, for example I might write:

--> Please, meet my good friend norwood, he is Pagan.

but if I used it like this I would not capitalize it:

--> Some traditions such as Christmas and Easter are derived from pagan practices.

It's a super subtle difference, really almost too subtle for most people to pick up on; hence, the push to make it more consistent.

If I were writing a paper on paganism, I'd probably choose to either capitalize it or not in the very begining and stick with that through the course of the paper. Consistency. Search on the Web, as I just now did, you'll find that most people will say capitalize Pagan with the exception of groups who make their whole life out of deciding English "styles" of writing. They're changing their minds constantly, which is why some of the style manuals have 12, 14, editions or more.



To me, it's not a matter of respect or disrespect... it's a matter of what is the proper English form, which is right now in flux and changing (if it wasn't, English would be a dead language like Latin). I'm hip on whatever becomes the norm.

Sometimes I am rather inconsistent myself but usually I capitalize 'Pagan' when speaking about people who identify with term as a specific practice or as their faith but not 'pagan' when speaking about practices or customs and not even 'pagans' when speaking about the ancients who would have not used the word for themselves. Now it nuanced because when speaking about people who identify as 'Pagan' I do capitalize it because they are using it in a more specific sense, not just a general descriptor, and the same follows for terms like Neo-Pagan or Eurocentric Paganism, since these are all in reference to people who use the terms for what they specifically follow.

As far as Jesus and using 'him' or 'Him' it depends in how I am writing about Jesus. If in a general aspect or while discussing religion I will refer to Jesus as 'Him'. If from a historical aspect while attempting to separate my religious beliefs from what history can prove I will use 'him' since I am switching hats. God is usually capitalized in any sense but when speaking about someone else's gods or gods I will not. Sometimes as MMW stated it is about how it is first used but even then I might fall back on more nuanced forms. Overall though I might be rather inconsistent.

I think out of respect, I may start using the P here on this forum. Makes sense. Pagans? Any input?
Thanks Mel, appreciate the grammar lesson!

I actually found a really cool grammar site for religion writers when I was looking around on the Web for style guides tonight. VERY interesting stuff (ok, interesting to me, most would probably find it mind numbing LOL).

I also found a really good example of when to capitalize and when not to (note the source is a pagan albeit Wiccan source):

"Drums may pound out pagan rhythms, but you hear them at a Pagan gathering."

So you see, the first one is an adjective, the other is being used as a proper noun.

This is what I try to do most of the time... I don't always succeed, you have to really think about what you're writing. But the same could be said of using the word god. You have to really think about how you're using it before you capitalize.

I was asking for YOUR opinion, not mklsgl's opinion.




What you are expecting is a one-time flashy display of God's existence that will awe you and impress you. You will never encounter this. Not to mention that we are talking on the internet and you live nearly 3000 miles away from where I live. Showing someone God's existence is a process, not a one-time trip. If it were a one-time miracle trip you'd believe for as long as you remembered the effects and then stop believing. I have seen this happen. You would have to live with me and see the process, the life-living, and the continual interaction and relationship that I have with God in order to believe.

You want "objective" "scientific" "proof". You will never get that, nor will you ever get a flashy miracle. What you expect, you will never see, if that means you don't believe in any God of any sort, than so be it.

or I am on to something and you are getting defensive... instead of defending yourself against my pov


why not counter with how you are 'not' in a fear construct....and if i have assumed in error explain how...thanks...

Son quotes:
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!



finally Son this quote.... "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?"

it would seem you have a fear of something imo of course if we are looking at the underlying motivations that impact choices....I get that as long as you are in the religion you hold the fear at bay so finding your own path would be the equvilent of getting bit by a cobra your words or in other words analogous to child abuse for the christian.......

Kaizen,I thnk anytime we seek to control, impose, strong arm, use reward, threats, death or limits of ones freedom to cultivate a relstionship with the diety of our choice/ or no diety if that is what one prefers. in the manner that suits us as unique individuals and we do not allow questioning of ideas only obeidance and blind faith we are creating a fear construct ... We find this in christianity alot , now this isn't to say that those that are christians are bound by these limts or except them i am refering to the ones that do......on Um people such such as Miss wells, BM, lady R,Bella, Irish , pa do not off the top of my head.... ..
the way one beliefs and (if its filtered through fear) it will have an impact on how one gets on in society and with others... ...In a fear construct god is beleived to reign singularly from a pinnalcle of of a hierarchy based not on love and support and encouragment and spiritual freedom but upon fear...

OK, maybe this time you'll actually read what I write.

As a Christian what do I have to fear?

That God is not real? Just like I can't simply "pass on" my experience of what it's like to rappel off the side of a building to you, I can't pass on my experience of God to you either. But just because you have not experienced something does not mean it is not true. God's reality is a concrete to me as 2+2=4, so no, no fear of God not existing.

That I might go to hell? I was given the gift of eternal life, so why would I fear something which this gift makes impossible?

That I might "lose" my Salvation? If I had somehow earned my salvation, then doing something that could cause me to lose it would be a concern, but I was given this gift because the giver loves me and wanted me to have it, not because I did anything which in any way made me deserve it. In fact, I was given this gift BECAUSE I did not deserve it, so then what could I possibly do to "lose" it? So, no, no fear of losing Salvation at all.

So, exactly what is it you think I fear?

I seriously believe that what's going on is that my certainty of God's reality touches that little corner in your soul where you have not yet managed to stamp out God's presence and it triggers the natural fear of knowing that you are not where you're supposed to be with Him. The fact that you equate just having any kind of spiritually-guided values (especially Christian values) with fear is a very telling indicator that you are superimposing your personal fears onto those who actually have what you know deep down you need.

I don't think these are very good allegories because I have seen for myself the effects of scalding and whilst I haven't seen a cobra deliver a fatal bite ,it is an undisputed fact that it would kill and both are easily proved without difficulty .However when we come to God ,who's existence is disputed and no one has seen him or proven or disproven his existence .I feel that it is a different ballgame altogether.You can't have a personal relationship with some one who might not even exist outside of your own mind and to teach a child to spend it's life worrying about eternal death seems ludicrous to me

fullywired

They were never intended to be perfect analogies, just to convey an idea.

The fact you have not experienced God does not invalidate the experience I and many others do have, so while it may be ludicrous to you to raise a child with that idea, it is equally ludicrous to me who do know God to raise a child not to know Him.

My point is these experiences are not physical experiences ,they occur in your head and therefore are suspect


fullywired

But doesn't personal experience of God make God subjective? If God is a subjective experience, then God is by no means an objective thing. God is therefore subject to our own emotions and perceptions. And if God is subjectively known rather than objectively understood, then what are the implications for religion? Surely a problem arises with subjectivity instead of objectivity with regards to God. If God is subjectively known, then how can we understand anything about God as actual objective fact?

Getting back on track with regard to whether relgious conditioning of children is just harmless fun or not,heres two equaly disturbing documentary films showing the extraordinary lengths some religious folk go to indoctrinate their own children.
I realise they may be two extreme examples but it just goes to show how unhealthy this kind of cult mentality brainwashing actualy is:

Undercover mosque:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peFQWuk4nuo

Jesus Camp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bB2rt3IKJc

(suggest watching both documentaries in full)

it seems to me the savvy converter for the lord would get to know me and articulate a sales pitch that would appeal to a confident empowered female XD do their homework...... ...I'd scrap this if i was you hit the drawing board again..... ., Son quotes: " The fact that you equate just having any kind of spiritually-guided values (especially Christian values) with fear is a very telling indicator that you are superimposing your personal fears onto those who actually have what you know deep down you need."


i prefer depth and ingenuity myself .....

recently a good freind of mine felt I should be republican and presented an argument similar to yours i told her to get something together then talk to me Kudo's to her she did...LOL




My question is what happens if you change your mind and can you and still have this gift you speak of or is it conditional based on obeidance .....


take myself as an example, i do not make reward or punishment or gifts my motivation for anything..


then I would like to ask yout to define love in your understanding......

Not bad Karl

It is easy for someone to stand on the outside.....look in and "see whats wrong" but it is much much harder to be on the inside and see that exact same wrong.

Lol, there are no such thing as rights...only priveledges.



Except...christianity does allow the questioning of ideas, true christianity isn't based on blind faith or fear. Nor is it based on the desire to control, impose, strong arm, reward, threaten or limit freedom. It is based on the idea that all men do not meet the standards which God has set. It then says that because of our failure to meet these standards we are not able to earn our way into spiritaul communion with God because we have created a gap between his perfection and our imperfection. The rememdy to closing this gap is the bridge of the sacrifice of Jesus's blood. A person, who is still has that gap, can at any point choose Jesus and close that gap between himself and God. Those who choose not to close the gap (upon their dying) go into a state of total removal from the presence of God.

It can in essence be viewed that once we are born, we come into that gap. As we go through life, the gap gets wider and wider until finally we die, and the gap is so wide that we are completely estranged from God.

Christianity seeks to be a doctor to humanity...it seeks to rememdy the problem it sees as a thorn in the paw of mankind. It sees the problem, and sets forth a solution. Upon acceptance of Jesus as lord and savior a person recieves the Spirit of God. The Spirit works within the hearts and minds of believers in a process called sanctification. The Spirit purifies the soul through Jesus and thus when the person passes from this world to the next, he/she is brought into the presence of God because he/she chose to acknowledge the gap, acknowledge his/her ailments, and seek out to God who was calling to them. THAT is christianity, and I don't see any "Fear" tactics used in that.

Zandore thanks for the reply,I'll have to agree with your sentiments on that one.
It's painfully analagous to the frog in the pan of hot water scenario-if the water is gently boiled the frog doesn't know anything is wrong.

I think both documentaries should be viewed by as many people as possible,if only to expose the darker side of extremist religious beleif and it's adverse effect on young children.
Regards Karl

Oh, I see. You're under the delusion that I'm trying to "converting" you? Sheri, I can no more convert someone than I can grant myself eternal life. You are the only one who can decide to trust God or not. I'm simply sharing my views and explaining my stance on issues.

I have pointed out that your constant assumption that believers live their lives in some state of fear seems to be an indication of the unacknowledged fear you have, and that you can only see when you reflect it onto others.

Son you have misunderstood, i do not think christians live in a state of fear... I am gonna declare an impasse....


Lets try this ,
would you follow this diety if you had no promise of eternal life ?

why would you think the worst possible outcome if one decide to go another path???? this is not about me its about the post you wrote...

why would you assume or beleive you are of substandard creation?? this has to be the saddest post I have ever read....

I am speechless......

Iams is right the only fear construct is the one you have express in your view SS. No one else has nothing to fear with their chosen path or the path of another which does not affect them. The only view which expresses fear seems to be yours. Kaizen offered another view to provide balance and you feign sadness at the concept that one might understand, even if they disagree or do not accept, that the Christian view states that we are separated from God and in a way to better ourself we are allowed to reconnect. Kaizen does not agree with the Christian view most likely but he understands. The only person claiming someone is a substandard creation is you. Original sin has nothing to do with substandard creations.

Everyone knows good and well, at least we can assume, that that was not the saddest post you ever read. It is easy to see your view's feigned sadness and then mentioning of substandard creation is perhaps a vehicle to deliver negative comments while feigning sympathy.

No one said anything about being a substandard of creation Sheri. I believe that sin/evil is almost like a gift, it allows us to have free will, it makes our appreciation of God grander, and it allows for our positive choices to have more meaning. Nothing in that post suggested a "substandard creation" viewpoint. If anything, to acknowledge the problems you see in life and provide a solution is to be more mature than those who would rather have a touchy feely emotional make-me-feel-all-warm-and-fuzzy-inside religion. That is not the purpose of religion Sheri, nor is it religion's purpose to degrade a person. If that's how you view christianity than it is also how you view Judaism. Though christianity has concepts that are not Jewish, and are indeed blasphemous, much of christianity does teach Jewish concepts, to the point that christianity is not considered un-lawful for a Gentile by many sources.

All people sin Sheri, it's a natural occurence. I'm not saying it's bad , I don't use that word any more (at least I try not to). However, it all depends on our goal. Sinfulness is definitely a block in the goal of achieving Godliness because God is without sin. Judaism and Christianity both provide different solutions to that problem. Period. That's all it is. There is no fear involved. Christianity teaches punishment, and Judaism teaches punishment. Christian punishment is eternal, but that is the only difference. This fear you see in Christianity, I can only tie it to your subconcious psychological lack of overcoming your previous fears regarding your christian past.

It is the duty of a parent to teach his/her child about some sort of religious structure (to the religious person) because there is this goal in the life of the religious person to be devoted to spiritual truth, to be devoted to God. Different religions see God with different eyes, but each one has the same goal. That is all there is to it. There is no fear involved. Most religions do have some form of punishment to go along with your lack of desire to get closer, or your deliberate attempts to get farther, but there is no fear. Religion is the science of spirituality Sheri, religion does not have emotion, it simply addresses the problem, and provides solutions.

That's all there is to it.

No, Sheri, I have read your posts for almost 2 years, there is no misunderstanding, the only thing happening here is that you are now trying to wiggle your way out of having to face yourself again and the only reason you are "declaring an impasse" is because you don't want to have to explain how I "misunderstood"


Sheri, your question is such a clear indication that you really just threw good money away in taking all those college-level religion classes, and frankly also puts into question all those posts where you talk about being good friends with Christians since it shows a compete ignorance of who Christians are. I follow God because He is God, not for any personal gain, but because I have experienced a depth and purity of love from my Creator that is unmatchable by anything else that a human can experience, because I would hve to be an idiot not to accept an offer from the Creator to share in His love and learn from Him and reason with Him. The fact that He loves me enough to overlook the insulting way in which I have rebelled against Him and wants to share love with me eternally is pure gravy!


Now let's see if you're willing to answer a question: Why, given all of your studies into religion is it that you fail to grasp the most foundational of Christian tenets?


Because to me passing on an opportunity for an eternal life of fulfillment is the worst possible outcome.
.

With just a few months observation and I came to the same conclusions Iams. Her expressed views make me doubt they are ones that someone with religious studies would express.

She went from claiming she never heard of 'scientism' two weeks ago and then stating it was a theological term. As one can see from the Questia website most of the books written about Scientism are in Philosophy and Religious Studies categories but the very top places them all in this category (Category Home / Philosophy / Branches of Philosophy / Epistemology). (link)









As you can see by the dates of her posts the evolution of her views which does not seem likely for someone who is a student of religious studies. But as we all know anyone can come online and claim what they want. So for that reason I do not believe everything someone claims especially when they give reasons otherwise.

To top it off she invoked the name of Principe as an appeal to authority and when I actually listened to his lecture at The Teaching Company her view disagrees with his making me realize she mentioned his name without even knowing what he actually had to say on the issue.

What is this, an SS bash thread?
Clovis, you rattle on and on about "scientism". Who here actually adheres to scientism? Who would actually believe that science is the be all end all of all knowledge? Science doesn't explain logic, science doesn't explain philosophy. Any good scientist would understand that. "Scientism" as our friends down at AiG like to call it, is as self defeating as Skepticism (philosophy):

Source

In the mean time, could we please stop bashing Sheri and actually debate? Seriously, it doesn't help your cause to try to make her look foolish. I did it to DC once in a fit of frustration, and it did nothing to support my cause.

No on is bashing anyone. We are simply comparing expressed views with the claims a poster has made and they seemingly do not match. It happens regularly on the forums and I will repeat again: it is not advisable to simply believe someone has the credentials they state the do online especially when their views do not match. No bashing there.

Thanks Church, Clovis, is new so I'll remind him this sort of prattle belongs in Pm... and my deepest apologies to the thread starter.. for derailing this....lady O i am so sorry hon...

I'm asking for anything that will convince me that God exists. You know, something that actually has subtance, not something like a one liner "You have to have faith"! You're implying that you are not brainwashing a child by convincing the child to believe in God by SHOWING the child God, but what exactly is this showing? Does it still take a leap of faith becaue there is a lack of evidence? Does it requrie blelief, or not?

What I see, is you convince a kid to attribute different events to God. Well, first you convince them to believe in God even though there is no evidence. And as they grow, things will happen in their life, and they'll take that leap of faith and attribute it to God, saying "God did this, God did that", reinforcing their belief in said God. I call that a form of brainwashing. Maybe not a direct and purposful brainwashing, but it's close enough in my opinion.



Then this "Show the kid God" is still nothing solid enough to allow the child to make their own choice.

[/rant]

Didn't have much time so I just ranted. =)

Maybe its just me, but I personally don't distrust most of the people on this board, whether its you or Iams or beckys mom or anyone else. I try to give them the benefit of the doubt, as naive as that may sound.

But on a different note, and I called you on it once but never got around to responding to it, Clovis are you not also in a sense guilty of contradicting yourself? I distinctly remember you calling Leo out on it for rushing to defend IS, but don't you do the same for your beliefs? Sheri may or may not have heard of scientism, but to be honest with you, neither have I, until on here. And to be honest with you, scientism seems like a religious construct for those who like... well... science. It seems more like an insult than an actual philosophy, and, as I've pointed out, scientism is self defeating.

Way to go church, you provided Sheri with a way to vow out without having to answer a simple question.

And despite Sheri's little attempt to make it seem like this is off-topic and "prattle" that should be treated in PMs I believe this discussion is well within the scope of the OP since it's dealing with the reliability of someone who has made strong statements regarding the ethical wisdom of bringing children up with spiritual, especially the oh so evil Christian, values, so I ask again: Sheri, why, given all of your studies into religion is it that you fail to grasp the most foundational of Christian tenets?

Religious studies has little to do with the beleivers stance or the faithful persepctive...., I am not trying to be a preacher, waht you speak of is oral tradition that is passed on from generation to generation through ritual and bible reading. and church..........this is not what relgious studies is nessecarily it steers away form the faith based perspective....... ... it approachs religion from a historical, scholary, academic etc etc etc perspective basically..

I guess you are not aware of how many people go into religous studies to increase their faith and end up changing their minds, i was curious about this as so many have told me this so i decided to find out for myself .. which has lead me to further my education and some other reasons be more well rounded... .. and surprisingly i enjoy religious studies alot its fun its interesting as heck but it deals with what we actaully know and have evidence of ... through writings, archeology and history....

you have to remember i live in calif, the christians i know are more like BM and Miss Wells they do not ascribe to a fundamentalist view..( just meaning that the bible is the absolute authority).
.
how can you say that I am making strong statements when you have no idea what religous studies entails...

son if you felt so confident in your avenue nothing i said would matter....IMO otherwise in argumetation you use the contrast or oppsoing view to see how your posit holds up....

You are not using the term 'brainwashing' correctly. It is a serious term and should be used properly especially so we can discover those really engaging in such instead of crying wolf. But OK let us explore how you are using it. The following article is about a rather slightly different topic, those accused of being in cults and the like, but you have definitely taken it and applied to regular Sunday School type of activity which millions of Americans have their children attend. Or the mother who loves the wisdom of the Book and teaches her child the stories. Or the father who exemplifies the virtues of the Book and lives them as an example and talks about the good Word to his child. Nope...not with you...brainwashing, brainwashing, brainwashing!!!

I digress and now the article.



Robertson, Ian. "Sociology" Worth Publishers, 1981. p 432-433

Clovis, Shaun used to be a fundemantalist christian his whole life , he speaks from his experince as a christian ......if Shaun uses brain washing i feel confident he understands it....he lived it....just a heads up i know you don't know us all real well yet.......XD...

Look, I'm just looking out at what was said.

1. Of course a non-Christian isn't going to understand the tenants of the Christian faith. You have to walk the walk before you talk the talk. In the case of both ShaunZero and myself, we both have walked the walk and talked the talk. From what I gather, Shaun used to be a fundamentalist, and I used to be a Catholic. We've both been there. I don't know what Sheri's religious history is.

2. The Scientism thing, as I have demonstrated, is not a view held by anyone that I know of. Maybe Richard Dawkins. But in any even, just like Philosophical Skepticism, "Scientism" is a self defeating belief system. Scientism comes off more as a response to people calling Christians "creationists". It sounds more like an insult than a philosophy, and its coming from the Christian side, more than anything. I have never heard anyone identify themselves as an adherent to "scientism".