Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
gop_jeff said:2. I have not seen Christ with my own eyes.
gop_jeff said:1. Just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it's true. Before Newton, no one could "prove" that gravity existed, yet it was still true that it existed (side note: SpidermanTuba might say that the theory of gravity has still not been 100% proven - which would only bolster my case).
2. I have not seen Christ with my own eyes. However, this is not the only way of ascertaining His existence. For now, I have eyewitness accounts of His life, death, and resurrection; I have personal experience of interaction with God; I have logical proofs from nature, etc. to prove His existence.
Hagbard Celine said:Aesop's fables? I know plenty of kids whose parents brought them up in a non-religious household who turned out great. In fact, I know none who were brought up in a non-religous household who turned out bad. Most bad kids I know were raised going to church every Sunday. I have a friend I went to highschool with who didn't even know who Jesus was in the 11th grade and he's a great guy. He's about to get married in the spring--he turned out fine.
liberalogic said:From what I've seen, the main problem is the tension between one's duty as a parent relative to faith and placing a divide between your child and you by not instilling faith.
I will say that I refute the argument of "why is the sky blue?" or other examples like that because those can be factually deduced. There is a scientific reason why the sky is blue, obviously a young kid won't understand. But there is a definite answer to that. Religion itself is diverse (that's why there's so many), so to juxtapose facts and ambiguity (something that is an opinion/belief, rather than a scientifically proven theory) is kind of like comparing apples and oranges.
I have heard very convincing arguments in favor of teaching religion to children at an early age. While I disagree in my mind, I agree in my heart. There are probably few other venues through which a family can bond as strongly as they do through religion. My bias may stem from personal experience, as religion did not do this for me.
I do stand to this though: children should know that there are other religions out there as well, which I'm sure they'll discover if they go to public school. They should at least be aware that they are making a choice to believe in Christ, rather than Allah or anyone else.
Truth is tied up with the idea of existence. Truth is what IS. Religion can be tested. Maybe not with beakers and micrometers. But by outcomes and results. Children should be taught to seek and to test. But, there is nothing wrong with a parent's imparting his learned wisdom, what he has experienced and found to be true. We would never have put a man on the moon if Newton hadn't passed on his thoughts about why that apple fell on his head.liberalogic said:Okay, I see where you're coming from. But what about those who hav claimed that they've seen Allah? Or any other God? I'm not trying to disprove the existence of Christ, I'm just trying to make you understand why I don't agree with your earlier comparison. There is absolute truth underpinned by fact-- children learn them because there is only one truth in them. My comparison to religion is that there are more "truths" than just one. Whatever the case, I respect your unwavering devotion, though I may disagree.
GunnyL said:You DO comprende Ingles, right? You completely disagree with many Christian values. You aren't talking about them here; yet, you are questioning a Chrisitian value, Einstein.
I have addressed your question directly and avoided nothing. Apparently, if you don't like the answer, then it doesn't count as one.
Since you want to accuse me of attacking YOU personally, here ya' go .....I don't know if I need to draw you a picture or what ..... Parents are responsible for teaching their children what THEY believe is right until such time as those children are emotionally and intellectually mature enough to make those decisions on their own, or they reach the age of majority, whichever comes first.
That INCLUDES the parent's religion. Obviously if the parents didn't believe their religion to be correct, they wouldn't practice it, now would they?
I speak from a Christian point of view because I AM one. Talk about your bullshit deflection. What .... you expect me to defend Judaism or Wiccans? GMAFB.
I answered your question. You don't like the answer, too bad. But don't give me the tears routine in your bullshit attempt to villify me.
Here, talk to this: :moon4:
mom4 said:Truth is tied up with the idea of existence. Truth is what IS. Religion can be tested. Maybe not with beakers and micrometers. But by outcomes and results. Children should be taught to seek and to test. But, there is nothing wrong with a parent's imparting his learned wisdom, what he has experienced and found to be true. We would never have put a man on the moon if Newton hadn't passed on his thoughts about why that apple fell on his head.
liberalogic said:This is where I disagree with you. I admire your faith tremendously, but this argument sounds similar to many of those that you've posted for Intelligent Design. You cannot prove the existence of God factually...you can believe, but you can't prove it. You can say that certain things work out a certain way and it can only be the workings of God, but you can't conclusively prove it. Does that mean he doesn't exist? Absolutely not! But there is a distinction, however slight it may be, between faith and truth. Truth, to me, is when something can be concluded with factual evidence.
liberallogic (post106) said:I see religion as something that should be believed because you believe it and not because you were told to accept it.
liberalogic (post 107) said:This is where I disagree with you. I admire your faith tremendously, but this argument sounds similar to many of those that you've posted for Intelligent Design. You cannot prove the existence of God factually...you can believe, but you can't prove it. You can say that certain things work out a certain way and it can only be the workings of God, but you can't conclusively prove it. Does that mean he doesn't exist? Absolutely not! But there is a distinction, however slight it may be, between faith and truth. Truth, to me, is when something can be concluded with factual evidence.
I read a study awhile ago. The "studiers" found that there was a strong connection between children who were taught nothing (left to make up their own minds when they grew up), and believing nothing when they grew up. Either the kids are recognizing that there is nothing out there to believe in, or the children have been indoctrinated-- with the idea that religion is unimportant, a side issue.liberalogic said:My point throughout this entire argument has been about the ethics of instilling a religion in a child. I have stated that you are placing a bias on the child instead of giving him the room to make his own decision. I see religion as something that should be believed because you believe it and not because you were told to accept it. This is my underlying point-- of course your kids are going to believe it if you tell them that when they're young. But who is to say that they wouldn't choose another religion when they are mature enough. True, they will still have that opportunity, but by instilling it in their minds when they're young, you are diminishing the chance of this happening.
mom4 said:I read a study awhile ago. The "studiers" found that there was a strong connection between children who were taught nothing (left to make up their own minds when they grew up), and believing nothing when they grew up. Either the kids are recognizing that there is nothing out there to believe in, or the children have been indoctrinated-- with the idea that religion is unimportant, a side issue.
The first idea is false; my own experiences tell me so. The second idea makes more sense. Children are constantly observing their parents, even when the parents are unaware of it. Parents' actions and behavior translate into experiences for children, whether the parents are actively teaching them or not. At maturity, children do decide whether to accept or reject what they learned in childhood. You claim that teaching religion to children is indoctrination. I claim that NOT teaching religion to children is also indoctrination.
liberalillogic said:Do You Force Religion on Your Kids?
liberalogic said:I've wanted to bring this point up for a while and get some views from others. Is it really fair to raise your child as a member of any one religion? I know that tradition is important to many families, but I've always thought that if you are religious, you should firmly believe-- not believe because your parents tell you to do so.
Now, it's true that once the kid turns 18, he/she has the choice to believe anything or nothing at all. But the truth of the matter is that by telling your kids to believe something (or to attend church, temple, mosque or wherever you go to worship), you are not giving them a choice.
I've come to the conclusion that parents shouldn't raise their kids to be members of any religion (Don't worry, this is my ethical opinion, I don't think it should be a law or anything) because they are indoctrinating them before they have the chance to fully understand it and place it in the context of the world in which we live.
For instance, I was brought up Roman Catholic (not devout or anything like that), but I did have the fear of God lurking around me in many things I did. As a matter of fact, I was kicked out of CCD (catholic school for those who go to public school) for asking how Mary was a Virgin if she had Jesus (I honestly didn't know the answer and was actually curious). My point is that there's a difference between being told to accept something and accepting it yourself...I think the latter of the two is more important and this can't be done (with regards to religion) until the child is older and able to truly grasp its magnitude.
Trigg said:I personnally wouldn't TELL my kids to believe, but then I'm not big on organized religion anyway. This comes from being raised Nazarene and being told that all other religions are wrong. My question at the time was, How do you know our religion isn't wrong??, of course they didn't have an answer except you'll have all your questions answered in heaven.
gop_jeff said:That's really interesting. I attend a Nazarene church, and I've never heard anyone say that Nazarenes are right and everyone else is wrong. Not saying I don't believe you, just saying that it sounds... weird.
gop_jeff said:I absolutely disagree with the bolded statement. There are logical proofs for the existence of God. There are experiential proofs for the existence of God. I'd be happy to post either of them later on. There is still a place for faith; after all, like I said before, I have yet to see God with my own eyes. Yet, seeing with my own eyes is not the only means by which to believe. After all, which of us saw Thomas Jefferson write the Declaration of Independence, or saw Columbus land in the West Indies, or saw Alexander the Great conquesr half the known world? Yet we know these things happened because of written history and physical evidence left behind.
mom4 said:I read a study awhile ago. The "studiers" found that there was a strong connection between children who were taught nothing (left to make up their own minds when they grew up), and believing nothing when they grew up. Either the kids are recognizing that there is nothing out there to believe in, or the children have been indoctrinated-- with the idea that religion is unimportant, a side issue.
The first idea is false; my own experiences tell me so. The second idea makes more sense. Children are constantly observing their parents, even when the parents are unaware of it. Parents' actions and behavior translate into experiences for children, whether the parents are actively teaching them or not. At maturity, children do decide whether to accept or reject what they learned in childhood. You claim that teaching religion to children is indoctrination. I claim that NOT teaching religion to children is also indoctrination.
liberalogic said:Excellent point! I completely agree with you, and I haven't thought of it that way up until now.
I would address this by teaching children that there is a possibility of something higher out there, but letting them know that they will discover it on their own as they grow older. So rather than telling them to be a Christian, Jew, etc., let them be aware that there is the possibility of a higher authority. But don't tell them they must believe it and let them seek it out on their own.
Pale Rider said:But, if you're a Christian, the Bible "commands" you to go forth, and spread the word of God. That's why the Jehovah Witnesses go around knocking on doors.
I guess it could never be resolved. You see tension between fulfilling a parent's religion and a point of ethics. Religious parents see no ethical dilemma.liberalogic said:I know-- you're right. We were talking about the tension between fulfilling your religion (by "spreading the word of God") and the ethical point that I brought up with this question in general.
