Religious families-Do your children easily love God?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

LOL! I am 15:14 AGAIN. I just realized, and found it funny that for a person who says they do not believe in God, you sure have a lot to say about parenting and faith education of those of us who do.

HAHAHA

Yeah, kind of ironic, that.

I think there are a few non-believers participating in this conversation, and just because we don't believe doesn't mean that we haven't experienced a lot of what's being discussed.

Many of those who are now non-believers grew up in homes with very religious parents, so many can comment on the effect of these parental practices first hand.

Who would you rather hear from - the person who followed right in their parents' footsteps and never questioned, or the person who can say, "This is what my parents did, and this is how I felt about it and was part of my journey to a different belief (or atheism)"?

Maybe the HAHAHA poster meant to give non-believers another invitation to get lost.

I wasn't telling anyone to get lost. It was just funny to me that non-believers are trying to tell believers how to teach their kids about faith. That is not to say that some folks may not provide some good suggestions, nuggets. But, to me, most of it came off as a somewhat smarmy, and not so subtle attack on faith. A lot of it comes off as I'm smarter than you and I can prove it, I'm just not going to come off and say that right off the bat. I'm going to take the long way around to prove it.

I meant to say COULD PROVIDE some good suggestions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way I see it, is if you attributed the "wants" or "needs" or otherwise characteristics and personality of God to a human being, that person would have every major personality disorder in the book. I'm not just talking about the Christian version of god, but all of them would be classified as severely mentally ill, by the same exact characteristics - if they were characteristics of your neighbor, Mortal Homo Sapien Joe.

Guess that shows you have no idea about God.

I do, yes. I have a couple of degrees studying religion, and grew up in a religious home. Just because you don't like what people have to say, doesn't mean there's at least a little bit of truth to it.

ok studying religion and having a relationship is not the same thing... i could get a degree all about you, but if I don't know you personally, I don't know jack about you...just what people tell me about you. And just because your parents were "religious" in no way means they knew what they were talking about. It's not about your parents' relationship, its about you and God. Having said that you, you are correct in your last sentence.

That's fine. You're welcome to deflect. But it still rings true that a lot of statements about god's characteristics, would be highly problematic if the same characteristics were applied to a human. You can rationalize that for whatever meshes with your beliefs, perhaps as some kind of "exception." But it doesn't negate the premise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I believe in building a relationship with my Creator. That is what my kids will have to do as well."


There's the indoctrination part: I "believe" and my kids will "have to."

Are you being a smart ass? I am genuinely asking this question. "Have to do" as in I cannot build a relationship for them, not as in 'that is what I required of them'. And if you come back with some smart ass response about the improper usage of "have to"...

With the upfront and repeated "smartass" references, you're not making it easy for me to respond in a measured way, but I'll try. Yes, I thought of it in terms of "what I require of them" -- not a far-out interpretation, I don't think. Even with your other choice, it still has the ring of a mandate or an extremely limited choice, as in -- "they should work hard at it -- just as I have done."

And this is all about something you believe -- it's not like the benefits of vegetables over velveeta, for which there is evidence.

HUH???? Same difference if a friend says, one day I want to be married and I say "well, if you get married, that is a relationship you will have to work at it, you don't just get married and then sit back and do nothing, it takes work to develop that relationship"
No where did i say that i am requiring them to do anything. I'm saying that's what the work you need to put in to get what you want.
And I was being sincere in questioning if you were being a smartass, just being real. The idea that you were gleaning that I am mandating something...well i ASSUMED that most folk would understand that was not what I was going for. As for whether or not you are measured in your response, that's on you, your choice, I do not care. By the way, the velveeta -- baby that was totally smartass...no worries tho

unlike "indoctrination" which is descriptive of an activity, "smartass" strikes me as inherently and personally insulting. I know Christians cannot always act in Christian ways, but I won't be participating in any other discussions in which the term "smartass" is directed to me. The tone of this has changed so much for the worse, that I'm not sure if I'm engaging with the same person anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I believe in building a relationship with my Creator. That is what my kids will have to do as well."


There's the indoctrination part: I "believe" and my kids will "have to."

Are you being a smart ass? I am genuinely asking this question. "Have to do" as in I cannot build a relationship for them, not as in 'that is what I required of them'. And if you come back with some smart ass response about the improper usage of "have to"...

With the upfront and repeated "smartass" references, you're not making it easy for me to respond in a measured way, but I'll try. Yes, I thought of it in terms of "what I require of them" -- not a far-out interpretation, I don't think. Even with your other choice, it still has the ring of a mandate or an extremely limited choice, as in -- "they should work hard at it -- just as I have done."

And this is all about something you believe -- it's not like the benefits of vegetables over velveeta, for which there is evidence.

HUH???? Same difference if a friend says, one day I want to be married and I say "well, if you get married, that is a relationship you will have to work at it, you don't just get married and then sit back and do nothing, it takes work to develop that relationship"
No where did i say that i am requiring them to do anything. I'm saying that's what the work you need to put in to get what you want.
And I was being sincere in questioning if you were being a smartass, just being real. The idea that you were gleaning that I am mandating something...well i ASSUMED that most folk would understand that was not what I was going for. As for whether or not you are measured in your response, that's on you, your choice, I do not care. By the way, the velveeta -- baby that was totally smartass...no worries tho

unlike "indoctrination" which is descriptive of an activity, "smartass" strikes me as inherently and personally insulting. I know Christians cannot always act in Christian ways, but I won't be participating in any other discussions in which the term "smartass" is directed to me. The tone of this has changed so much for the worse, that I'm not sure if I'm engaging with the same person anymore.

You are talking to the same person, I was saying the remark was smartass, not the person making the remark. And, you do not know me, but I am oft to say that I am not being smartass -- referring to whatever remark i may have made or am about to make. Like I said - it was about the remark - which was why i said i was "genuinely" asking this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I wasn't telling anyone to get lost. It was just funny to me that non-believers are trying to tell believers how to teach their kids about faith. That is not to say that some folks may not provide some good suggestions, nuggets. But, to me, most of it came off as a somewhat smarmy, and not so subtle attack on faith. A lot of it comes off as I'm smarter than you and I can prove it, I'm just not going to come off and say that right off the bat. I'm going to take the long way around to prove it.

This is very interesting -- please consider that you may be describing your own reaction -- that over the course of the conversation, you started thinking that the humanists were actually smarter than you -- or least had good arguments that you had not expected, that were starting to sink in --and that you resent them for surprising you in this way -- that you feel taken in, and perhaps alarmed that your beleifs are being threatened. So you're projecting your feelings and calling it their behavior - and calling them names - "smarmy" and "smartass" to try to belittle them and put their ideas out of your head.

[Anonymous]

I'm the one that appealed to everyone to have an open discussion without resorting to alienating the other side. For DCUM I think we did pretty well on a sensitive topic. Baby steps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I wasn't telling anyone to get lost. It was just funny to me that non-believers are trying to tell believers how to teach their kids about faith. That is not to say that some folks may not provide some good suggestions, nuggets. But, to me, most of it came off as a somewhat smarmy, and not so subtle attack on faith. A lot of it comes off as I'm smarter than you and I can prove it, I'm just not going to come off and say that right off the bat. I'm going to take the long way around to prove it.

This is very interesting -- please consider that you may be describing your own reaction -- that over the course of the conversation, you started thinking that the humanists were actually smarter than you -- or least had good arguments that you had not expected, that were starting to sink in --and that you resent them for surprising you in this way -- that you feel taken in, and perhaps alarmed that your beleifs are being threatened. So you're projecting your feelings and calling it their behavior - and calling them names - "smarmy" and "smartass" to try to belittle them and put their ideas out of your head.

Nice try. I am a thinker, so no I was not surpised at something that changed my belief system.
Not that at all. I was simply stating the feeling I got from
some of the posts . I could be totally wrong about the intent of those posts. I was talking feelings, not concrete knowledge of the authors intent.

[Anonymous]

Do some of you truly believe that all people of faith are stupid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do some of you truly believe that all people of faith are stupid?

projection!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the one that appealed to everyone to have an open discussion without resorting to alienating the other side. For DCUM I think we did pretty well on a sensitive topic. Baby steps.

yes, it was nice for a while. and interesting throughout - even when the ad hominems started

[Anonymous]

For the sake of this argument, lets call it indoctrination. What exactly are they being indoctrinated in? Treat others as you wish to be treated, and be open to the presence of God. If the last part creeps you out, deal with it. Yes, many of you raised in a religious house, and stopped believing. You still function in society just fine. There's nothing wrong with indoctrinating children on God, as long as it's done gently. Which many parents do, and it enriches and enchants a childs life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do some of you truly believe that all people of faith are stupid?

projection!

Psychology? Boooo! This isn't the place for you psychology-go away.

Unless it's the Jung. He's more than welcome in this discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the sake of this argument, lets call it indoctrination. What exactly are they being indoctrinated in? Treat others as you wish to be treated, and be open to the presence of God. If the last part creeps you out, deal with it. Yes, many of you raised in a religious house, and stopped believing. You still function in society just fine. There's nothing wrong with indoctrinating children on God, as long as it's done gently. Which many parents do, and it enriches and enchants a childs life.

I am a PP raised in a religious household. My parents were "gentle," but nonetheless I spent a long time thinking something was wrong with me, and that sense of being wrong did have an impact. The thing is that even a parent who is being gentle does it within the framework of a belief system and unless you're in a religion that actively repudiates the sometimes cruel actions of god as taught in the major religious stories, a smart kid will know that no matter how gentle a parent is, the god of your belief system can act capriciously and with cruelty. It is very hard to resolve the idea of a god that loves you with a lot of the traditional religious stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the sake of this argument, lets call it indoctrination. What exactly are they being indoctrinated in? Treat others as you wish to be treated, and be open to the presence of God. If the last part creeps you out, deal with it. Yes, many of you raised in a religious house, and stopped believing. You still function in society just fine. There's nothing wrong with indoctrinating children on God, as long as it's done gently. Which many parents do, and it enriches and enchants a childs life.

I am a PP raised in a religious household. My parents were "gentle," but nonetheless I spent a long time thinking something was wrong with me, and that sense of being wrong did have an impact. The thing is that even a parent who is being gentle does it within the framework of a belief system and unless you're in a religion that actively repudiates the sometimes cruel actions of god as taught in the major religious stories, a smart kid will know that no matter how gentle a parent is, the god of your belief system can act capriciously and with cruelty. It is very hard to resolve the idea of a god that loves you with a lot of the traditional religious stories.

I understand what you are saying but I don't get where you were taught that God was capricious. But, understanding God and how people interpret Him and his Word is a whole 'nother thread. I will say about the bolded part above that what you says can hold true for secular beliefs, any value/moral system. By the way I certainly do not believe that teaching my kids about God and faith is indoctrination. I disagree with the other pp.

[Anonymous]

I teach my children what I think is good for him/her. I teach her to brush her teeth, for example. I teach her to eat healthfully, etc. And I teach her religious. I impart all my knowledge as to how to be a good human being and to have a worthwhile life, and that includes all of the above.