Is raising a child without religious belief the same as raising them WITH it?

Dave!

Hey folks ,

I saw someone (PDN?) mentioning this in another thread, so I'm just gonna see what people's opinions of this is.

Basically the point made was that by raising a child without any form of religious belief, you are effectively choosing to raise a child as an atheist, and so you have made a decision in the same way as parents who raise their child Catholic/Muslim/whatever.

So what do ye think? I'm talking about not bringing them in to any religious faith as a child -- yet NOT telling them that there is no god. The parent has not explicitly decided to raise their child as an atheist, and yet by default, because they were not baptised or whatever, they will not be a member of any religious order. They will of course still be educated on the various religions in an unbiased manner (ie. "this group believe this, this other group........")

If you asked such a child if there is a god, they would, presumably, be unsure. For a period they may say there is, and other times they may say there is not. Yet, you can't afford the same weight to the beliefs of a child, as to an adult -- so what exactly does that make the child, in terms of religious beliefs?

If they're raised as theists, they will believe in god. If they're raised as atheists, they will NOT believe in god. So if they're raised without having either of those positions instilled in them, they will not be sure either way. That means that they will not be theists -- is that effectively the same as raising them atheists? Or is their opinion essentially irrelevent and they cannot be considered either, until they have reached an appropriate age that they can reason effectively?(that age can I'm sure be debated, but <10 is certainly not it)

Cheers folks!

Scofflaw

Currently testing...tell you in 4 or 5 years.

cordially,
Scofflaw

philologos

Yes they both have a similar impact on children.

BrianCalgary

Every parent instills a belief system and worldview in their child. They can't help but do it.

When kids get to adult age they will make the decision whether or not to agree with their parents worldview and belief system or to discard it for that which they feel most comfortable with or that system dictated by their peers.

That is why I can't stand the idea that Christians indoctrinate their children. Every parent in that sense indoctrinates their children. Think about a wicknight offspring coming home to tell Daddy, "I have become a creation scientist and have been baptised and follow the almight and living true God of the universe, and everything you tried to indoctrinate me with is a load of horse apples and you lied."

kelly1

DaveMcG wrote: »

Basically the point made was that by raising a child without any form of religious belief, you are effectively choosing to raise a child as an atheist, and so you have made a decision in the same way as parents who raise their child Catholic/Muslim/whatever.

So what do ye think?

Happy new year Dave.

My own opinion is that bringing up a child with no religious education/formation is highly irresponsible and dangerous. Educating a child in the ways of a false religion is similar.

Raising a child without religious (Christian) education leaves a child with a serious disadvantage. I learned from experience and the grace of God that this world of ours is full of traps, snares and lies. I don't mean to be bleak but that's that way it is. Little or nothing in what is promoted by the media, government and popular culture brings us closer to God and any tendencies within us to seek God's are are mocked and discouraged. What chance does an innocent child have in the face of this onslaught?

You look at the news every day and see stabbings, shootings, drug abuse, corruption, greed. You look in the media and you see page after page of materialism, greed, wealth, "soft" porn, me, me, me.

How is a child moving towards adulthood supposed to understand what he sees in the world? Without being taught what is right and what is wrong, how is he to know when the world teaches the opposite. Without knowing that there is a God who loves us and that at the end of this life there is prepared in Heaven a place for each of us, how is a person to have a sense of purpose and meaning in this life? How many of us know that the whole purpose of life is to love and serve God and neighbour? This is not something we can come to know unless we're told.

A good Christian education is like a map and compass that points us along the road prepared for us by God. Without these we are very unlikely to know where we are, where we're going and how to get there.

God bless,
Noel.

Blackhorse Slim

My son was raised as nominally a Catholic, was baptized, made his communion, confirmation etc. However he was not encouraged to attend mass (neither was he discouraged) and didn't get any religious instruction at home (at least not from me). I am agnostic, with leanings towards atheism but with a strong interest in Buddhism. My wife is Catholic.

He is now 16, atheist, and interested in philosophy, both religious and secular.

FWIW

Dave!

kelly1 wrote: »

My own opinion is that bringing up a child with no religious education/formation is highly irresponsible and dangerous. Educating a child in the ways of a false religion is similar.

I'm afraid you've crossed the line kelly, I'm putting you on ignore. Not even allowed to educate the child about other religions, lol..... ridiculous.

BrianCalgary makes a few good points.

philologos

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

My son was raised as nominally a Catholic, was baptized, made his communion, confirmation etc. However he was not encouraged to attend mass (neither was he discouraged) and didn't get any religious instruction at home (at least not from me). I am agnostic, with leanings towards atheism but with a strong interest in Buddhism. My wife is Catholic.

He is now 16, atheist, and interested in philosophy, both religious and secular.

FWIW

Sure, I know of many who are raised in Christianity who are willing to read secular philosophy and learn from it, I personally have a great interest in Abrahamic faiths in general. Perhaps because I subscribe to Christianity as a philosophy and a way of life as well as a belief system. I don't see any harm with raising a child with a religious belief, and if I did have a child I would definitely raise them through Christian teaching and morality.

kelly1

DaveMcG wrote: »

I'm afraid you've crossed the line kelly, I'm putting you on ignore. Not even allowed to educate the child about other religions, lol..... ridiculous.

I'll clarify Dave. There's nothing wrong about educating your child in non-Christian faith as long as one doesn't say that all religions are equal or that all religions lead to God. It would be wrong to present a false relgion as truth and not making the dangers of same clear.

robindch

BrianCalgary wrote:

That is why I can't stand the idea that Christians indoctrinate their children

The word 'indoctrinate' means to teach somebody a doctrine, usually religious and usually with little, if any, criticism. It's in this specific sense, that most religious education is quite rightly termed "indoctrination" with all of the unpleasant connotations that this term includes.

All children start as atheists, and it's principally through indoctrination -- though there are other processes too -- by which children lose their natural atheism and acquire religious beliefs.

BrianCalgary wrote:

When kids get to adult age they will make the decision whether or not to agree with their parents worldview and belief system

Unless the parents make it difficult, as many do; or, if the society makes it difficult, as many do; or if your spouse demands a religious belief, which many do. And so on and so on.

In point of fact, it is frequently extremely difficult to discard a religious belief which one acquired through indoctrination, and it is quite disingenuous to claim or imply that the choice to do so is, in any sense, a "free" one.

Scofflaw

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Every parent instills a belief system and worldview in their child. They can't help but do it.

When kids get to adult age they will make the decision whether or not to agree with their parents worldview and belief system or to discard it for that which they feel most comfortable with or that system dictated by their peers.

That is why I can't stand the idea that Christians indoctrinate their children. Every parent in that sense indoctrinates their children. Think about a wicknight offspring coming home to tell Daddy, "I have become a creation scientist and have been baptised and follow the almight and living true God of the universe, and everything you tried to indoctrinate me with is a load of horse apples and you lied."

I don't agree, I fear. "Indoctrination" requires there to be doctrine, or at the very least a positive statement of belief. If I don't tell my daughter there's no God (which I don't), in what way am I indoctrinating her? She will find out in time what I believe, and she may choose to follow the same path. That's the way I went - I only discovered my own father (and his family) were atheists when I was in my late teens, by which time I had long since made my own way to atheism, on foot of reading the Bible.

I have no interest in "making" my daughter an atheist. I am certainly prepared to respect her religious position, if it is come by honestly - just as I respect the religious position of posters here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

philologos

kelly1 wrote: »

I'll clarify Dave. There's nothing wrong about educating your child in non-Christian faith as long as one doesn't say that all religions are equal or that all religions lead to God. It would be wrong to present a false relgion as truth and not making the dangers of same clear.

He can't see your post anyway Noel since he pressed ignore.

Ciaran500

kelly1 wrote: »

I'll clarify Dave. There's nothing wrong about educating your child in non-Christian faith as long as one doesn't say that all religions are equal or that all religions lead to God. It would be wrong to present a false relgion as truth and not making the dangers of same clear.

Are you talking about Islam/Judaism/Hinduism etc or are you talking about religions like Scientology?

PDN

DaveMcG wrote: »

Hey folks ,

I saw someone (PDN?) mentioning this in another thread, so I'm just gonna see what people's opinions of this is.

Not guilty, guv! It wasn't me.

I think it would be much better to raise a child as an atheist than to raise them up with the formalistic drivel of traditional established religion. The kind of cultural Christianity that many grew up with in Ireland has basically inoculated them against getting real Christianity.

However, a better alternative is to raise them in an environment where Christian faith is vibrant and exciting.

BrianCalgary

Sorry robin and scofflaw I disagree. Following is the definition of 'indoctrinate'.

in·doc·tri·nate –verb (used with object), -nat·ed, -nat·ing.

1. to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., esp. to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.
2. to teach or inculcate.
3. to imbue with learning.

Note definition 1: to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.

Now robin you recently remarked on your daughters action in church by going, 'blah, blah, blah.' ewhen the minister was speaking and added something along the lines of, 'that's my girl'.

By acknowledging this action as cute and funny, which under the circumstances did give me a giggle, you are imbueing her with your belief or philosophy of there being no God and a disdain for Christianity and their ministers. You can't help but do that, because you are her dad and kids want to emulate their parents until they get to a certain age, at which point they make their own decisions.

And to scofflaw, ther is no need for their to be a doctrine, just a biased belief or point of view, which we all have. Your particular view ppoint is that there is no god of any sort and you will pass that view on to your own kids, thereby indoctrinating them.

Zombrex

BrianCalgary wrote: »

That is why I can't stand the idea that Christians indoctrinate their children. Every parent in that sense indoctrinates their children.

Depends on what you mean by "indoctrinating"

I seem to remember having a discussion with you about this before, and I don't think you indoctrinate your children (if I remember correctly).

You don't tell them that Christianity is right and all other religions are wrong. You don't make them go to church, they go if they want to. And I'm sure if they wanted to go to another religions church you would bring them to that as well. You explain to them what you believe and then ask them what they believe. And then you discuss this with them, you discuss other religious and other beliefs. You hope that they decide to follow your religion, but you don't make them (again if I remember what you told me).

That is not indoctrinating.

On the other hand I'm pretty sure Kelly does (or will) indoctrinate his children if he teaches them that all other religions are wrong and immoral and believes that to not teach his children the "one true" religion is to lead them down the path of immorality.

There is a difference between telling your children what you believe, and telling them what they should believe.

But then Kelly is a catholic, and the RCC seems to put a lot more emphasis on the raising of children in the faith than the Protestant churches.

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Think about a wicknight offspring coming home to tell Daddy, "I have become a creation scientist and have been baptised and follow the almight and living true God of the universe, and everything you tried to indoctrinate me with is a load of horse apples and you lied."

I have offspring now? Doesn't that mean I had sex recently. Because I'm sure I would have remember that.

BrianCalgary

Wicknight wrote: »

Depends on what you mean by "indoctrinating"

I seem to remember having a discussion with you about this before, and I don't think you indoctrinate your children (if I remember correctly).

You don't tell them that Christianity is right and all other religions are wrong. You don't make them go to church, they go if they want to. And I'm sure if they wanted to go to another religions church you would bring them to that as well. You explain to them what you believe and then ask them what they believe. And then you discuss this with them, you discuss other religious and other beliefs. You hope that they decide to follow your religion, but you don't make them (again if I remember what you told me).

That is not indoctrinating.

On the other hand I'm pretty sure Kelly does (or will) indoctrinate his children if he teaches them that all other religions are wrong and immoral and believes that to not teach his children the "one true" religion is to lead them down the path of immorality.

There is a difference between telling your children what you believe, and telling them what they should believe.

But then Kelly is a catholic, and the RCC seems to put a lot more emphasis on the raising of children in the faith than the Protestant churches.

Thanks for that. But by defintion I have indoctrinated my children. They have heard my point of view, I believ it to be correct. We have looked at other religions. My eldest, who is in University and away from home (and being influenced by the new boyfriend), attended a mormon church recently.

She is making her own way and is sticking with Christianity in part because of the influence and teachings of her parents.

Wicknight wrote: »

I have offspring now? Doesn't that mean I had sex recently. Because I'm sure I would have remember that.

It would have had to have been over 9 months ago, remember? Is that recent?

rainbowtrout

kelly1 wrote: »

I'll clarify Dave. There's nothing wrong about educating your child in non-Christian faith as long as one doesn't say that all religions are equal or that all religions lead to God. It would be wrong to present a false relgion as truth and not making the dangers of same clear.

No religion is false to those that believe in it.

And a person can be taught the difference between right and wrong without having to bring religion into it. I am an atheist, and if I have children I will bring them up as such (ie without an affiliation to a religious faith or belief system), but I would teach them about the different religions so they can make their own choice when they are old enough.

kelly1

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Are you talking about Islam/Judaism/Hinduism etc or are you talking about religions like Scientology?

I'm talking about all non-Christian religions. I have respect for Judaism because Jesus was a Jew and it is a true but incomplete religion. I have no time for Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, scientology etc because they all teach that Jesus isn't necessary for salvation.

Akrasia

BrianCalgary wrote: »

That is why I can't stand the idea that Christians indoctrinate their children. Every parent in that sense indoctrinates their children. Think about a wicknight offspring coming home to tell Daddy, "I have become a creation scientist and have been baptised and follow the almight and living true God of the universe, and everything you tried to indoctrinate me with is a load of horse apples and you lied."

Christians do indoctrinate their children (to varying degrees) by making special effort to inculcate ideas by repetition and dogmatism that they would otherwise never consider as truth. Some christians just tell their children that there is a god and bring them to mass on sunday (where the child is usually bored to tears and doesn't learn anything other than the words to some prayers and when to sit down and stand up),
Others make their children go to special religious instruction where they are encouraged to memorise catechism and are told all the bible stories as though they were all objectively true.

Atheists don't do any of this. (at least very few of them). An atheist might keep his child away from religious instruction, but its not like he/she would send the child to richard dawkins sunday school where they learned all of the reasons why there is no god, and all the arguments against religion.

Atheists are likely to 'indoctrinate' their children to believe that science is an effective and appropriate way of understanding the world, but most people are rational and would allow the children to still believe in fantasy and to use their imagination. Only the most joyless parents would take away the magic of santa clause from a young child or prevent them from believing in superheroes and mystical creatures for as long as it is appropriate for them to do so.

kelly1

Wicknight wrote: »

On the other hand I'm pretty sure Kelly does (or will) indoctrinate his children if he teaches them that all other religions are wrong and immoral and believes that to not teach his children the "one true" religion is to lead them down the path of immorality.

I don't actively tell my children that other religions are wrong but if asked for my opinion I would say that all religions (except the Catholic faith) contain truth and errors and it is the errors that are dangerous.

Scofflaw

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Sorry robin and scofflaw I disagree. Following is the definition of 'indoctrinate'.

in·doc·tri·nate –verb (used with object), -nat·ed, -nat·ing.

1. to instruct in a doctrine, principle, ideology, etc., esp. to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.
2. to teach or inculcate.
3. to imbue with learning.

Note definition 1: to imbue with a specific partisan or biased belief or point of view.

Now robin you recently remarked on your daughters action in church by going, 'blah, blah, blah.' ewhen the minister was speaking and added something along the lines of, 'that's my girl'.

By acknowledging this action as cute and funny, which under the circumstances did give me a giggle, you are imbueing her with your belief or philosophy of there being no God and a disdain for Christianity and their ministers. You can't help but do that, because you are her dad and kids want to emulate their parents until they get to a certain age, at which point they make their own decisions.

And to scofflaw, ther is no need for their to be a doctrine, just a biased belief or point of view, which we all have. Your particular view ppoint is that there is no god of any sort and you will pass that view on to your own kids, thereby indoctrinating them.

Hmm. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm not going pass that view on to my own kids, because it is vital to me that they come to their own conclusions, whatever they may be.

How can I put it? I'm not dogmatically committed to atheism, but I am dogmatically committed to free thinking. How can I help my daughter become a free thinker by telling her what to think?

Now, you must admit, I think, that if I let my daughter form her own conclusions, you would expect her to become a Christian, because that is the best possible conclusion - so don't worry.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Akrasia

kelly1 wrote: »

Happy new year Dave.

My own opinion is that bringing up a child with no religious education/formation is highly irresponsible and dangerous. Educating a child in the ways of a false religion is similar.

So everyone in the world who isn't a christian and doesn't raise their offspring to believe in Jesus as the messiah is mistreating their children?

Raising a child without religious (Christian) education leaves a child with a serious disadvantage. I learned from experience and the grace of God that this world of ours is full of traps, snares and lies. I don't mean to be bleak but that's that way it is. Little or nothing in what is promoted by the media, government and popular culture brings us closer to God and any tendencies within us to seek God's are are mocked and discouraged. What chance does an innocent child have in the face of this onslaught?

You look at the news every day and see stabbings, shootings, drug abuse, corruption, greed. You look in the media and you see page after page of materialism, greed, wealth, "soft" porn, me, me, me.

Guess what, the majority of the people in the west who do all of these bad things were raised as christians, and many of them still profess to believe in jesus.

Christianity has no monopoly on morality. Jesus was by no means the first ever moral figure, nor were his teachings on morality unique or original.

How is a child moving towards adulthood supposed to understand what he sees in the world?

Well it'll be easier if he's not lied to and taught fairy stories as though they were the truth.

Without being taught what is right and what is wrong, how is he to know when the world teaches the opposite. Without knowing that there is a God who loves us and that at the end of this life there is prepared in Heaven a place for each of us, how is a person to have a sense of purpose and meaning in this life? How many of us know that the whole purpose of life is to love and serve God and neighbour? This is not something we can come to know unless we're told.

Thats your opinion, but personally, I think the idea that our sole purpose in life is to serve god is a pretty rubbish one. There are very good reasons why we should respect our neighbours, the simplest and most straightforward one is that it is a contract, we show them respect in the hope that they show us respect back. God doesn't need to come into it.

A good Christian education is like a map and compass that points us along the road prepared for us by God. Without these we are very unlikely to know where we are, where we're going and how to get there.

It is a map, it is a way to live your life, but it is not the only map, it is not the only way, and it is not even necessarily the best way. It's not a very good map either because its written very blurry and there are chunks missing, why else are there so many different interpretations about what is the right way? Why do so many christians think its ok to steal and screw other people, as long as they can magically separate their work from their personal lives?
Why does WalMart, the worlds most christian corporation, think its ok to use child sweatshop labour and pay their U.S. workers a sub subsistence wage that forces them to apply for state aids just to make ends meet? That's not very christian, or is it?

philologos

kelly1 wrote: »

I'm talking about all non-Christian religions. I have respect for Judaism because Jesus was a Jew and it is a true but incomplete religion. I have no time for Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, scientology etc because they all teach that Jesus isn't necessary for salvation.

Just reading your post Noel.

Just to comment, from a Christian point of view also. I recently finished Mere Christianity by C.S Lewis, and he brings up an interesting point in one of the chapters. The defining difference between an atheist and a Christian is that atheists have to believe that all religions are wrong (with the exclusion of Buddhism), whereas Christians are allowed to see that there is a sense of truth in other religions. This is the way I would argue from other religious views, there are a lot of similarities, but there are a few defining differences also.

I also believe that Jesus is the way the truth and the life like yourself, however there is a way we should approach the topic of other religions, without explicitly saying you're wrong. Infact the Christian way of dealing with it would be "it's not quite the truth, but there are elements of the truth in it". Arguing from similarities is also an interesting way to educate yourself and educate others about your faith.

kelly1 wrote:

I don't actively tell my children that other religions are wrong but if asked for my opinion I would say that all religions (except the Catholic faith) contain truth and errors and it is the errors that are dangerous.

Apologies I just read this post.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

I don't actively tell my children that other religions are wrong but if asked for my opinion I would say that all religions (except the Catholic faith) contain truth and errors and it is the errors that are dangerous.

How old are your children that they ask for your opinion on the truth of religion?

kelly1

rainbowtrout wrote: »

And a person can be taught the difference between right and wrong without having to bring religion into it.

What yardstick you use to tell right from wrong? Does it come down to feelings?

rainbowtrout wrote: »

I am an atheist, and if I have children I will bring them up as such (ie without an affiliation to a religious faith or belief system), but I would teach them about the different religions so they can make their own choice when they are old enough.

I would consider this approach way too risky. You can't gamble with a person's soul. It's a fact that the Catholic faith is rejected by the majority and Catholic teachings are jeered at in the newspaper etc. What are the chances that someone will come to know the faith and Jesus Christ of their own accord in spite of what the world tells them?

philologos

Akrasia wrote:

Well it'll be easier if he's not lied to and taught fairy stories as though they were the truth.

Would you teach your children that?

rainbowtrout

kelly1 wrote: »

What yardstick you use to tell right from wrong? Does it come down to feelings?

Partly it comes down to feelings, partly to intuition, partly to experience, lots of children do things which they know to be wrong and try to cover them up so they won't get in trouble. They don't have to be told its wrong.

kelly1 wrote: »

I would consider this approach way too risky. You can't gamble with a person's soul. It's a fact that the Catholic faith is rejected by the majority and Catholic teachings are jeered at in the newspaper etc. What are the chances that someone will come to know the faith and Jesus Christ of their own accord in spite of what the world tells them?

Well I don't think my soul is damaged in anyway. Where do you get your 'facts' from? And I think as 90% of primary schools in Ireland are run by the Catholic Church and if I have children they will more than likely end up in one of these schools, I think there's a fair chance they will hear about the Catholic faith, whether I want them to or not.

CerebralCortex

kelly1 wrote: »

What yardstick you use to tell right from wrong? Does it come down to feelings?

I would consider this approach way too risky. You can't gamble with a person's soul. It's a fact that the Catholic faith is rejected by the majority and Catholic teachings are jeered at in the newspaper etc. What are the chances that someone will come to know the faith and Jesus Christ of their own accord in spite of what the world tells them?

I haven't closely examined this thread. But one question that pops into my mind whenever I brush over your posts is "How in the unknown universe can he know that Catholicism is the right religion?". How can you claim this, it sounds absolutely ridiculous. I do admire your faith and the energy you put into it but try directing that energy into "what if?" questions and you'll see where I'm coming from. What led me to be an atheist was that while Catholics sing "Gods"/The supreme being's praises you're also very insulting to his intelligence if you think we have some kind of special relationship to him. HE'S A GOD(if he/she even exists) he can/could do what he wants yet Catholics/Christians make this guy sound so petty and infantile its brainsick.

kelly1

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Partly it comes down to feelings, partly to intuition, partly to experience, lots of children do things which they know to be wrong and try to cover them up so they won't get in trouble. They don't have to be told its wrong.

To give one example, why do so many women have their unborn children killed? Obviously their feelings, intuition and experience aren't enough to prevents abortions. Abortion is murder but yet it's legal in lots of countries. We all have consciences but our consciences need to be informed by true moral teaching.

Ciaran500

kelly1 wrote: »

Abortion is murder but yet it's legal in lots of countries.

We're going down a completely different path now but its debatable whether an abortion could be morally considered murder and you can't assert your opinion of it on the world.

BrianCalgary

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Partly it comes down to feelings, partly to intuition, partly to experience, lots of children do things which they know to be wrong and try to cover them up so they won't get in trouble. They don't have to be told its wrong.
.

There was just a gang related murder in Calgary on New Years day. I'm sure that the killers had the feelings and intuition and experience to determine that what they were doing was right.

Would you concur with their conclusion?


Also Akrasia:
Where do you get the idea that WalMart is a Christian organisation?

philologos

Ciaran500 wrote: »

We're going down a completely different path now but its debatable whether an abortion could be morally considered murder and you can't assert your opinion of it on the world.

The flipside of this is also applicable may I add.

BrianCalgary

Ciaran500 wrote: »

We're going down a completely different path now but its debatable whether an abortion could be morally considered murder and you can't assert your opinion of it on the world.

Yet you can assert yours?

kermitdfrog

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Yet you can assert yours?

He hasn't, has he?

JC 2K3

Saying that something's debatable and isn't relevent here isn't an assertion.

PDN

Akrasia wrote: »

Why does WalMart, the worlds most christian corporation, think its ok to use child sweatshop labour and pay their U.S. workers a sub subsistence wage that forces them to apply for state aids just to make ends meet? That's not very christian, or is it?

And what criteria are you using to pronounce Walmart to be "the worlds (sic) most christian corporation"?

I agree that paying workers substandard wages is wrong - that is why we have trade unions that were largely formed by committed Christians.

PDN

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Saying that something's debatable and isn't relevent here isn't an assertion.

But saying that you can't assert your opinion on it is.

kelly1

CerebralCortex wrote: »

"How in the unknown universe can he know that Catholicism is the right religion?". How can you claim this, it sounds absolutely ridiculous. I do admire your faith and the energy you put into it but try directing that energy into "what if?" questions and you'll see where I'm coming from.

I've looked into a lot of religions and philosophies and Christianity just rings true for me in a way that none of the others do. So I began with Jesus and believe Jesus to be the Way, the Truth and the Life. I then discovered that He founded a Church and asked Peter to feed His "lambs". I have many reasons to believe that the Church Christ founded is the same Catholic Church which exists today. I don't accept that the Church is merely a community of worshippers. It is the Body of Christ and has the God-given authority to administer the sacraments i.e. the authority to distribute the fruits of Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

CerebralCortex wrote: »

What led me to be an atheist was that while Catholics sing "Gods"/The supreme being's praises you're also very insulting to his intelligence if you think we have some kind of special relationship to him. HE'S A GOD(if he/she even exists) he can/could do what he wants yet Catholics/Christians make this guy sound so petty and infantile its brainsick.

I really don't see how Christians make God seem petty etc?? God created us not because He needed us but because of His goodness and love. God want's us to have a special relationship with Him. He wants us to put Him first by doing His will and rejecting the ways of the world. And He wants us to do His will because it is always what's it best for us. God's plan for every human being is that we become united with Jesus Christ and hence with God by freely accepting the gift of God's grace. This leads to everlasting life which is God intended destiny for us. God isn't haughty. He understands our cares and worries and He's merciful to those who acknowledge their offenses against Him. God sent His only Son to the world to save us by His death and resurrection. What more proof do we need of God's love for us and the enormity of sin!?

It is true though that God's love for us seems foolish in view of the fact that He loves us unconditionally despite of our sinfulness, indifference and the insults He receives constantly. People have no idea how much God loves us and how offended He is!

God bless,
Noel.

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

The defining difference between an atheist and a Christian is that atheists have to believe that all religions are wrong (with the exclusion of Buddhism), whereas Christians are allowed to see that there is a sense of truth in other religions.

We only believe that the supernatural elements of a religion and miracles etc. are wrong. Nothing stops us from believing that any of the morality taught in any religion is right, just that it's not derived from a god/gods.

Ciaran500

BrianCalgary wrote: »

Yet you can assert yours?

Jakkass wrote: »

The flipside of this is also applicable may I add.

PDN wrote: »

But saying that you can't assert your opinion on it is.

But someone with a pro choice attitude can't say people have to agree with abortions, while a pro life person says you have to disagree with them.

BrianCalgary

Ciaran500 wrote: »

But someone with a pro choice attitude can't say people have to agree with abortions, while a pro life person says you have to disagree with them.

But you are asserting an opinion and an attitude on the rest of society; being that abortion is OK.

Ciaran500

I'd be asserting the opinion that people should be making there own opinion.

If you look at some of the recent threads on abortion on here its a pretty popular opinion that people think abortion is wrong but its not up to them to decide for someone else so they are still pro choice.

JimiTime

Ciaran500 wrote: »

If you look at some of the recent threads on abortion on here its a pretty popular opinion that people think abortion is wrong but its not up to them to decide for someone else so they are still pro choice.

What a bizzare stance So some people who believe abortion is killing a child can still be pro choice? Does that go for killing a child that has been born also? Surely the two positions are at odds with each other? or did I take that up wrong?

PDN

JimiTime wrote: »

What a bizzare stance So some people who believe abortion is killing a child can still be pro choice? Does that go for killing a child that has been born also? Surely the two positions are at odds with each other? or did I take that up wrong?

It would be like arguing that paedophilia is wrong, but still defending the right of paedophiles to abuse children because you can't go imposing your will on others.

Bottle_of_Smoke

kelly1 wrote: »

I would consider this approach way too risky. You can't gamble with a person's soul. It's a fact that the Catholic faith is rejected by the majority and Catholic teachings are jeered at in the newspaper etc. What are the chances that someone will come to know the faith and Jesus Christ of their own accord in spite of what the world tells them?

This would make sense if you knew that's what God wanted. Though lets say Hinduism is actually the "correct" faith. Then you'd be making the Gods angry with your child if make him/her a Christian.

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

What yardstick you use to tell right from wrong? Does it come down to feelings?

What yardstick do you use to tell that the morals traditions of a nomadic tribe that lived in the Middle East 4,000 years ago is the system to teach your children?

Would that be a "feeling" also?

kelly1 wrote: »

You can't gamble with a person's soul.

Isn't that what you are doing by teaching your children that Catholicism is the correct religion and all others are wrong?

What if you are wrong?

Akrasia

BrianCalgary wrote: »

There was just a gang related murder in Calgary on New Years day. I'm sure that the killers had the feelings and intuition and experience to determine that what they were doing was right.

There is every chance that the murderers were christian, brought up to believe in god, and taught the christian version of morality.

People reject the right course of action all the time, people of all 'faiths' of all philosophical dispositions. Morality has nothing to do with religion, Our actions have everything to do with the circumstances we find ourselves in, our culture, our upbringing, what we have to gain from being moral people, and what we have to lose by not being moral (or vice versa).

Violence is a social phenomenon, it exists equally amongst the deeply religious, the deeply political, and the deeply alienated.

Also Akrasia:
Where do you get the idea that WalMart is a Christian organisation?

They claim to be christian, they hold regular prayer meetings, they try to uphold 'christian values' they pander to christian fundamentalist groups at the expense of Gay rights charities http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,231259,00.html

Walmart are one of the most hypocritical corporations on the planet, but they do appeal to the christian right in America (except when they give tiny amounts of money to gay charities.... the christian groups don't seem to care about the sweatshops or the slave wages)

Akrasia

kelly1 wrote: »

I've looked into a lot of religions and philosophies and Christianity just rings true for me in a way that none of the others do. So I began with Jesus and believe Jesus to be the Way, the Truth and the Life. I then discovered that He founded a Church and asked Peter to feed His "lambs". I have many reasons to believe that the Church Christ founded is the same Catholic Church which exists today. I don't accept that the Church is merely a community of worshippers. It is the Body of Christ and has the God-given authority to administer the sacraments i.e. the authority to distribute the fruits of Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

So you're a catholic then? And you believe that the RC church is the one true christian church?
Even absolutely made up nonsense like the 'assumption of Mary into heaven' and other blatantly ridiculous claims like 'transubstantiation' (it's simply not true, even the simplest empirical or chemical analysis would clearly demonstrate that there has been zero physical change before the consecration compared with afterwards)

Akrasia

kelly1 wrote: »

I really don't see how Christians make God seem petty etc?? God created us not because He needed us but because of His goodness and love. God want's us to have a special relationship with Him. He wants us to put Him first by doing His will and rejecting the ways of the world.

So why did he create dolphins then? Do dolphins have a special relationship with god too or was it just for our own pleasure and benefit?
What about those deep sea creatures that we only just learned exist have practically zero impact on the wider eco system? What's their purpose? to give David Attenborough something to film?


Why would he make the 'ways of the world' the way they are if he then wants us to reject them? Moreso, if he wants to protect us from the ways of the world? (that he created)
That's a bit like me putting a newborn baby on a high precipice and then expecting the baby to be eternally grateful to me for advising him on how not to fall off.

Akrasia

BrianCalgary wrote: »

But you are asserting an opinion and an attitude on the rest of society; being that abortion is OK.

The old testament asserts that you should murder someone who has a different faith to you. Foetus' are inherently atheist (having no conscience and all, they essentially have no belief in god)