How old were you when you realised?

Originally posted by FMF
You filled the head of a 6 year old with speculations and hopes-for-immortality that you yourself decided to subscribe to only in your mid-20s? I don't see how trying to simplify your theories about the supernatural, and feeding them to her, squares with your desire to "protect the sanctity of her mind".

Read much? Amazing that a Christian can honestly and publicly admit their grappling with simple/hard concepts and you walk away with brainwashing. What kind of jackass looks for confrontation when faced with another's confliction?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
My daughter (6) recently asked me—out of nowhere—why God, if He cares about us, might let bad things happen to us. I was totally blind-sided by the question and didn't feel I could give her a satisfactory response. And if you can't explain it so a child can understand it, most likely you don't understand it yourself. I managed a, "Well... human ...[text shortened]... mind. Not many six year-olds raise the problem of evil, and, frankly, it makes me proud.

I hear ya. In my quest to raise thoughtful kids, my sermonizing is nearly non-existent in light of my duties as their regent. It's a tricky path that requires a common vocabulary, so my first tack is to establish words and concepts in a concrete manner based upon their understanding of their own worlds.

While I am respectful of their reasoning, I don't allow them to think their reason is the sole arbiter of reality: what must be developed certainly cannot be implicitly trusted. Like you, I encourage questions and encourage doubt. I challenge them to douse the altar and then watch the consuming fire, resting assured He has answers to questions not even thought of yet.

Being a parent is a joy, a reward for which I cannot express enough gratitude.

Family Circus broke my faith. There was one that went

"Mommy, how come the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus have the same handwriting?"

That's when I knew.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Your highly intuitive eight year old self serves as a case in point for part of my statement. Had anyone around you (including the pastor) been equipped with doctrine, they would have been able to explain how the will of God is running co-terminus with the will of man, thereby clearing up any seeming contradictions to the goodness of God.

Your highly intuitive eight year old self serves as a case in point for part of my statement. Had anyone around you (including the pastor) been equipped with propaganda, they would have been able to explain how the will of God is running co-terminus with the will of man, thereby clearing up any seeming contradictions to the goodness of God.

Fixed.

Originally posted by FMF
You filled the head of a 6 year old with speculations and hopes-for-immortality that you yourself decided to subscribe to only in your mid-20s? I don't see how trying to simplify your theories about the supernatural, and feeding them to her, squares with your desire to "protect the sanctity of her mind".

There is a yawning chasm separating merely 'subscribing' to something and the unadulterated recognition of truth. If you are able to comprehend that, which I hope and expect you are, then you should be able to grasp why sharing my faith with my daughter isn't contrary to protecting the sanctity of her mind.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I hear ya. In my quest to raise thoughtful kids, my sermonizing is nearly non-existent in light of my duties as their regent. It's a tricky path that requires a common vocabulary, so my first tack is to establish words and concepts in a concrete manner based upon their understanding of their own worlds.

While I am respectful of their reasoning, I don' ...[text shortened]... ught of yet.

Being a parent is a joy, a reward for which I cannot express enough gratitude.

Like you, I encourage questions and encourage doubt. I challenge them to douse the altar and then watch the consuming fire, resting assured He has answers to questions not even thought of yet.

Ain't it the truth.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
There is a yawning chasm separating merely 'subscribing' to something and the unadulterated recognition of truth. If you are able to comprehend that, which I hope and expect you are, then you should be able to grasp why sharing my faith with my daughter isn't contrary to protecting the sanctity of her mind.

I have children too. But I find you telling her that she will live forever, or words to that effect, and telling us that you do this so as to be "protecting the sanctity of her mind" utterly incoherent. I am sure there are incoherent things about the way I raise my kids too.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Read much? Amazing that a Christian can honestly and publicly admit their grappling with simple/hard concepts and you walk away with brainwashing. What kind of jackass looks for confrontation when faced with another's confliction?

I am not looking for "confrontation". epiphinehas brought his young daughter into this discussion, not me. He made what I see as utterly incoherent claims about what he was doing. As a fellow parent, I simply said so. You calling me a "jackass" makes it sound like it is you that is seeking "confrontation" rather than either me or epiphinehas.

Originally posted by FMF
I have children too. But I find you telling her that she will live forever, or words to that effect, and telling us that you do this so as to be "protecting the sanctity of her mind" utterly incoherent. I am sure there are incoherent things about the way I raise my kids too.

The reason it probably sounds incoherent to you is that you don't share my convictions about reality. To 'protect the sanctity' of my daughter's mind means, to me, allowing her the freedom to doubt and form beliefs accordingly. If she asks a question about God, I'm going to give her the best answer I can in that context—why wouldn't I? If your child asked you why there are so many species of bird, wouldn't you give him or her a general rundown of evolutionary theory? Would you say that by doing so you weren't protecting the sanctity of his or her mind?

Let's say your child starts to question your account of how the universe works. Let's say he becomes convinced that the universe could not have begun on its own, that there must be a God. Would you squash that moment of freethinking? Or would you allow him the room to explore the idea further? I believe, if you were interested in protecting the sanctity of your child's mind, that you would allow him to continue in his belief. Of course, that wouldn't mean you'd have to abandon your own beliefs, or remain silent on the issue. Similarly in my case.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
The reason it probably sounds incoherent to you is that you don't share my convictions about reality.

Exactly. Whether it draws gratuitous personal insults from the likes of you and FreakyKBH or not, I find your concept of what "protects" the "sanctity" of a 6 year old's mind incoherent because I do not share your superstitions and your speculations about your own immortality. Exactly. I am not for one minute suggesting you should change the way you raise your children. I was simply commenting on what you revealed about yourself.

Originally posted by FMF
Exactly. Whether it draws gratuitous personal insults from the likes of you and FreakyKBH or not, I find your concept of what "protects" the "sanctity" of a 6 year old's mind incoherent because I do not share your superstitions and your speculations about your own immortality. Exactly. I am not for one minute suggesting you should change the way you raise your children. I was simply commenting on what you revealed about yourself.

Personally, I am not in the least bit offended by anything you've said. And I don't think I've insulted you, have I? But, are you going to respond to the rest of my post?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
But, are you going to respond to the rest of my post?

No. The topic you raised was your child and your belief in the afterlife. I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent. How I talk to my children is not on in play here. Suffice to say that I have no doubt that the way I deal with them is not always coherent either.

if [God] cares about us, [why] might [He] let bad things happen to us. I was totally blind-sided by the question and didn't feel I could give her a satisfactory response..

"Bad things" in the human world, like injustice - for instance - mostly have political causes and political solutions. I don't see why children have to be encouraged to think that the causes and solutions are supernatural. Surely a little child can wait till they are in their mid-twenties, like you did, before telling themselves that "bad things" have got something to do with metaphysics.

But, as I said, I have no wish to dictate to you whether you should tell your children things you know to be the truth or whether to tell them things you hope are true. None of my business, except in so far as what you revealed struck me as incoherent and what you decided was a "satisfactory response" struck me as being not a "satisfactory response".

Originally posted by FMF
No. The topic you raised was your child and your belief in the afterlife. I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent. How I talk to my children is not on in play here. Suffice to say that I have no doubt that the way I deal with them is not always coherent either.

if [God] cares about us, [why] might [He] let bad things happen ecided was a "satisfactory response" struck me as being not a "satisfactory response".

I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent.

I get that, but the part of my post you won't respond to argues that what I claimed to be doing is in fact not incoherent.

How I talk to my children is not on in play here.

Consider it hypothetical then, it really doesn't matter:

A child of atheistic parents starts to question the atheistic account of how the universe works. Let's say he becomes convinced that the universe could not have begun on its own—that there must be a God. Would it be right to squash that moment of freethinking? Or would it be right to allow him the room to explore the idea further? If the atheist parents were interested in 'protecting the sanctity of the child's mind', they would allow him to continue in his belief. Of course, that wouldn't mean they'd have to abandon their own beliefs, nor remain silent on the issue.

Similarly in my case.

"Bad things" in the human world, like injustice - for instance - mostly have political causes and political solutions. I don't see why children have to be encouraged to think that the causes and solutions are supernatural.

Undoubtedly, some 'bad things' are political in nature, but not all. When my daughter asks why God allows bad things to happen to us if God loves us, surely she isn't thinking of bad things of a political nature. More likely, things like tornadoes, lightning bolts and other freak accidents.

But, as I said, I have no wish to dictate to you whether you should tell your children things you know to be the truth or whether to tell them things you hope are true. None of my business, except in so far as what you revealed struck me as incoherent and what you decided was a "satisfactory response" struck me as being not a "satisfactory response".

In fact, I indicated the opposite, that the response I gave didn't strike me as satisfactory at all.

In truth, I don't know if there is a satisfactory response to the problem of evil. The best anyone can do, I think, is show how the existence of evil doesn't necessarily preclude the existence of a loving Creator, but that type of esoteric argument I don't think lends itself to a satisfactory answer. It is understandable how the problem of evil might be a deal-breaker for some people.

If my daughter wants information from me regarding why God allows such things to happen to us, of course I'm going to give the best answer possible (as she does believe in God). Whether my answer is ultimately satisfactory for her remains to be seen. The point of my original post being, if it isn't ultimately satisfactory for her, I'm comfortable with her being true to her own instincts. All in all, you haven't provided me a good reason to think there is anything incoherent about my position.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent.

I get that, but the part of my post you won't respond to argues that what I claimed to be doing is in fact not incoherent.

How I talk to my children is not on in play here.

Consider it hypothetical then, it really doesn't matter:

A child of atheistic ...[text shortened]... a good reason to think there is anything incoherent about my position.[/b]

A 6 year old already "believes in" God. Does she also believe her teddy bears and dolls are "real"? What's your definition of "sanctity"?

If you're comfortable talking about your children, all well and good. I won't talk about my own children. A few weeks ago Seitse made persistent accusations of pedophilia against me in the Debate Forum (for which I gather he has been banned for a long time) - the only poster who went along with it and who made the same insinuations was FreakyKBH, who seems to be a regular on this forum. My wife read some of the posts by Seitse and FreakyKBH and was upset. For this reason I am not willing to talk about my children here.

Originally posted by FMF
A 6 year old already "believes in" God. Does she also believe her teddy bears and dolls are "real"? What's your definition of "sanctity"?

If you're comfortable talking about your children, all well and good. I won't talk about my own children. A few weeks ago Seitse made persistent accusations of pedophilia against me in the Debate Forum (for which I gather h ...[text shortened]... eakyKBH and was upset. For this reason I am not willing to talk about my children here.

I understand your reticence in light of those types of accusations, although I fail to see why not being willing to discuss your children should prevent you from acknowledging the gist of my argument. But whatever, if you feel that way, that's fine. I don't hold it against you. Let's drop the whole discussion—I'll acknowledge that you find my post incoherent and leave it at that.