Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Indoctrinating children
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="aiki" data-source="post: 58758624" data-attributes="member: 178791"><p>I don't dispute the methods of science. I dispute the idea that faith and science are somehow mutually exclusive. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a rather simplistic approach to knowledge, but you're entitled to your opinion. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>God has shown Himself in the person of Christ. But faith remains necessary. Having direct experience of someone doesn't preclude having faith in them. For example, I have faith in my wife. </p><p></p><p>[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]</p><p></p><p>I couldn't disagree more! Many homosexuals most certainly <em>do</em> spread their way of life with an evangelistic fervor. [FONT=&quot][/FONT]And when you object to them doing so, they call you homophobic and intolerant or worse. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Please provide proof of this assertion. In fact, homosexuality is not "in the genes" despite several attempts in the last twenty years or so to prove that it is. What <em>has</em> been discovered is that homosexuality appears to be the result of several covergent factors that are sociological, hormonal, and psychological in origin. No one is "born gay." [FONT=&quot] [/FONT] </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it is a desire to restrain an obvious perversion of nature and to preserve God's intended design for sexuality that produces a resistance to it among Christians. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, you agree with me that there are all sorts of sources of indoctrination imposing themselves upon us. Great. You were objecting to such indoctrination, especially of children, because they could not make adult, well-informed decisions about what to believe and not believe. It seems now that you are saying, "Indoctrination can't be helped," which seems a rather passive response given how animated you are about Christian indoctrination of children. Why aren't you equally as opposed to all forms of indoctrination of children? Why get so excited about what a Christian will teach their child and not what a secularist, or relativist, or naturalist will teach them? If indoctrination of children is wrong because they are unable to make mature decisions about what to believe, then all indoctrination is equally wrong. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Did you purposely ignore the point of my comments here? I offered them to explain why your caricature of what Christian parents tell their children (hell, hell, and more hell) is a Strawman Argument. </p><p></p><p>[FONT=&quot] </p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">I do - when their opinions warrant respect. No one is obliged to respect another's opinion merely because they hold it. </span></p><p></p><p>[/FONT]</p><p></p><p>Children think for themselves quite as a matter of course - whether their parent loves them or not. But, when they think that something dangerous is harmless, a parent is obliged by law and their own love for that child to prevent him from acting upon that mistaken thinking. When a child thinks hurting another child to get what he wants is okay, a parent is obliged to correct that thinking. When a child thinks tormenting an animal is fun, a parent must needs correct that thinking. And so on. These instances where a parent curtails or corrects the "free thinking" of their child is not unloving, but rather quite the reverse! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He would want parents above all to tell their kids the truth! And the truth, as far as a Christian is concerned, begins and ends with God. </p><p></p><p>It is ironic that your own prejudice against the Christian worldview informs everything you're writing here. You say that freedom is a valuable thing but you are espousing a view on this thread that treads upon a Christian's freedom to teach their child about their faith. Your words are ringing rather hollow and hypocritical... </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>None at all - within the God-ordained confines of a monogamous, life-long marriage. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't educate in this way for the same reason you wouldn't educate in accord with Christian philosophy: you don't agree with it! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're saying so doesn't make it so. I think <em>your</em> perspective is quite irrational, so your view must be totally opinion as well, then. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, he was promoting a worldview very different from the one my parent's had taught me. Our investigation into the novel was not a neutral one. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is no such thing as an unbiased approach! </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For the very reason you cited: They lack the capacity to maturely decide what to believe. </p><p></p><p>Selah.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="aiki, post: 58758624, member: 178791"] I don't dispute the methods of science. I dispute the idea that faith and science are somehow mutually exclusive. This is a rather simplistic approach to knowledge, but you're entitled to your opinion. God has shown Himself in the person of Christ. But faith remains necessary. Having direct experience of someone doesn't preclude having faith in them. For example, I have faith in my wife. [FONT="] [/FONT] I couldn't disagree more! Many homosexuals most certainly [I]do[/I] spread their way of life with an evangelistic fervor. [FONT="][/FONT]And when you object to them doing so, they call you homophobic and intolerant or worse. Please provide proof of this assertion. In fact, homosexuality is not "in the genes" despite several attempts in the last twenty years or so to prove that it is. What [I]has[/I] been discovered is that homosexuality appears to be the result of several covergent factors that are sociological, hormonal, and psychological in origin. No one is "born gay." [FONT="] [/FONT] No, it is a desire to restrain an obvious perversion of nature and to preserve God's intended design for sexuality that produces a resistance to it among Christians. So, you agree with me that there are all sorts of sources of indoctrination imposing themselves upon us. Great. You were objecting to such indoctrination, especially of children, because they could not make adult, well-informed decisions about what to believe and not believe. It seems now that you are saying, "Indoctrination can't be helped," which seems a rather passive response given how animated you are about Christian indoctrination of children. Why aren't you equally as opposed to all forms of indoctrination of children? Why get so excited about what a Christian will teach their child and not what a secularist, or relativist, or naturalist will teach them? If indoctrination of children is wrong because they are unable to make mature decisions about what to believe, then all indoctrination is equally wrong. Did you purposely ignore the point of my comments here? I offered them to explain why your caricature of what Christian parents tell their children (hell, hell, and more hell) is a Strawman Argument. [FONT="] [FONT=Verdana]I do - when their opinions warrant respect. No one is obliged to respect another's opinion merely because they hold it. [/FONT] [/FONT] Children think for themselves quite as a matter of course - whether their parent loves them or not. But, when they think that something dangerous is harmless, a parent is obliged by law and their own love for that child to prevent him from acting upon that mistaken thinking. When a child thinks hurting another child to get what he wants is okay, a parent is obliged to correct that thinking. When a child thinks tormenting an animal is fun, a parent must needs correct that thinking. And so on. These instances where a parent curtails or corrects the "free thinking" of their child is not unloving, but rather quite the reverse! He would want parents above all to tell their kids the truth! And the truth, as far as a Christian is concerned, begins and ends with God. It is ironic that your own prejudice against the Christian worldview informs everything you're writing here. You say that freedom is a valuable thing but you are espousing a view on this thread that treads upon a Christian's freedom to teach their child about their faith. Your words are ringing rather hollow and hypocritical... None at all - within the God-ordained confines of a monogamous, life-long marriage. I don't educate in this way for the same reason you wouldn't educate in accord with Christian philosophy: you don't agree with it! You're saying so doesn't make it so. I think [I]your[/I] perspective is quite irrational, so your view must be totally opinion as well, then. No, he was promoting a worldview very different from the one my parent's had taught me. Our investigation into the novel was not a neutral one. There is no such thing as an unbiased approach! For the very reason you cited: They lack the capacity to maturely decide what to believe. Selah. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Outreach
Outreach
Exploring Christianity
Indoctrinating children
Top
Bottom