Ugh, Christian intervention @ my house tonight! Live!

[TheVrolok]

Religiosity and church attendance has been declining for a long time. If more people were adopting christianity, the major religion of the us, then the trend would be reversed. Basically, old school, main line protestantism is shrinking in the US, with some moving towards hardcore evangelism, but the rest not attending church.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tren.htm

I agree with this 100%.. but you've changed the point; unless you're saying that the only way to voluntarily be religious is to go from a state of non-religion to religion, and that, in addition, people born into a religious family cannot, in your opinion, by definition be voluntarily religious.

 

[preslove]

I agree with this 100%.. but you've changed the point; unless you're saying that the only way to voluntarily be religious is to go from a state of non-religion to religion, and that, in addition, people born into a religious family cannot, in your opinion, by definition be voluntarily religious.

Growing up being told that, in addition to the tooth fairy, santa, and the easter bunny, there's this God, who created everything and sent his kid down to get killed for all our sins, and this dude paul came along and added all this other stuff about the kid he never met, seems pretty much to be nonconsensual indoctrination, to me. Are you actually trying to claim otherwise? Are you implying that five year olds in sunday school voluntarily chose their religion?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I agree with this 100%.. but you've changed the point; unless you're saying that the only way to voluntarily be religious is to go from a state of non-religion to religion, and that, in addition, people born into a religious family cannot, in your opinion, by definition be voluntarily religious.

In support of the post above, Children raised in Christian households are certainly more likely to be Christian than children raised in non-Christian households. That's rather obvious. But to suggest that you can "brainwash" your children into Christianity is rather silly, in my opinion. Children have then own minds and form their own opinions. If you deny this, my guess is you don't have children.

 

[TheVrolok]

Growing up being told that, in addition to the tooth fairy, santa, and the easter bunny, there's this God, who created everything and sent his kid down to get killed for all our sins, and this dude paul came along and added all this other stuff about the kid he never met, seems pretty much to be nonconsensual indoctrination, to me. Are you actually trying to claim otherwise? Are you implying that five year olds in sunday school voluntarily chose their religion?

No, I'm not claiming 5 year olds are making nearly any decisions for themselves. However, I know quite a few people from religious families who are now no longer religious and others who are not from religious families who are religious. In addition, I know quite a few people who are from religious families that were absolutely allowed to do as they pleased when it came to religion once they reached adulthood - some remained religious. Are you saying that being born into a religious family automatically revokes your ability to ever choose for yourself because you've been biased? There are many, many things that parents impress upon their children - some of those things stick, some don't. Religion is the same.

 

[konakid7]

I was raised Christian, forced to go to church every Sunday. By the time I was 12 or so though I could tell there were serious problems with the bible, contradictions and what not, that made me realize how absurd some parts of Christianity are.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Growing up being told that, in addition to the tooth fairy, santa, and the easter bunny, there's this God, who created everything and sent his kid down to get killed for all our sins, and this dude paul came along and added all this other stuff about the kid he never met, seems pretty much to be nonconsensual indoctrination, to me. Are you actually trying to claim otherwise? Are you implying that five year olds in sunday school voluntarily chose their religion?

What is you ultimate point, that children of Christian parents be removed from their homes and educated by the state? If not, what is it?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I was raised Christian, forced to go to church every Sunday. By the time I was 12 or so though I could tell there were serious problems with the bible, contradictions and what not, that made me realize how absurd some parts of Christianity are.

Can you give me an example of what you consider a contradiction?

 

[preslove]

No, I'm not claiming 5 year olds are making nearly any decisions for themselves. However, I know quite a few people from religious families who are now no longer religious and others who are not from religious families who are religious. In addition, I know quite a few people who are from religious families that were absolutely allowed to do as they pleased when it came to religion once they reached adulthood - some remained religious. Are you saying that being born into a religious family automatically revokes your ability to ever choose for yourself because you've been biased? There are many, many things that parents impress upon their children - some of those things stick, some don't. Religion is the same.

Well, I've never met a single churchgoer who did not attend as a child. So, our anecdotal evidence contradict. But, the aggregate data is on the side of my anecdotal evidence, not yours.

As for growing up in religion, I think that as children grow, they have a worldview impressed upon them by their parents, peers, and extended friends/family. If you grow up in a place where everyone thinks that jesus died for your sins, then you are going to be an adult who grows to believe that, unless something (like secular education?) changes. Same about muslims, hindus, jews.

The only reason these religions survive is because they successfully indoctrinate new generations into believing what their parents believed.

Also, the idea that people "choose" Christianity "voluntarily" kind of implies that this is a rational decision. Considering that Christianity is based on faith, a nonrational belief, this is pretty silly.

 

[preslove]

Can you give me an example of what you consider a contradiction?

lol

Don't think too hard. No one here is going to convince you of anything.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Well, I've never met a single churchgoer who did not attend as a child. So, our anecdotal evidence contradict. But, the aggregate data is on the side of my anecdotal evidence, not yours.

As for growing up in religion, I think that as children grow, they have a worldview impressed upon them by their parents, peers, and extended friends/family. If you grow up in a place where everyone thinks that jesus died for your sins, then you are going to be an adult who grows to believe that, unless something (like secular education?) changes. Same about muslims, hindus, jews.

The only reason these religions survive is because they successfully indoctrinate new generations into believing what their parents believed.

Also, the idea that people "choose" Christianity "voluntarily" kind of implies that this is a rational decision. Considering that Christianity is based on faith, a nonrational belief, this is pretty silly.

Why do you have such a hard time accepting that people can choose to have a different belief system than you?

 

[TheVrolok]

Well, I've never met a single churchgoer who did not attend as a child. So, our anecdotal evidence contradict. But, the aggregate data is on the side of my anecdotal evidence, not yours.

Huh? What aggregate data?

Also, the idea that people "choose" Christianity "voluntarily" kind of implies that this is a rational decision. Considering that Christianity is based on faith, a nonrational belief, this is pretty silly.

What does voluntary choice have to do with rationality? People choose things all of the time for non-rational reasons - that doesn't make them involuntary. You're connecting dots that do not align. Are you now saying that having faith in something is silly? Or is it simply religion that is silly, and not having faith?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I was raised Christian, forced to go to church every Sunday. By the time I was 12 or so though I could tell there were serious problems with the bible, contradictions and what not, that made me realize how absurd some parts of Christianity are.

The three accounts of the Apostle Paul's conversion has often been cited as demonstrating a contradiction in the Bible, but when you examine the accounts carefully, they're not contradictory at all.

http://harvardhouse.com/sauloftarsus_contradiction_acts.htm

I have yet to see a "contradiction" that can't be fairly readily explained.

 

[preslove]

Huh? What aggregate data?



What does voluntary choice have to do with rationality? People choose things all of the time for non-rational reasons - that doesn't make them involuntary. You're connecting dots that do not align. Are you now saying that having faith in something is silly? Or is it simply religion that is silly, and not having faith?

Do you actually deny that the concept of indoctrination exists?

Aggregate data? Western culture is increasingly secularizing. I thought you 100% agreed on that point? I believe that this secularization is a result of the fundamentalist christian worldview being challenged by the existence of other faiths, science, and a general cosmopolitanism.

Again, do you deny the concept of indoctrination?

 

[IcePickFreak]

In support of the post above, Children raised in Christian households are certainly more likely to be Christian than children raised in non-Christian households. That's rather obvious. But to suggest that you can "brainwash" your children into Christianity is rather silly, in my opinion. Children have then own minds and form their own opinions. If you deny this, my guess is you don't have children.

Naturally the kid is going to only get one side of the story from whatever particular religion of the parents practice. I doubt many parents of any religion encourage their children to broaden their theology horizons. In a Christian household would it be ok to question the differences between the Synoptic Gospels and the other canonical gospels, rather than just going along with the man in the funny hat on Sundays?

Here's the comparison between just the widely accepted Synoptic Gospels. Keep in mind a large portion that they share together in "Triple Tradition" portion are literal word for word copies of which ever wrote it first. Don't ask who the first one was either because there's about eight different theories on that alone with no definite answer.

Honestly I find the historical aspect of it very interesting since it obviously had a huge impact on western civilization throughout the follow two millenniums. I think it's better learned as a historical account including all the scriptures because of that, rather than being channeled into the dogma of the different Catholic denominations, Islam, or Judaism, which all cross paths numerous times.

 

[preslove]

Naturally the kid is going to only get one side of the story from whatever particular religion of the parents practice. I doubt many parents of any religion encourage their children to broaden their theology horizons. In a Christian household would it be ok to question the differences between the Synoptic Gospels and the other canonical gospels, rather than just going along with the man in the funny hat on Sundays?

Here's the comparison between just the widely accepted Synoptic Gospels. Keep in mind a large portion that they share together in "Triple Tradition" portion are literal word for word copies of which ever wrote it first. Don't ask who the first one was either because there's about eight different theories on that alone with no definite answer.

Honestly I find the historical aspect of it very interesting since it obviously had a huge impact on western civilization throughout the follow two millenniums. I think it's better learned as a historical account including all the scriptures because of that, rather than being channeled into the dogma of the different Catholic denominations, Islam, or Judaism, which all cross paths numerous times.

Good post. I agree, I'm really fascinated by the historical development of christianity. It's funny how little most fundamentalists know about the religion they believe in.

Here's a really good course on the new testament as history and literature:
http://academicearth.org/courses/new-testament-history-and-literature

I've listened to a couple of Bart D. Ehrman's teaching company courses
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=643
http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?cid=6577

Here are the rest of his:http://www.teach12.com/storex/professor.aspx?ID=150

 

[AreaCode707]

I don't know what 4H is, but ANY organisation that cannot just leave you alone is worth blasting for their practice.

Especially if you have expressed your lack of interest and they want to have an intervention with you because of it. Interventions should be reserved for close family and friends to get REAL problems into the open.

I'm also fairly certain that you agree with me on this.

4H is a kids club organized around animals and agriculture. They have large group meetings and smaller breakout groups on particular programs, like raising rabbits or gardens or stuff. Kids do presentations, run the clubs by electing officials, participating as treasurer, webmaster, etc. It's a pretty cool organization overall, just not one I wanted to be part of as a kid.

As far as expressing a lack of interest and being left alone, eh. As an adult, sure. As a kid, you are swayed so much by how you feel at the moment, how connected you feel socially, whether you're initially intimidated by the group, whether your interests change... it often takes repeated connections for a kid to connect up with something the like. I don't really see a problem with an organization trying repeatedly; it's just dealing with the human nature of pre-mature people. Getting PUSHY about it, not so great. But follow up contacts and invitations, that's just the nature of any organization.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I had a negative experience going to 4H, that I was forced to go to and where mostly people ignored me or were cliquish and deliberately unfriendly. Oh, and if I stopped going I got annoying "recruiting" calls, roughly akin to the OP's topic (though not directly parallel, admittedly.) Still, it was one group where I lacked interest in the topic and had nothing in common with the attendees. I don't hate the organization for it and I don't have the need to respond with bashing.

People who want religious types to live and let live often don't do a very good job of it in return.

No offense, but that's not really a negative experience compared to what others have dealt with. Try being sent to a camp to be cured for instance. No not all youth groups are that way (in fact obviously the majority are not), but considering the many instances of religion being used to take advantage of children, acting like there's no reason to bash is preposterous. The sad thing is the negative religious behavior happens often enough to be a stereotype.

It can be outright impossible to live and let live with religious people as they go out of their way to push it onto others. How can you expect people to let live when they try to refute evolution or comment on science (which by the way isn't saying anything about religion or god) based solely on their beliefs and force it into schools or government. Not only that, but have Fred Phelps protest a loved one's funeral and then get back to me on letting live.

 

[Malak]

Growing up being told that, in addition to the tooth fairy, santa, and the easter bunny, there's this God, who created everything and sent his kid down to get killed for all our sins, and this dude paul came along and added all this other stuff about the kid he never met, seems pretty much to be nonconsensual indoctrination, to me. Are you actually trying to claim otherwise? Are you implying that five year olds in sunday school voluntarily chose their religion?

Are you saying 5 year olds in sunday school have a religion? Statistically I can tell you that even 15 year olds rarely do. They might put Christian on their facebook, but that doesn't mean they actually care or take it seriously. There's a huge difference between someone that claims a religion, and someone that is religious. That is why polls fail big time.

Most of your data does not support your original point that people do not voluntarily choose a religion. You base it only on assumption and speculation. Do I have to jump and wave my hands to get your attention? You aren't talking about some abstract association of people like most people refer to the government, you are talking to me. Flesh and blood just like you. I'm real. I voluntarily choose what I believe and accept.

 

[Malak]

Naturally the kid is going to only get one side of the story from whatever particular religion of the parents practice. I doubt many parents of any religion encourage their children to broaden their theology horizons. In a Christian household would it be ok to question the differences between the Synoptic Gospels and the other canonical gospels, rather than just going along with the man in the funny hat on Sundays?

This may come as a shock, but not all Christian households, or churches for that matter, are what you think they are. I don't doubt that most don't even want to discuss it, but I do. I'm definitely interested in contradictions, histories, translation errors, etc. I like to discuss controversial topics that make the pope cringe. Hell, I invented the funny hat joke. I've gone head to head with everyone from theology professors to cultists.

I am not a Christian because some book said I should be. The bible is not the word of God, God speaks for himself. That isn't to say the bible doesn't have a lot of inspiration in it, that isn't questioned by anybody. But I am not a Christian because of a book. It is a tool which I evaluate for use just like any other tool.

 

[Modelworks]

N but considering the many instances of religion being used to take advantage of children, acting like there's no reason to bash is preposterous. The sad thing is the negative religious behavior happens often enough to be a stereotype.

People are in love with tragedy. What about all the religions that give billions each year to charity ? The ones that are feeding people in the USA out of work. The churches that help out families whose homes burn down ? There are more good religious people than bad but people like to look at the dark side of things. Give $100 to someone homeless on the street and nobody cares, take $1 from anyone and it will make headlines.

It can be outright impossible to live and let live with religious people as they go out of their way to push it onto others. How can you expect people to let live when they try to refute evolution or comment on science (which by the way isn't saying anything about religion or god) based solely on their beliefs and force it into schools or government. Not only that, but have Fred Phelps protest a loved one's funeral and then get back to me on letting live.

At the same time it can be impossible to live with people that continually bash religion , they can't seem to let live. I am religious but I do not force it on anyone. I respect each persons right to believe what they want to and so do most others .

Some people do bad things in the name of religion that does not mean that because they claim religion that religion is responsible. I could claim science allowed me to be able to use a gun to shoot someone so science is responsible and that would be just as crazy as someone claiming religion made them harm someone.

 

[Modelworks]

So my bro OK'ed his youth group's pastor to come over and talk to one of the youths (he's 22) about why he's been absent from youth group church so much lately.

It is funny to hear with how much authority they talk to him. He saying he's always tired cos he works night shifts; they're telling him they do too but show up anyway, etc.

So manipulative; I'm glad I dropped the act a long time ago

Would you have had a problem with them coming over if they were from the local gym and seeing why a member of their weightlifting club had not been coming much ?

Because it is religion you feel the need to bash it and make fun of it because it doesn't share your views ? I hope you are never put in a position of authority over anyone else where anyone not sharing your views is belittled.

I am understanding more and more why there is an increase in bullying in youths.

 

[darkswordsman17]

People are in love with tragedy. What about all the religions that give billions each year to charity ? The ones that are feeding people in the USA out of work. The churches that help out families whose homes burn down ? There are more good religious people than bad but people like to look at the dark side of things. Give $100 to someone homeless on the street and nobody cares, take $1 from anyone and it will make headlines.



At the same time it can be impossible to live with people that continually bash religion , they can't seem to let live. I am religious but I do not force it on anyone. I respect each persons right to believe what they want to and so do most others .

Some people do bad things in the name of religion that does not mean that because they claim religion that religion is responsible. I could claim science allowed me to be able to use a gun to shoot someone so science is responsible and that would be just as crazy as someone claiming religion made them harm someone.

Of course they do some good, but I'm not going to sing its praises because there's a lot of gray area there (sure they donate billions, while having leaders in gilded halls and much more wealth than they give out, while constantly asking for more, something is not right there). Not only that, but you'd have a hard time proving that people are more giving because of religion, or that things wouldn't be possibly better off without it.

Your second point is valid, but keep in mind, its reactionary, in other words its clearly the egg coming after the chicken, so if you take issue with being criticized because of your religion, understand that while you might not yourself warrant the criticism, your religion absolutely can and thus if you claim those beliefs as yours then you need to accept the criticisms of those beliefs or stop claiming them.

I see a lot of moderate religious people take offense when the criticism is aimed squarely at the person using the similar beliefs as theirs for some ignorance (for instance if you're mad because say Phineas gets picked on here, then you need to actually examine what he's posting and then realize its not just because he's religious, its because he's gone out of his way to show his ignorance on topics while using his beliefs as his reasoning). If you can't understand that you aren't being criticized as well then that is your own fault. Or if you're someone who can't accept valid criticism, then you have no reason to complain. If you associate with the people warranting the criticism and go out of your way to include yourself, then hey, guess what, you're gonna get criticism aimed at you as well.

I only take issue with religious people that openly prove they are worthy of the scorn, I couldn't care less what you believe otherwise, but the moment you start spouting the crap that I've seen on here (there's a lot of anti-science sentiment from a few people on here and their whole reason for it is due to their personal religious beliefs, and they go out of their way to inject themselves into threads that have nothing to do with those beliefs, and then prove they have no grasp of the actual subject, while claiming they deserve equal say in the matter) or in real life (saying people will go to hell for not going to church or reading the bible and even more insane stuff that I've actually seen in person), then I will take issue.

The last point, well your logic is just flawed (which is actually a big reason I get bothered by religious people, they have a habit of using horribly flawed logic). In your first example it is literally true, whereas in the second there's nothing backing your claim at all other than your word. The former just tells how you were able to kill, not why, while the latter is why without the how (you certainly didn't use god as a weapon). Of course, in both instances you are to blame, but in no way does your first one even resemble a motive or defense of your actions while the other one you're giving god/religion as your reason.

 

[Fritzo]

What denomination is this? Sounds like some private church that needs to make sure their donation supply keeps coming in.

 

[Modelworks]

The former just tells how you were able to kill, not why, while the latter is why without the how (you certainly didn't use god as a weapon). Of course, in both instances you are to blame, but in no way does your first one even resemble a motive or defense of your actions while the other one you're giving god/religion as your reason.

I used science to show how extreme someone could become in justifying their actions. There is no causation between the two, but that doesn't stop people from trying to use things in that way.

The last example is used by gun control advocates all the time. They infer it isn't the person committing the act, it is the fact they have access to the weapon that causes the act to occur as if without it the person would not commit the act should guns be made scarce.

 

[sourceninja]

You may be right, the rest of ATOT seems to agree, but do you have any data whatsoever that supports this belief? That people are rarely voluntarily religious? It's a pretty ballsy statement to make.

Once you realize the line of shit you were fed by your parents is just that, it is easy to see the rest of it is also a line of shit.