Are Your Parents Lying Liars?

kq3fsvojrkywk

You are a Christian because your PARENTS indoctrinated you!

So what?

You admit it?!  You are just believing what your parents told you!!!

My parents told me the date I was born.

My parents told me I have relatives that live in Ireland.

My parents told me the Earth revolves around the Sun.

Should I disregard everything my parents told me or just the religious stuff?

Just the religious stuff.

Why?

Because religion is superstitious nonsense!

Really. Who told you that?

Nobody.

So I should trust ‘nobody’ over my own parents?

I mean, nobody told me it’s superstitious. I just know it.

Ok. How do you know?

Science!

My parents taught me science too.

That’s impossible!

Actually, my parents were both certified science teachers.

No! I mean, you can’t believe science AND religion!

Why not?

Because…

Did your parents tell you that?


571 thoughts on “Are Your Parents Lying Liars?

  1. My parents also told me the tooth faerie took away my teeth;
    and the easter bunny left easter eggs outside;
    and that santa gives coal to bad boys and girls …
    Parents are known to be inaccurate on occasion.

    My Church also taught me that you can’t trust any science that contradicts the Bible.

    Like

    1. So, what’s your answer to the question? Yes, your parents are lying liars? 🙂

      I ask, because my own parents never told me any of the things you just listed… so, I’m curious how others sort out the fact from fiction, when they can’t trust those who raised them.

      Like

      1. We live in a world where both are true; parents lie – except when they’re telling the truth and parents tell the truth – except when they’re lying. We know churches exist out there that do indoctrinate children, except for the ones that don’t. Once you get to a point where you can make your own judgements about the world around you, you sort out the facts at hand, you accept whatever evidence that informs your choices – and there you have it. A worldview. For some, faith is a fact beyond doubt. For others, it’s not in them to believe all those stories – but they’re happy to go around being perfectly decent people. Some parents are out there who specifically take the fun out of growing up – I met a kid who had never done Halloween because her mother never allowed it. She was never ‘lied to’ in anything, but she never got to have any fun either and came to view religion as being a bunch of rules that don’t make any sense. Some who were ‘lied to’ grew up to tell those same lies to their kids but still took them to church anyway and they grew up in the faith; others walked away. I guess you can say that there’s no way to raise someone to guarantee that they’ll walk in the faith exactly as the generations before them did.

        Like

      2. At this point, I haven’t discovered anything my parents have “lied” to me about.

        Yet–I’m told with some regularity that I’ve been indoctrinated, and that’s the only reason I think any of the thoughts I do…

        Like

      3. Me thinks Jamie is upset with her specific church culture.
        Reading her blog I get the sense that she’s not totally cool with ‘wives submit to your husbands’.

        Of course, her views are nuanced and I will have to read every word of every article she’s written before I will understand.

        Like

      4. I have read several articles from her blog in the past, too. But as for how her comments relate to THIS post, I simply don’t understand what point is being made. I’m trying to clarify.

        (Although, in some church cultures, vagueness is the supreme goal. You can score some pretty big points with the Held-Evans and Pavlovitz crowds, saying something like “parents lie – except when they’re telling the truth and parents tell the truth – except when they’re lying.” Sounds thoughtful!)

        Like

      5. Her point is that she is the victim of false teaching. Her outrage, like KIA’s, is completely justified. Religion is horrible.

        I’ll bet you fifty bucks she won’t be able to tell you what she believes but she can go on and on about what she doesn’t.

        Like

      6. So your parents, though perfectly capable of lying to you, never did for any reason whatsoever? So when you asked about how babies were made as a kid, they never told you that “the stork delivers them”? They sat you down and explained the process to you in all it’s detail even though you were too young to understand?

        Like

      7. They always answered my question in the most age-appropriate way possible… I remember when my mom told us our “private parts” would “help us make babies someday.” And that was the only answer we required for awhile. When we wanted to know more, she shared more. Just yesterday, my 3-year-old walked into the bathroom and was concerned that I was bleeding. I told him, “It’s okay. It doesn’t hurt me. My body is telling me, ‘There’s no baby growing in there!’ But, if a baby is growing, then the blood would be its home.” He shrugged, told me whatever he had barged in to say, and then left.

        Why? Are you suggesting I’m lying now?

        Like

      8. Isn’t it the same way with how Christianity is taught? That’s why certain parts of the Bible are skipped over or taught in such a way that the details of it are obscure. Not every story in the Bible is rated G or can be taught in a rated G format without omitting certain details. When parents teach their kids those stories, they tend to soften the details. Because it’s nice to think about God saving eight people on a boat. It’s not nice to think about God drowning every single three year old on the planet along with their brothers, sisters, mothers, and fathers.

        Like

      9. You think that’s what the Atheists mean when they say I’ve been “brainwashed?”
        I wasn’t told that God drowned every 3-year-old on the planet in the flood?

        Like

      10. Jamie–are you intentionally avoiding my questions? I never said “Christians didn’t lie.” I said, to the best of my knowledge, my own parents never did.

        They never told me God killed every 3-year-old on the planet, because they didn’t think it was true. I asked how YOU know that it is, in fact, the truth, and you deflected (again).

        What point are you trying to make?

        Like

      11. The Bible talks about this big flood – the survivors are Noah and his family. Everybody else died. It’s what the Bible says. If they didn’t tell you that, they lied by omission. Or they could have told you a white lie. Your parents are human, and therefore not free of sin, and have at some point told lies.
        One of my favorite games is MindTrap, where the Isle of Beguile features questions about people who live on an island are all liars, but tourists always tell the truth and you have to figure out who’s a tourist and who’s a native based on what they they’re saying. So when someone says: “I’m a native, but he’s a tourist.” and the other guys says: “I’m a native, but she’s a tourist.” You have figure out which is the case. I grew up being okay with lies to some degree. It would be foolish to expect everyone everywhere to be completely honest all the time. So I know that yes, Christians lie; but they’re truthful about how they lie in a sort of principled way.

        Like

      12. Odds are if you told him absolutely everything, it would have been information overload and he wouldn’t have understood it any better or worse. He’ll probably ask in a few years from now and you’d give a different answer though, right? You’ll change the answer as he gets older. It won’t always be the same.

        Like

      13. Obviously, the answer doesn’t “change.” It becomes more complete. That’s why both James and I have used the word “age-appropriate” with you.

        I hope the reason you commented here isn’t to try and make the case that, yes, ALL parents are “lying liars,” to answer the title question.

        Like

      14. Never tried to say no parent has ever refrained from lying.

        I simply doubt that’s what happened in your case.

        (That’s why you’re here, right? You’ve got a massive chip on your shoulder?)

        Like

      15. This is an interesting comment Jamie.

        I agree with you that many things in the Bible are not rated G but, as with your example about where babies come from, I think k we both agree that life itself is not rated G either.

        My question for you is this.

        If a parent makes teaching kids about anything in life age appropriate by sanitizing it and that’s OK, why is doing the same thing with the Bible somehow not OK?

        Like

      16. And life in the Bible and get pretty ugly. What happened to Dinah and Tamar (David’s daughter, not the other one) are examples of that. The thing is – for me at least, having been told the sanitized version and then told that the version I was taught was inaccurate, I began to question the rest of it. How can you trust the “good parts” when you were lied to about the “bad parts”?

        Like

      17. No one is foolish enough to believe they’ve never been lied to Jamie, we’ve all been lied to.

        My question was. Were you wilfully decieved into believing a religion and you now believe that was unfair?

        Like

      18. To a large extent, I wasn’t presented with many options. After all, why are most Americans Christians, and not Hindu or Bhuddist? We don’t have a lot of choice about religion growing up. I remember being told that Catholics weren’t really Christians and that Muslims don’t believe in God. As it turns out, not everything I was told was true, it was biased in favor of the local religion to keep me from seeking out other religions.

        Liked by 1 person

      19. Most kids aren’t presented with many options when they are growing up Jamie, they are pretty much along for the ride their parents take them on and, that is the point I have been trying to make all along.

        It seems like non-believers single out parents who raise their kids in Christian homes as horrible indoctrinators where other parents get a pass.

        Do non-believers who claim they are free thinkers who never force any belief on their kids take them to churches of all denominations so they can make their own rational choice?

        If Carmen’s, for example, grandchildren had a conversation about God with a schoolmate, I imagine one of them would say “grandma told me God isn’t real.”

        Now, has that kid, as smart as he/she is, came to a conclusion abou5 God rationally? Or is she just parroting what he/she has been told by an authority figure that is trusted? Sounds like indoctrination to me.

        Liked by 1 person

      20. Actually, James, I would say nothing of the sort as I feel that is their parents’ responsibility, not mine. Now the one thing that our little granddaughter said to another of the grandchildren at Christmastime was this – “Don’t pick out that story about Jesus – Nannie won’t read it!” (they were choosing stories before bedtime and it was part of an anthology — I didn’t notice that one when I picked the book out) 🙂

        Like

      21. Carmen,

        Why do you suppose she would say such a thing about you? Obviously your opinion about Christianity have been made known to this girl either overtly or by example.

        Now, is her’s a totally unbiased upbringing where she is free to make her own choices of her own free will or has she been influenced?

        Liked by 2 people

      22. Actually, James, all of our grandchildren get told the truth – their parents say, ” We don’t know and no one else knows”. They certainly don’t get fed a made-up, silly myth as ‘truth’. That would be misleading and dishonest, something the parents have no wish to do.

        Like

      23. How can you say they are taught “we don’t know, no one knows” and “made-up silly myth” in the same sentence Carmen?

        Don’t you think kids are smart enough to know what their parents and grandparents believe just by existing in the same environment? You basically told them while watching a movie that God is a made-up silly myth. Are they really free to honestly investigate that myth completely unencumbered by what they have learned from you?

        Also, do you comment on Christian blogs as someone who doesn’t know or someone who believes they know quite a bit?

        Liked by 1 person

      24. My point is that your grandchildren have been indoctrinated and you are not being entirely honest when you say that “you don’t know.”

        People who truly don’t know don’t seek out people online just so they can disagree with them about what they claim to not know, nor do they say “made up myth” with authority.

        Liked by 2 people

      25. Sorry James but I disagree. Indoctrination applies to the religious alone, I’m afraid. Honestly with children can only be that – an honest attempt NOT to indoctrinate or fill their heads with foolishness disguised as moral ‘truths’.

        Perhaps you ought to take a look at the blog, “Homeschoolers Anonymous” to get an idea about the frustration many millennials feel, who were brought up completely indoctrinated. Religious fundagelicals have much to answer for.

        And yes, I can say ‘made up myth’ however I like. You have no idea who wrote the Bible ‘babble’. Neither does anyone else. At least admit it HONESTLY.

        Like

      26. Homeschoolers Anonymous is driven by anecdotes Carmen and not unbiased.

        I have been in ministry a long time and I personally know dozens of Homeschooling parents who have raised very bright and happy kids.

        Anyway, we could talk about Homeschooling until the cows come home but, until you ditch the notion that there is some sort of nefarious evil in it, we will never see eye to eye.

        And again, how can you say no one knows who wrote the Bible yet say with authority everyone who disagrees with you is wrong?

        I have seen hundreds of your comments on multiple blogs in the past year or so Carmen and “I don’t know” is not the common theme.

        Like

      27. “And again, how can you say no one knows who wrote the Bible yet say with authority everyone who disagrees with you is wrong?” – Have I said that, James?

        Projecting, perhaps?

        Like

      28. In my efforts at consistency, James, I must disagree with you.

        However, I do know that because of your own indoctrination, you must cling to that myth. 🙂 As I mentioned to Jamie, being able to think logically is not one of your strong suits.

        Like

      29. I became a Chritian at the age of 30 and, at the time, hadn’t set foot in a church in a decade. I also did not grow up in a Christian home.

        So, please explain to me how and when I was indoctrinated Carmen?

        Despite what you believe, indoctrination does not play the evil role you think it does.

        Liked by 1 person

      30. “I became a Chritian at the age of 30 and, at the time, hadn’t set foot in a church in a decade. I also did not grow up in a Christian home.”

        Yet, you are now one of the most prolific of Bible-thumpers. Ahhh. . .think you answered your own question, James. .. 🙂

        Like

      31. Honestly, James – you’re worse than a few of my Gr. 9’s. You said you didn’t grow up in a religious house. You stated you didn’t have any religious until you were 30 (?) – too far to scroll up to verify. OBVIOUSLY, your indoctrination after the age of 30 worked!

        N’est-ce pas?

        Like

      32. So, you say I was indoctrinated, I say I wasn’t? That is the lie?

        Can you explain to me exactly how it worked? Was I locked up? Threatened? Told I couldn’t read anything that disagreed with my pastor?

        Seriously Carmen, what happened?

        A year after I was saved my family and I moved to another state where I willingly attended different churches until I found one my family and I liked. Again, I wasn’t told I had to join or had to stay. I wasn’t told I had to believe what I was told. I wasn’t told I couldn’t ask questions. So, how was I indoctrinated again?

        Like

      33. . .. and you just keep bubbling forth more indoctrinated claptrap. . . Jesus James, can you hear yourself??

        Like

      34. Yes, I certainly will. Because it’s a bullshit story, James – a myth that has taken on gigantic proportions. You are willfully spreading falsehoods. I will not contribute to it in any shape or form. What’s more, my own children would not expect me to.

        I think you realize it for what it is, too. You’re just so heavily indoctrinated – and now make your living spreading it like a cancer – that you cannot crawl out from under it.

        Like

      35. You’ll have to speculate, won’t you James? 🙂

        Not sure I can explain – after all, you’ll only believe what you tell yourself to believe. Imagination’s a wonderful thing, isn’t it?

        Like

      36. You’re right Carmen, I’m afraid you will not be able to explain to me how a grandmother telling her grandchildren that their faith is based on a bullshit story 8s somehow OK. In fact, I find the mere idea of it shocking, especially in an age where people supposedly value tolerance.

        Now I’m guessing this conversation has outlived it’s usefulness so…

        Enjoy the rest of your weekend Carmen 🙂

        James

        Like

      37. It’s all about perspective, isn’t it James? From my perspective, there’s absolutely no way I’d pass off a fairy tale as a truth; especially not when my own children are trying their best to be honest with our grandchildren. Of course I wouldn’t verbalize that something was bullshit. I’d be sure to tell them, however, that there are people who believe those stories even though there’s not one shred of proof. I’d also tell them that there are people who find fairy tales comforting, for all sorts of reasons – even adults! The bottom line will always be that people – real, live people they are surrounded with – are still far more reliable than invisible, imaginary ones. One of the people in their lives they’ve already figured out they can count on – to tell them the truth, to depend on for support, and to love them unconditionally – is their grandmother. They know that will never change. I value them enough not to tell them lies. Lies that will have to be dispelled later in life, sometimes with much trauma associated with them. I love them too much to mess around with innocent trust. I hope you never have to explain to trusting individuals why YOU lied, James, but that’s on you.
        My conscience is clear. You think me rude? No, James. I tell the truth. If you don’t like it, that’s not rudeness; it’s you not being able to accept reality.

        Like

      38. Whatever Carmen. You insulted my intelligence and called me a liar, that is rude, period.

        Also, your conscience is obviously not clear. Your constant need to argue against what you claim you don’t believe in is proof that you are deeply bothered by it.

        Liked by 1 person

      39. You realize of course that I could also assert, “Your conscience is obviously not clear. Your constant need to argue in favour of what you believe in is proof that you are deeply bothered by it”.

        Why, James, do you feel compelled to offer rejoinders? Perhaps you are deeply conflicted?

        Like

      40. Oh, believe me – I know how much you’ve got ‘invested’ in spreading the great omission. 🙂 So much so that you can’t possibly afford to apply logic to your position. You and Branyan both have much to gain from Je$u$.

        Like

      41. Hey, Carmen– if my parents are cashing in, they’re doing a pretty good job hiding it. Have you ever been to their house? (No?) Well, I have. And it’s not in great shape. Peeling paint, a back porch that sags. Honestly, their neighbors across the street are probably annoyed by the outdated windows and overgrown weeds.

        But–weirdly–you don’t make millions as an entertainer and the children’s director at a homeless shelter. That’s right. My mom devotes her entire week to poor people. And she would NEVER use her position to lift herself up, so I’m going to do it for her. She pours her entire heart into that ministry. And you know what she does with her tiny paycheck? She pools it…and saves it…until she can afford a fixer-upper apartment, which her friends help her turn into a safe place for a single mom to live for cheap. My parents have three renters so far–poor women with their children–and I’m willing to bet that’s three more people than you’ve helped, with your arrogant, hateful comments.

        I know you’re not worth my time. I know you’re just a poor, empty-headed woman, with a giant chip on her shoulder, and most likely some kind of mental illness. I know I should feel pity for you rather than anger. But, when you suggest my parents are somehow taking advantage of people and making loads of money with the work they’ve chosen to do FOR THE COMMUNITY, it really pisses me off.

        You ought to be better than this.

        Liked by 3 people

      42. Aren’t you just a shining example of someone who’d never make ‘arrogant, hateful’ comments, Amanda?

        I actually laughed at that one! I’m sure all those who’ve been the subject of your insults are snorting, too.

        Please – if you want to attempt at being gracious, you’d better ask Daddy to scrub his blog of all the evidence to the contrary.

        Meanwhile, I’m watching Neil DeGrasse Tyson and babysitting some of the grandchildren.

        Like

      43. I’ve seen Cosmos. lol. Astronomy (and specifically Astrophysics) is probably my favorite scientific discipline… But, of course, that’s not the point.

        The only reason Carmen showed up today was JUST to cheerlead for Jamie while “booing” the other side (which was a no-no when I was a cheerleader in high school.)

        Anyway, I’m not going to let her get away with smearing the reputation of my parents, without setting the record straight.

        She can make up whatever she wants about me personally. But, when I see injustice being dealt to someone else, it’s my responsibility to speak up. As I said, my parents won’t defend themselves or brag about their own selfless actions toward people who will never be able to return the favor. But I will testify about it. 🙂
        (Proverb 27:2)

        Liked by 2 people

      44. Astronomy is fascinating but Niel DeGrasse Tyson is a hack more so than a legit scientist. I, quite frankly, would be embarrassed to cite anything I learned watching his show as a fact.

        I am glad you said what you did about your parents, it needed to be said even though everyone knows people who do ministry work don’t do it for the money.

        As far as cheerleaders go, why would Jamie need one?

        Like

      45. It’s something Carmen and Ark do, without being asked.

        This is the picture we use whenever Carmen shows up to “cheer” for a fellow Atheist (or anyone who seems to be taking a position against JB).

        Liked by 2 people

      46. Also Carmen.

        When you say applies to.the religious alone do you mean that because you can use it.as a weapon against religion alone?

        People don’t indoctrinate their kids in the areas of politics or anything else?

        Isn’t “an honest not to fill their heads with foolishness disguised as moral truths” the same thing as willfully biasing them against faith? How is that not indoctrination Carmen?

        Like

      47. Christianity seems to be the worst offender that way. There are usually schools that allow Churches to teach kids in a sort of book-mobile setting. You don’t see the local mosque hooking up a trailer to teach about Isa (Jesus Christ) and Muhammad to all the public schools in any given area.

        Like

      48. You never WILL see that either, Jamie. Christians can’t have any competition, no siree! It’s their invisible friend or NO invisible friend!

        Like

      49. That’s an odd stance to take. Given the account of God taking down the gods and goddesses of ancient Egypt, it was quite a show – never mind the poor innocents who had to suffer to that God could prove a point that he was greater than a pantheon of lower deities. I would think they would want all sorts of gods and goddesses out there so God could triumph over each and every one and they can munch on popcorn like Jonah was hoping to do when God promised to judge Ninevah. What better way to create a generation of true believers? (For the record, the entire generation of Israelites (except the two spies, I think) who saw God send ten plagues against Egypt were found unworthy to enter in the promised land. Perhaps we fear the same fate?)

        Like

      50. Who ever said Christians were a sensible lot? Many of them don’t seem to be able to handle logic at all, for instance.

        Like

      51. That just depends on which batch you’re dealing with. I know of some pro-head-covering Christians who are trying to teach that all women, for the sake of being female, married or not, should cover their heads when at church. They make just about everyone else sound normal.

        Like

      52. Do you live in America Jamie?

        Seems to me that every time Christianity gets anywhere near an American public school there is immediate “separation of church and state” backlash.

        I am also interested in how you word some of what you write. “Chortianity seems to be the worst offender…” may seem benign but I believe there is some anger behind it.

        Like

      53. Yes. Why should the state favor one religion over all others? If Christianity weren’t the only acceptable choice – it might be cool to have the chance to go from group to group, learning what they believe and why they believe it.
        I like idioms. I’m trying to incorporate more of them. The other day, this guy confused me when he said he was “of no account.” I had to go look it up to figure out what he meant. It makes me glad that the Bible doesn’t use idioms, otherwise we might never understand them.

        Liked by 1 person

      54. I think we probably agree quite a bit here Jamie.

        Christianity is the majority religion in America so I think it will always have a certain amount of favor, for example Christian holiday as national holidays and Christmas pageants in schools.

        That being said, I am 100 percent in favor of all religions being taught in an unbiased manner in schools.

        Like

      55. I think God would rather that true believers choose him and not because of a lack of alternatives; but because out of all the possible alternatives, his seemed to be the most true. As it is, it’s no wonder a great many millenials and others have walked away from not having a choice.

        Like

      56. You are right, God does want us to chose Him. But He wants us to chose Him because we want to.

        As far as millennials walking away from not having a choice goes. Interesting but I am not sure that’s why they are walking away. Maybe 8 will

        Like

      57. Isn’t it so that a similar statement we make about our military, sure we could draft everyone to create a mighty army; but our dedicated volunteers, though they be fewer in number can outfight a large force who would rather be somewhere else doing something else.

        Like

      58. That’s not a bad analogy Jamie.

        I was in the military for 20 years and I wanted to be there. I will say though that I followed some orders I didn’t completely agree with because there would be certain punishment if I did not.

        By in large though, I followed orders and did what was expected of me because I believed in my leadership and a cause that was bigger than myself.

        Same thing goes, kind of, in a relationship with God. We can do what we are supposed to out of fear or we can do it out of devotion. God wants the devotion.

        Like

      59. So it would be better to live out a devoted life to God as an example than to try to raise a kid to be a Christian from birth because that has been tried – and has failed.

        Like

      60. The idea that you can mass-produce faith. That you can use a cookie-cutter approach to create a generation of believers without regard for the individual. I remember reading how the same approach was used to try to standardize children to all be right-handed; the problem is that those who were left-handed were sometimes forced to switch, causing speech impediments and were called stupid because of it. My entire youth group, kids who were all dragged to church, did VBS, the works – none of them now attend church regularly. Whatever used to work for the last generation doesn’t work for this one. But people keep on using the same old ideas hoping for the same result, hoping beyond hope that if they follow the dictates of tradition that it won’t fail them. It doesn’t bother them that as empty as the church seems is as empty as this young generation feels.

        Like

      61. In other words, James, there is a generation of people who’ve realized they’ve been duped. . . lied to, if you prefer.

        They don’t like it one bit. Goddamn cheap trick, if you ask me.

        Like

      62. A lot of truth here, I wouldn’t argue with that.

        But, as many small churches seem to be emptying, many more liberal mega churches have members in the thousands.

        I think what we are seeing in America is a rise in cultural Christianity and a decline in fundamental Christianity. Will the tide turn? Who knows?

        The church I am a pert of now, and I am in ministry, had declining numbers for years and we have turned it around.

        This is a fascinating discussion and I am glad to be a part of it but u can’t find much fault with the faith itself, just al lot of the people in it.

        Like

      63. I’m out in the sticks; the closest church that can pass for a mega church has roughly 150 showing up regularly. Just down the street there’s a church that barely manages to bring in twelve. It’s not uncommon for me to see bulletins that feature programs from K-12 and picks up at 30+ onward. If you’re in the dead zone between those ages; they have a whole lot of nothing to offer you; even less if you’re single and without children. What does your church do differently?

        Liked by 1 person

      64. I encourage you to read the conversation going on between James and Carmen right now… She is the sort of Anti-Religion person who inspired the original post. Insisting that all religion is indoctrination, refusing to recognize her own bias, resorting to personal attacks, etc.

        This is why EVERYONE needs to be EQUALLY skeptical of what they were taught by their parents… AND what they come to tell themselves in adulthood.

        Like

      65. I have, but I can’t help but think of this girl:

        She’s been so … sheltered that she has little experience with which to build relationships with others. Some see her and say: “that’s indoctrination” – but others would call her a dedicated believer. But what has she based her faith on? Her own experience that changed her from a sinner to a saint; or the expectation as the daughter of a Christian family to be an ideological clone of her parents?

        Like

      66. I am not denying that there are Christian parents who indoctrinate their kids. What I’m saying is, the charge is unwarranted HERE. The Christians HERE, commenting on this blog, should not have to answer for some other parent’s failings.

        It’s clear that the people doing the lying and the outrageous indoctrinating, sometimes, is the anti-religious camp.

        Like

      67. That’s why I think that kids need to be presented with options, and taught that one isn’t right and all others wrong; that they’re all just different. At some point, I was taught that I was responsible for what I believed and why I believe it – it didn’t have to be what my grandparents believed, what my parents believe, or what my friends believe. But I can allow what I believe to be justification for me to be disrespectful of others who believe differently.
        But I think because I was so pressured into a Christian teaching, it made me all the more want to look into everything else. When everyone else bought Ipods, I bought a Walkman. That’s just how I’ve been.

        Like

      68. Teaching children that no religion is wrong and they’re all just different is teaching them…

        Someday, they would be wise to question that base assumption.

        Like

      69. The difference is that I’m not telling them what they must believe to be true; they have to decide that for themselves; only that they shouldn’t assume their beliefs are justification to treat others poorly who don’t believe as they do.

        Like

      70. There is no such thing as a neutral education. If you tell children they should be respectful of all beliefs, and they shouldn’t tell others what to believe, those are based on religious beliefs.

        I may agree with you. But I also recognize that ideas about fairness and tolerance and equality come from religion. They are”indoctrinated” into our entire, Western (Christian) culture.

        Again, you will not find tolerance and free speech widely valued in Middle Eastern countries, for example.

        Like

      71. You might be surprised. I believe the United Arab Emirates has been making great strides in that area; and if they can do that – what’s holding us back from doing better and being more?

        Like

      72. Making better strides means “imitating Western culture.”
        Again, to claim they are doing something GOOD is based on your religious beliefs regarding tolerance and open dialog.

        Like

      73. I still say that the west/east division is only made up, in a way of doing an “us vs them” sort of thing. Were all human, some of us were lucky enough to live in wealthier areas with better access to the basics. But had we grown up in that corner of the world, we wouldn’t be that different from “them”. So let’s stop saying that we’re better than them and look for ways we can help them who need our strength to bolster their weakness. Let’s stop dividing ourselves and saying “they’re not one of us, they’re not our problem.”

        Like

      74. Again, you said ” better” because you believe the Western ideals of being open minded and respectful of all backgrounds is headed in the right direction.
        Do you see why education can’t be neutral? Do you see that even moral relativism is impossible to live out?

        Like

      75. Perhaps if I had said “superior” the point would have been better served.
        But thanks to the East, we have plumbing and the concept of zero, so we’re lucky to “copy” off of their great ideas. I view all humanity as one people; so it bothers me to hear you talk down of my distant relatives who grew up “on the wrong side of the tracks”. Just as it bothers me to read blogs where they talk down of us because we grew up on the wrong side of the tracks – from their perspective. We’re just so much alike, so that’s how I know we’re all related.

        Like

      76. No, if you had said superior, it would have been the same statement… I’m not talking down about anyone. I’m trying to help you understand how much your Western eduction has impacted you. And I’m trying to get you to realize that relativism is impossible to practice, when you’re trying to teach the next generation about right and wrong.

        Only in the West is this seen as a bad thing. Only in the West is open mindedness and tolerance so highly valued. Only in the West do we wag fingers at each other for thinking our customs are “better.” And, if the other cultures are starting to value “tolerance” as well, they are well behind us.

        Direct question: are tolerance and open-mindedness things every culture ought to value?

        Like

      77. That’s why I think we should stop the West vs East schism and build some common ground; to learn how to see things with other eye and walk with other shoes. So long as we think in terms of us vs them; we’ll never get to an “all of us” kind of world. Who knows what I’m missing out on by not having had access to eastern education and religions. What don’t I know because my Western education fails me?
        I was reading ‘Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes’ and I learned that there’s this culture out there that doesn’t like the idea that we can individually go to heaven because their culture believes that when someone dies they go to their family and it is frightening to think of an eternity where you are forever separated from your family for generations and generations back because they died before having heard of Christ. Their point of view makes sense. Why must the western idea that individuals can be saved necessitate being cut off from our family make it okay for us to do things that do not act in the best interest of our entire family? We can learn a lot from other perspectives. (I did just watch Pocahontas today and it showed much the same idea.)

        Like

      78. Wouldn’t it go against what every culture who believes differently to do that? I know that no culture lasts forever; but that there is something of value we can learn from all cultures if we wish to learn from others. I know that I’m descendant of the Irish culture, but it was to some degree destroyed so that people could fit in here in the states – I know nothing of my Irish heritage. I don’t want to see that happen to others.
        Perhaps its us who are breaking our own rule, to claim to be tolerant and open-minded, but in actuality to prefer Christianity and to be closed-minded about alternatives.

        Like

      79. You can learn a lot about the consequences of being closed-minded by viewing how they treat those who disagree with them. It’s a learning opportunity, neither right nor wrong; just different from being open-minded. And they might have some very valid reasons if you’d care to listen. Perhaps they had an open-minded society once that lost it’s way and found comfort in rules and order. Or perhaps rules and order betrayed them and they found that being open-minded better served them. Culture is subject to change; as do the people that make culture what it is.

        Like

      80. The church isn’t even consistent; given all the denominational variations, the non-denominational stances, and conflict over everything from baptism to the color of the carpet; it’s not an easy thing to ask of anyone. I’m not even consistent in that I used to be different. And when I’m older I’ll be different again than from what I am now.

        Like

      81. Are you really defending your inconsistency by saying, “yeah, well the Church is inconsistent, too” ?

        The Church teaches there is such thing as right and wrong. We may disagree on the specifics of which things are right and which are wrong. But there is agreement that truth exists.

        Your leaning toward relativism is your problem. I recommend the book “The Closing of the American Mind.” It explains how the ideals of tolerance and open-mindedness have turned Americans into bad thinkers, who are endlessly skeptical of religion (especially Christianity), but unable to reason through what they DO believe.

        And, yes, it was your American education that did this.

        Like

      82. Only by saying that it’s human. We all grow and change to adapt to the situations around us. That’s why sometimes we’ll do things under specific conditions that we wouldn’t normally do were those conditions not present.

        Like

      83. The point is: if nothing is right or wrong (only different) then you can’t turn around and be upset at your parents or pastor for so-called abuse.

        It’s very posh to claim that other cultures are beautiful and need to be preserved–while also being highly critical of your own. But you’ve knocked your legs out from under you.

        You can’t use “open-mindedness” to accuse the Church of wrong-doing, and then say it’s not really wrong to be closed-minded.

        Like

      84. Perhaps we’re predisposed to liking the idea of being right to dislike the idea of being wrong; that’s one of the many kind of thinking we have to learn to overcome. What one says is right, the other says is wrong and in each to their own way, they are both right that the other is wrong. It really gets neither of us anywhere on anything.

        Like

      85. I’m growing really weary of your contradictory comments.

        When you can’t even say whether open-mindedness is right or wrong, you’re hopelessly lost. Relativism is a tangled mess.

        If you don’t believe in right/wrong, then why are you here talking about the things your parents and church did wrong?

        Liked by 1 person

      86. Considering that from the Bible we get both Arminianism and Calvinism, pro-slavery and anti-slavery theology, and various forms of creationist teaching: day-age theory, literal six-day creation, guided evolution – you might consider that the Scriptures are an open door to different paths of thinking. When you declare one to “orthodox”, the rest becomes “heresy” as Biblical as it may be. The difference is that I accept that the ancient cultures of the world were okay with fudging the details for the sake of a good story and I understand how that shapes modern interpretation of Scripture. Getting so caught up on the here and now of what we believe; we can miss the significance of the cultural fingerprints of the societies that were involved in the creation, transmission, and preservation of the scriptures. They would embrace contradiction; so do I; how else should I understand their words apart from how they would have?

        Like

      87. You should really read “Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible” by E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O’Brien; only when you understand how Christianity’s roots are also Eastern in origin and not exclusively Western will you realize that we are missing all sorts of shades and hues to the interpretation of the Scriptures because we fail to understand even the most basic Eastern worldview that would have been predominant as Christians. Odds are Jesus and his followers wouldn’t have thought like us modern Westerners who live free from Roman control. But I totally get why you wouldn’t want to know about the cultural assumptions that under-laid the foundation of everyday life for them because they’re just so different; it’s better to replace them with assumptions from our everyday life and pretend that our interpretation of Scripture is inerrant and infallible and we just don’t need to know about how Jesus’ culture impacted the interpretation and application of the lessons he was teaching. Then we might have give up our ability to use it to control others by what we teach them.

        Like

      88. Again–are you intentionally avoiding my questions?

        Somehow you got sidetracked talking about different Christians who disagree with eachother. I understand that Calvinists contradict Armenians. I understand that slave-owners contradict abolitionists. I understand that Young Earth creationists contradict the Day-Age Theorists, and I’m comfortable with all of that.

        The problem is when an individual contradicts HIM/HERSELF, which is what you’re doing. You are refusing to criticize certain cultures for ANYTHING, while also criticizing American, church culture for various things. That is a problem. Do you understand the difference?

        Like

      89. If I criticize Easterners for their devotion to their beliefs, then I’d be criticizing Westerners for their devotions to their beliefs; when in actually, devotions to one’s beliefs is admirable; I just refuse to state which set of beliefs is “wrong” or “right”; and that’s because to each their own is right. If I don’t like the lack of choice here, then I don’t like the lack of choice there – choicelessness doesn’t reveal true devotion; it’s just having the inability to search high and low for that which you are looking for. I’d say I’m treating human culture equally as we’re all one. I just don’t look at it the same way as you do and that’s what you find frustrating. You understand those who are most like you because you understand yourself. But you’re not quite sure what to make of me because I’m not one of them, but I’m not one of you either; at least, not in the way that those who are like you are one of you. It’s really easy to like who are like you, but it’s not so easy to find something honorable in those whose perspective differs. Jesus probably frustrated the Pharisees in the same way: “Do we pay taxes to Caesar or not?” “If his image is on the coin, render to Caesar what’s his.” “Do we stone this adulterous woman or not?” “Which of you haven’t sinned may cast the first stone.” “Let’s crown Jesus king so that he can overthrow the Romans!” “You don’t understand the purpose of my being here.” Jesus’ answers weren’t always clear, but they did reveal what was in a person’s heart; that’s my goal. What I’ve discerned is not an encouraging sign; what’s so wrong about thinking differently?

        Like

      90. What’s wrong is that you come in here playing the victim because you don’t like how your church taught children.

        That’s what’s wrong.

        But, when asked whether someone from ANOTHER CULTURE ought to give options to their children by being open-minded, you refused to answer.

        So…all that stuff you said about wishing you’d learned about multiple religions…about people who need to heal from the abuse they’ve suffered…about the importance of not indoctrinating young ones and being open-minded… You just mean that the church you grew up in was different from others and that’s okay?

        Is that an accurate summary?

        Like

      91. Can one culture be used to judge another; even in Christianity? Should an orange be the standard by which all applies ought to be measured? Perhaps that’s half of the disconnect. We’re two distinct cultures and what went for you wasn’t true for me; and what experiences I had weren’t similar to yours. It’s like the campfire experience I never had, and so cannot relate every time my church tries to sing that one funny song that I never learned the words to. Likewise, you can’t really relate to my cultural experiences in Christianity because they’re so very different from your own.

        Like

      92. So–your church was definitely wrong to teach you the way it did. But my church might be correct to shelter children and prevent questioning?

        Come on. Nobody is buying this.

        Like

      93. I had a bad church; of course it was wrong. Your church was likely right to it’s own convictions – but were the lot of you transplanted into my church, my pastor would have declared that you’d been taught wrong because you weren’t taught the way that we were taught that the pastor could never be wrong about such things.

        Like

      94. Your church was wrong. Thank you for answering that question!

        And, if your pastor and I had a conversation about the places we disagreed, one of us would be wrong. (Or, perhaps, both of us would be wrong.) But, if we’re saying two opposite things, we wouldn’t both be right.

        Right? (So far, so good?)

        Like

      95. In so far as the conversation was on the same subject, you would always consider your point of view to be right and your opponent’s wrong because it’s not in agreement with your own. I might not, I would understand that of course the person I’m talking with feels and thinks differently and they could be right in so far as their experiences has shaped their understanding; but had their experiences been identical to mine, they’re free person entitled to believe as they do anyway; there’s no rule that says we must always all be on the same page, is there?

        Like

      96. I’m not talking about point of view. I’m talking about whether it’s right or wrong to lie to children and/or indoctrinate them.

        This is not hard, Jamie.

        Like

      97. Seeing as how indoctrination is teaching someone to believe in something uncritically, it’s not good to not give somebody the tools to question a bad teacher who would indoctrinate an impressionable individual in such a way that they accept things that are bad and harmful. Remember that cult that had it’s members beat up one of it’s own until they died? Indoctrination does that. If a parent really wants to do well by his or her children, he or she will teach them critical thinking skills so that they will not be harmed. If your parents taught you how to think critically, you were not indoctrinated. Now what parent out there wouldn’t want their child to think critically, what parent would want their child to believe everything anybody tells them? What parent wouldn’t want their child to question a cult leader who tells them to beat up one of their friends who questions his teaching? I’m not sure in what way indoctrination could be used as a tool for good apart from it’s potential to be abused. I know you might say: “Wouldn’t you say that cult was right to it’s own way of thinking to punish it’s members like that?” – that violates one of my personal codes of honor, to refrain from doing harm; particularly killing anyone exists as a walking talking entity. It’s just a personal belief of mine that applies to me; one I wouldn’t force on others who feel their religion justifies harming others. What others consider okay for them to do doesn’t mean that it’s okay for me to do as well; or we’d all be jumping off of bridges. But hey, if your religion says it’s required for you to jump off of bridges, why should I stop you from obeying your personal convictions? Why is your religion “right” so much so that it must be applied to everyone else?

        Like

      98. You would not “force your belief” of not causing harm on others?! Again–I’m not buying this.

        You’re suggesting there’s a congregation somewhere in the U.S. which was (and possibly still is?) HURTING CHILDREN. You’ve alluded to the idea that grown adults have to spend years repeating to themselves “It wasn’t my fault, it wasn’t my fault, it wasn’t my fault” just to recover….

        But, when faced with direct questions about whether indoctrinating a child is right or wrong, you need to determine first whether the person doing the indoctrinating is a Christian (because “Christianity seems to be the worst culprit”) or if they’re from some other background, because certain cultures are totally different and not subject to the same rules.

        That’s ridiculous. If you want people to take you seriously, then you need to figure out what you believe and apply it consistently. If you’re going to champion open-mindedness, then you need to expect open-mindedness no matter where a person lives–and not get upset ONLY at your parents/pastor for not parenting the way you think they should have.

        This doesn’t have to be complicated.

        The only reason it becomes convoluted is because Postmodern American culture has convinced an entire generation of people that uncertainty is noble and beautiful. Young Americans believe they are deep and complicated and nuanced and interesting, when they never give a consistent answer for anything. But, unfortunately, contradicting yourself will make you look silly, no matter what the story of your life experience is… (That goes double when your contradictions require you to say that you’d let someone jump off a bridge.)

        Like

      99. I don’t doubt that they are out there. Have you read up on New Bethany home for Girls? Hepzibah House? Escuela Caribe? The Rebecca Home for Girls? Did you read about how To Train Up A Child’s teaching lead to the deaths of three children who were disciplined to death in spanking sessions that can last for hours at a time? Christianity has been known to take certain verses and clobber people – bashing them with the Bible in an attempt to get them to change their ways. There are kids out there who were physically and emotionally hurt by Christian approaches to indoctrinate and discipline them, who were abused and abandoned in the name of gospel. Like the rash of parents who kicked out their LGBTQ sons and daughters in an effort to show them “tough love” so that they would return to God and come home to be heterosexuals that the Bible demands them to be. To deny such things have happened is to marginalize those who experienced them and to give tacit approval to those who hurt them. If you hadn’t heard of these things, I’m not surprised. It’s easier to not want to know than to own the fact that your religious belief can be that harmful when applied in that way.
        So what are all the ways that indoctrination can be used as a force for good in Christianity?

        Like

      100. “To deny such things have happened is to marginalize those who experienced them and to give tacit approval to those who hurt them.”

        My dear girl, you are spinning in circles. Nobody has denied that evil has been committed in the name of Christianity. Demanding that we explain how indoctrination can be a force for good is called a ‘loaded question’. It assumes that Christianity is NOT a good thing and you now expect us to ‘defend’ the faith from the implicit charge of evil.

        The point that has been made MULTIPLE TIMES to you is that relative morality is irrational. You cannot claim that all beliefs are equally true and good; and then accuse people of believing the wrong thing. You are being inconsistent.

        Like

      101. How indoctrination can be a force for good doesn’t necessarily have to imply that Christianity is not a good thing – think of indoctrination apart from faith. What good has indoctrination been able to accomplish?

        Like

      102. Not only have I heard of those things, but I’ve acknowledged them and condemned indoctrination in this very thread. (Again–deaf ears.) Then I asked whether you also call out indoctrination, when it happens in other countries, and you got squirmy. You didn’t want to talk about that.

        It’s exactly like this video of college students answering questions about whether “discrimination” laws are fair or unfair. All of them had a different standard for Christians than for everyone else.

        That’s the new American ethics for you: call out the Christians who do evil (loudly and repeatedly!). And I agree, we SHOULD call out Christians for doing wrong. But when a person from another culture does the SAME WRONG, don’t suddenly become an Indoctrination Apologist.

        Like

      103. Nice, huh Jamie? And you’re on Team Jebus, too! You need to realize that if you want to be on THEIR team, you’ve got to think exactly the way daughter and daddy do – if you can figure that out. Narrow-mindedness is a definite start, here! Just sayin’ . . . .

        Like

      104. “Perhaps its us who are breaking our own rule, to claim to be tolerant and open-minded, but in actuality to prefer Christianity and to be closed-minded about alternatives.|

        BINGO!

        Like

      105. No, mrsmcmum, I would not like to answer. I don’t find conversations with you particularly edifying. Plus, I think Jamie is doing a fine job.

        Like

      106. My church has about 150 which is up from roughly 60 two years ago.

        What we have done, for the most part, is become more involved in outreach. We feed the homeless, pass out coffe on cold days and water on hot days. We mow lawns and help people in need in small ways. We run a food pantry and parner with local charities who actually do the work of Jesus. Basically, we try to do church outside the church as much as we can.

        We have also gone out of our way to encourage members to invite new people and we make the new people feel welcome and loved when they show up.

        We try to make sure there is a small group where everyone belongs. We also teach in our small groups that it is not only a study but that they do life together. They all have each others phone numbers, they all chat offline, and they meet offsite to do things together that have nothing to do with church. There is less teaching and more group discussion and questions so people actually feel like they are a participant and not to just there to be taught.

        And the sermons are purely biblical, which people have responded well to.

        Biggest thing though is that all the members of leadership keep it as real as we can. No air of superiority, no pretending we know more than anyone, and no acting like we are better than anyone.

        Like

      107. Is your leadership diverse?
        At one of my churches, we had a leader that never agreed with the other one, so one leader would wait until the other was out of town to push through all of his ideas without any “check” or “balance” on his power. He managed to get the old pastor replaced with a new one – freshly graduated with pretty much no experience to “shepherd” the people to believe his preferred teaching. It’s dangerous for all leaders to be on the same page and never disagree or have to come to a compromise.

        Liked by 1 person

      108. Jamie,

        For some reason I was unable to reply directly to this comment so I hope this makes sense.

        You said.

        “That really depends on how one leaves their religion. For those who suffered spiritual abuse, they might have been lead to believe they can’t trust their own, fallen senses, and any mistreatment going around them was just Satan attacking them…”

        People can, do, and have suffered spiritual abuse and I have a ton of empathy for them.

        It does seem however, that any of these people, judging by their behavior online, aren’t even trying to move on.

        How, for example, is waging an online war with Christian bloggers helpful in the healing process? Moving on means moving on, not fermenting in past wrongs, doesn’t it?

        I suppose one could argue that some are trying to save others but how can that happen if they don’t truly save themselves first?

        Like

      109. Because part of processing is going through the story of what happened to you as many times as it takes to accept that it wasn’t your fault, you didn’t have a choice, you didn’t control the situation, it wasn’t you. If you don’t go through this process of repetition; you get stuck. You can’t truly move on if you pretend that you’re “past it” when in reality you just refuse to deal with it at all. We see it when people make the same mistakes, leave one bad church only to attend one just like it – or worse. Repetition can take many forms. The process of moving one isn’t always simple, quick, and easy.

        Like

      110. True it isn’t simple or easy, I agree. It seems that many make it harder than it needs to be by arguing with people who were once part of the problem.

        If someone grew up with serious church problems, why jump in the fray with church people before they are healed? Wouldn’t distancing oneself be more conducive to healing?

        Like

      111. It’s not easy to let go of an identity. If you left America today, became an ex-pat, could you say that you were “free” of all the American Ideals you were raised to believe were so just because you now live in Uruguay? You’d still know all the customs, the vocabulary, and the concepts of being American and you can’t give it up just like that.
        It’s also a part of the process. To learn that it’s not just you, you might still read up on Christian bloggers who think like you used and realize that to some degree there are systematic issues with Christianity at the institutional level. I realized that when I was watching a Southern Baptist conference where a Palestinian was begging the believers not to side with Israel unquestioningly because they were hurting Palestinian Christians. But his plea fell on unlistening ears because as far as they were concerned, anyone who blesses Israel is blessed by God, and they didn’t care about the consequences to their Palestinian Christian brothers and sisters. If they could care less about those Christians, how am I to be sure they cared about me at all? So now I know it isn’t just me.

        Like

      112. James says he is in favor of having comprehensive religion taught in all schools. I agree.
        And I doubt you’d find the same sentiment in any other country, not heavily influenced by Christianity.

        Liked by 1 person

      113. I just don’t understand what people are so afraid of. I remember this one girl saying she was into Wicca and how hard it was to find a group to belong. I don’t see how she was that a big of threat to Christianity.

        Like

      114. I just don’t understand what you’re talking about. Who says she’s a threat? James and I both said we’re in favor of comprehensive religion. In this thread, the only people acting “threatened” by anything are the ones indoctrinating AGAINST Christianity.

        Like

      115. Authoritarian interpretations of Christianity that boxed me into a preconceived standard that I didn’t fit certainly didn’t help matters.

        If the original point was: “Parents aren’t liars because they tell the truth!” Then it’s just as true to argue the opposite: “Parents aren’t truth-tellers because they lie!”
        Two sides of the same coin; you can’t have one without the other; obviously.

        Like

      116. On my phone, so I think this is the on-going thread. Could be wrong though.
        Jamie, if you want to see how the Christians on here interact with each other, go to Philosophy of Slugs- here- at the Comedy Sojourn. You’ll see a lot of “I don’t know”‘s, “what do you think about this?”‘s and “You make a great point”s. We, collectively, are the most open-minded group of people that I know. Your point about indoctrination is dead here. We feel sorry for you if your childhood didn’t allow for many questions, but you won’t further sway us to being more open-minded, because we already are.
        If you were taught not to ask questions as a kid, apparently they didn’t too well, because you have much to say against indoctrination- instead of following suit and passing it on to the next generation. You are exemplifying the fact that people ask questions on their own, regardless of what their parents taught them. They could have “lied” or told the truth, either way, people will search on their own.
        Also, if you listen to the podcast, you’ll see how they interact. There is one where they talk about Santa Claus with Amanda’s oldest daughter, and Amanda does nothing to convince her that Santa is real. I don’t believe she is lying when she says that her parents haven’t lied to her. The Branyans ask questions, and get people to think about their own worldview.
        The first thing my dad ( who is a pastor) asked me when I said ” Hey Dad, a kid was wondering about this at school, how would you answer it?” was “Well, how did you answer it, Matt?”. I would proceed to tell him. Only then, after he got my perspective, he’d say something. Usually, he’d guess their reply to my answer. He’d play devil’s advocate for a bit before he suggested where to go for the answer. It was always up to me to research the answer for myself.
        Oh, and my dad was the one who taught my brother and I to never be afraid to say ” I don’t know, but when I find out, I’ll tell you.” then to always follow through when you do. So you won’t find any experience of “indoctrination” here either- and this is from a pastor’s kid.

        Liked by 3 people

      117. Matthew; I don’t see how it’s consistent to say: “we’re so open minded, but you’re points are falling on unlistening ears here, so go over there.”
        My grandfather, – who was not a pastor but could out-preach one – was also a devil’s advocate. As a not-pastor, he didn’t have a seminary education to unintentionally bias his understanding of Scripture (which as an uneducated devotee of the word had the potential to be inaccurate). He taught me that when somebody out there says: “My parents couldn’t have been liars, they tell the truth.” To point out that the inverse of that statement is also a truth; “My parent’s couldn’t have been truth-tellers, they tell lies.” The original post was saying the former but didn’t acknowledge the latter.
        Jesus was once asked: “What is truth?”
        Here, we seem to think in terms of absolutes; but truths change. It was once true that people believed that the sun revolved around the earth. Now we understand the truth differently that the earth revolves around the sun. What was true wasn’t a lie, it just wasn’t accurate. And some truths in Christianity today will be innacuracies decades and centuries from now. So we can’t say definitively that parents don’t like and always tell the truth; some might believe what they are teaching is true and it might be true to their way of thinking but it doesn’t always make it so to others.
        I have a German friend who told me about how indoctrination had lead to one of the greatest evils in the history of his country and the lengths his country’s schools now go to in order to prevent that from happening ever again. I just don’t think it’s a good idea to be okay with indoctrination because of all the evil it can do even if it can somehow be harmless.

        Like

      118. To clarify (again) the post didn’t say JB’s parents couldn’t have been liars. You came here to share what your grandfather told you, but it wasn’t relevant to this discussion.

        The post clearly asked, “Which stuff should I throw out? Just the religious stuff?” Which is a question designed to get people biased against religion to think about their bias. Then, in the comments, I clearly asked you how one separates fact from fiction? And I asked whether you’re actually trying to claim that ALL parents tell lies? (Because my claim to you is that mine haven’t lied to me.) You wandered away from all of those points, without addressing them.

        So, if anyone’s points are falling on deaf ears, they are mine. I’m afraid you were a little too eager to teach what you believe to be true, and ended up finding yourself in the company of people who are probably even more open-minded and deep and nuanced and interesting than you fancy yourself. To quote a friend of mine from upthread: “You understand those who are most like you because you understand yourself. But you’re not quite sure what to make of me because I’m not one of them, but I’m not one of you either…”

        But, to rephrase what I said last night, you will continue to be frustrated until you address your INTERNAL inconsistencies. It’s fine to grow and change. It’s fine to correct inaccuracies you’ve held in the past. (And as you said, before contradicting yourself, being wrong isn’t the same as lying. It’s not lying when Christians do it, either.)

        But you can’t hold two, conflicting ideas at the exact, same time. That is called relativism, and it is self-defeating. But I’ll let Matthew speak to that…

        Like

      119. You can – situation-ally. Almost every christian I know believes it is wrong to kill, yet they’re the first to sign up for war and will justifying murdering an army of other people whose ideas differ. They believe it’s wrong to kill, but under certain circumstances it’s right to kill. I know of Christians who are anti-abortion because life is sacred and pro-death penalty because it’s not that sacred. I know of Christians who hate the sin of homosexuality but are gluttons themselves. Christians can and do hold conflicting beliefs all the time.

        Like

      120. Did you watch the video? Your comment sounds exactly like something one of those college students would say.

        We get it. You’re angry at Christians. You think they need to do better. But your prejudice is glaring.

        A double-standard is wrong, no matter who holds it.

        Like

      121. I didn’t say your points were falling on unlistening ears. I said your point was dead here. I also said that we feel sorry for you if you were indoctinated. Did you get that? We are listening to you, and we feel sorry for you. But obviously, you’ve moved on and are questioning your parents’ methods now.
        What is close-minded is believing that everybody must have had your experience in a religious household- the Branyans and I did not. So your point here is moot, or dead, as I said. We are the counter-examples to your conclusion.

        You can’t convince an open-minded person to be any more open-minded.

        Truths don’t change. Beliefs do. The sun didn’t revolve around the earth just because people believed it did. The truth about the sun stayed the same. Beliefs changed.

        Like

  2. My parents told me those things and i don’t remember raging when i found out that they were made up. I think some people just want to rage so they will find something to rage about (ie the easter bunny, santa, preacher, and of course lying parents)

    Like

    1. Yeah.
      The point of the post was not ‘this is good parenting’. The point was that it is illogical to throw out religious views just because your parents taught them to you.
      It may turn out that your parents taught some bogus stuff. It doesn’t follow that we should discard EVERYTHING we learn from somebody just because they have been wrong on occasion.

      Sadly, now it looks like this comment section is going to fill up with sob stories from those who have been ‘abused by religion’.

      Like

      1. So it’s going to be filled up with people who argue from anecdote?

        For every person who has been abused by religion (and these people do exist) there are millions, even many who have left the faith that were not abused or scared in the least.

        Stories of abuse are indeed sad but they always fail to make a larger point.

        Like

      2. Anecdotes necessarily take the place of reason and logic for the ‘de-convert’. Critical thinking belongs to God and you can’t take that with you when you toss away ‘religion’.

        The de-convert is always a victim. They were deceived. They were abused. They were ‘indoctrinated’. Leaving religion is ALWAYS touted as brave, enlightened and liberating. They leave the fundamentalism of religion for the fundamentalism of atheism and consider that to be a total metamorphosis of thought.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. If leaving religion is so liberating why do almost all vocal deconverts seem so conflicted even years later? Why can’t they move on?

        That really depends on how one leaves their religion. For those who suffered spiritual abuse, they might have been lead to believe they can’t trust their own, fallen senses, and any mistreatment going around them was just Satan attacking them, so even though a tiny voice inside them told them wrong things were happening all around them, they were told to ignore it because the Pastor is never wrong about anything and only the Pastor has the truth. When that degree of damage has been done, it takes years and years to undo the damage.
        When I was watching Star wars, a quote stood out to me: “belief is not a matter of choice, but of conviction” you can’t be made to choose to believe something that you aren’t convicted is true, and for some who walk away from what they no longer consider to be true, the words echo on in their ears that God is going to send them to burn in hell, being tortured in unimaginably terrible ways forever and they can’t see that as loving or merciful. It’s a contradiction that doesn’t fit with his character. When you grow up being told that’s what you can expect, you sort of have to expect having difficulty letting go and doubting where you’re at.
        And there are still plenty who let go and are just fine with that, they feel relief, are at calm, and peace. But you won’t often find them here. They’ve moved on beyond the influence or reach of the Christian corners of the internet.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. You make some good points here Steve. For my money, the Easter bunny and Santa have no place in religious discussions because these characters are far too different from God, Christianity, the Bible, and Jesus for sensible comparisons to be made. Most importantly, parents who teach their kids about Santa and the Easter Bunny know they are make believe and that their kids will one day learn the truth without emotional trauma. You said you didn’t rage when you found out they weren’t really, no one does, and no one will.

      On the other hand, Chriatians believe Christianity is the truth so we teach our kids.

      Imparting truth, or what we sincerely believe truth is, should be the goal of any parent. To do otherwise is at best laziness and at worst abuse. Christian parents indoctrinate their children in Christianity because they believe it is true. First Corinthians 2:12-13 says, “Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.” By passing on truth, parents show their love and respect for their children.

      I can say with a fair amount of certainty that people who rage against parents lying to their kids about religion do not give religion fair treatment in their own homes with their own kids.

      If, for example, one believes kids must be threatened with Hell in order to come to faith then they are, ironically, believing a lie. If they pass that lie onto their kids as a truth aren’t they indoctrinating them in a way?

      Like

      1. Every parent indoctrinates their kids. Every parent passes religious ideas to their kids. (Yes. The self-proclaimed atheists have religious ideas.)

        Not all religious ideas are equal. Knowing that we WILL indoctrinate our kids should be a strong motivation to make sure we know the truth ourselves.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. True every parent indoctrinated their kids and no one has a problem with that except the anti-religious.

        Differnece is that they believe they have the market on truth cornered so their indoctrination is teaching which is totally different.

        Pick any vocal atheist on this blog and just imagine what a “fair” lesson on Christianity would sound like in their home, to one of their kids.

        “Not one iota of evidence exists for that frackin Lake Tiberious pedestrian…”

        “Christians and Muslims worship the same Abrahamic God.”

        “97 percent of scientists…”

        Indoctrination is a straw man, plain and simple.

        Liked by 3 people

    1. Hey, Carmen. I was just saying I hoped Jamie would come back and clarify that last comment, since it seemed to be a mix of several angles.

      You have said it makes sense to you, so would you mind explaining the point Jamie was trying to make?

      Like

      1. Dropped me when I proved too much to handle. You’re not the first!

        Good to know you are blogging in secret. Tucked away in the shadows where nobody can find you…that’s where atheist blogs belong. (winky-face)

        Like

      2. Aw, Branyan. Sorry to burst your smug little bubble there (wait, no – maybe I’m not) but I didn’t have an atheist blog. Novel idea, I know. An atheist who has a blog but doesn’t bother discussing atheism. . . like, there are all kinds of things happening in my life – imagine THAT!

        I live in a wonderful little corner of the world (we don’t lock our doors at night; don’t even take the keys out of our vehicles), I have many creative people in my life, and I have always had a stimulating and enriching life, too! I get to travel to the other side of the world at least once a year – bonus! Just IMAGINE . . . and all this without an invisible friend. It just beats all, doesn’t it? 🙂

        Like

      3. You mean ‘all this without BELIEF in an invisible friend’.
        The wonderful, enriching, stimulating life you live has been gifted to you by your Creator whether or not you choose to acknowledge Him. God blesses you despite your arrogance! It just beats all, doesn’t it?

        Liked by 2 people

  3. . . . and you know this. . .HOW?

    THAT’s what beats all, Branyan. Your hubris. You’re so puffed-up with it you can’t even think straight.
    Now go talk to members of the Jebus team. They’ll all nod in affirmation when you pull their strings. You’re wasting your time on me – I gave up that nonsense long ago, right after the tooth fairy, easter bunny and santa.

    Like

    1. Good one, Carmen!!!
      (Side note: Jamie and I were just talking about how her parents lied to her about the Easter Bunny and mine never did. I’m sorry you couldn’t trust the people who were supposed to be your teachers.)

      Liked by 1 person

  4. To Isaiah 57. (I believe it’s James, correct?)
    As a matter of fact, that discussion has been had in our house with a few of the grandchildren.
    Our favourite movie is ‘The Wizard of Oz’ and we’ve all watched it together several times. A few months ago, one of the grandchildren asked, “Nannie, is there really a god?” To which I replied, “Remember the wizard?” 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

      1. The part they GOT was that it was all smoke and mirrors, Branyan.

        Oh, and they are 4 and 5. 🙂 (smart, like their grandmother)

        Like

      2. Ha, ha – depends on what you think a ‘real’ wizard is, I guess. They obviously knew better. (Better than a grown man, it appears)

        Like

      3. Careful, Branyan. You’re going into ‘LOL’ mode; where it becomes increasingly clear you’re losing the debate. Familiar readers are already nodding their heads in acknowledgment. It’s your default position, poor fellow.

        Oh, and Jamie – good luck trying to get the Branyan Comedy Team to stick to the point. They’re famous prevaricators. . .

        Like

      4. As a woman (who once was a middle-school girl), there is nothing more annoying than the “Come, agree with me and be on MY TEAM” that vapid females do.

        Gross, Carmen.

        If she wants to be on your team, it won’t be because you said something smart. It will be because doesn’t like me and wants to use you for back-up.

        Like

    1. Carmen,

      Yes, it’s James.

      So, no unbiased discussion about how many people believe in God and why according to their faith systems?

      Just a simple answer a kid hearing could (probably wouod) hear as “God is make believe like a character in a movie.”

      If one of your grandchildren asked you to sum up the Gospel for them, what would you say? Would you give them an honest presentation so they could make up their own mind or would you spin it so it’s something only a crazy person would believe?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I did use the word “crazy” Carmen and it was intentional.

        A person could tell two versions of the Gospel story, both basically true but both leading.

        My guess is that your version would focus on believing in Jesus or suffering eternal torment needlessly.

        My version would focus on love, redemption, grace, and eternal glory.

        Like

      2. aww – pissed off are you, Branyan? I can always tell because he tosses out the ‘stupid’ comment. 🙂 Didn’t like the Little Man Syndrome comment, I’ll bet – the truth hurts.

        Like

  5. ahh, there we go, Branyan!

    Another thing, Jamie. When he starts losing the argument – as he invariably does – he resorts to ad hominem – so charming! And so pathetically obvious! 🙂

    I suspect he’s got a chronic case of Short Man Syndrome, too.

    Like

  6. Actually, James, I’m an English teacher. What’s obvious about the stories in the Bible is that they are all based on myth (some of the ‘tales’ are evolved from older myths, which the gospel writers ‘stole’) — so any discussion around them would involve the age-old custom of myth-telling. Even children can understand the purpose of traditional tales.

    Like

    1. As an English teacher, you realize that the Bible wasn’t written in English, right?

      Please give me your literary criticism of the resurrection. Tell me how we can be certain it is myth.

      Like

      1. “As an English teacher, you realize that the Bible wasn’t written in English, right?” No! Really?? (Jesus Christ, Branyan, MUST you make yourself out to be such a nimrod?)

        Now why in the world would I want to get into any kind of literary criticism with you – what good reason would there be for me to do that?

        MYTH Branyan, myth. Do look it up.
        Or, if you prefer, historical fiction (which would be a generous description). Either way, completely contrived.
        I realize, however, that to the completely indoctrinated this is heretical. . . how about just growing up??

        Like

      1. Actually, no James. That was an attempt to illustrate where I’m coming from, in terms of understanding. Not really my problem if you cannot see that. As I’ve said, perspective is everything, eh?

        Like

    2. Carmen,

      Myth was a method the ancients used to transmit wisdom.

      There is nothing wrong with myth.

      But the Bible is much more than myth since the moral and covenant components contained in all the stories of the Bible are unique in all of ancient literature.

      The Hebrews wrote their literature with the particular intent of making the Word of God distinguishable from pagan myth.

      Like

    3. Carmen,

      Also, there is so much more to the story of the Wizard of Oz, than the Wizard.

      “There’s no place like home.”

      “If I only had a brain.”

      “If I only had a heart.”

      “What makes a king out of a slave?”

      The Wizard of Oz is a great mythical story for children because it role models good and evil, virtue and vice and so many other great things.

      One other thing…

      …Isn’t the Wizard of Oz an example of literature written in English?

      Like

  7. Evidence for Santa Claus being a myth: Parents buying gifts for their kids. Santa Claus isn’t necessary for gifts to exist.
    Evidence for the Easter Bunny being a myth: Parents buying candy. Easter bunny isn’t necessary for candy to exist. Evidence for the Tooth Fairy being a myth: Parents putting money under the pillow. Tooth Fairy isn’t necessary for money being under my pillow.

    Evidence for a Creator being a myth: “Atoms coming from nothing. Creator isn’t necessary for the world to exist.”

    I have seen my parents buy Christmas gifts, chocolate, and put money under my pillow.
    I have never seen anybody create atoms out of nothing.

    Until that happens, I’ll believe a Creator is still necessary for the world to exist.

    Hope that helps people out on the difference between Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, in contrast to a Creator.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. @James

    A person could tell two versions of the Gospel story, both basically true but both leading.

    How nice…. I can make a comment that stays on topic: about lying parents.

    Well, James you are a parent and you are a frakking liar of the first order!

    Like

    1. Ark,

      I think a point of the Bible skeptics here is that parents didn’t develop the Bible stories for children into bible stories meant for adults.

      I was vexed by that terrible shortfall too, but I never blamed my parents.

      I put the responsibility at the feet of the Church for doing such a terrible job of educating young adults.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. …I’d put the responsibility at the feet of those “young adults.” When you’re old enough to complain about what your parents didn’t teach you, then you’re old enough to search and think for yourself, right?

        I danno. I mean, parents and Church leaders have responsibilities, too. Buy my generation is so quick to get “offended” and leave when they don’t hear what they want, that there isn’t always opportunity to teach.

        That’s why I think young adults should start ACTING like adults and taking some of that responsibility themselves. God gave you a mind. Quit blaming others and use it. Just my two cents. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      2. MrsMcMommy,

        Where God is concerned there must be a lifelong nurturing process of education and training.

        Discipleship encompasses heart, body and soul in a particular process of refinement.

        People who can do all of that themselves are few and far between.

        Like

      3. Agreed.

        But, again, I belong to a generation that sticks its fingers in its ears and yells “lalalalala!” when they get the faintest whiff of traditional Christianity. So, it’s hard for me not to (ultimately) put the blame on individuals.

        Like

      4. The problem, Peaches, is more and more young Christians are getting swept away by the John Pavlovitz’s of this world during their independent research.
        Somebody pointed this out to me, and I agree with them: they found it odd that most churches group their kids by “nursery” “pre-school” “elementary” ( so far makes sense) but then middleschool and high school are lumped together. Something is wrong about a senior having the same lessons as a sixth grader. There is not much continual growth as they progress in age.
        I believe I benefitted being one of two youth in my church growing up. The other was my brother who is four years older than me. It was just the two of us in all of our Sunday School classes, well from 2003-2008, at least. We talked about issues of our ages. Plus. our growth also developed from being the pastor’s kids.
        However, I believe the church leaves kids out to dry when they go off to college. Kids are attracted to their peers. Then they go to churches filled with people their age, which I term “seeker churches”-meaning they give the gospel message, people give their lives to Christ, but the lessons they hear on Sundays don’t go much deeper than that. They serve their purpose, but I believe it should be short-lived.
        While individuals are responsible for their growth, a lack of proper discipleship along the way bears much weight.
        My parents did a wise thing and surrounded my brother and I with people much older than us while we were kids. I, to this day, get along better with people my parents’ and grand-parents’ ages than people my own age.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. I understand what you’re saying. But maybe some of the problem is continuing to see people as “kids” all the way through college?

        I mean–16, 17, 18… At some point, you’ve got to start taking responsibility for your own learning, like an adult! 🙂 (Homeschool student here. Independent learning is a big thing.) If you’re still getting swayed by your friends (and John Pavlovitz) by the time you move out, I’m just not sure how to help. Objective thinking needs to be established looooooong before then.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. The more you study about millennials, the more you’ll find out how peer- oriented they are. It’s great for evangelism, kinda bad for discipleship- unless you have people strong in the faith by then. My grandfather got saved in his 40s, my dad when he was 16 ( they got baptised together, actually), my brother when he was 14- to expect people to be mature in the faith by that age is expecting much.
        My brother and I were kinda loners growing up ( I still am, really), but most kids spend the school day plus many hours afterwards ( sports and the like) with their friends. They are going to have a great influence on each other and the way they think, which as I already pointed out, may not be the best influence.

        Oh and not to mention the parents that pull their kids from churches every two weeks for sport-related events. When my brother and I were in soccer and Taekwondo ( and my brother was in Cross-Country) Sundays and Wednesdays were off- limits, and the coaches knew it. A lot of parents let their kids skip church every other week all of their lives then wonder why their kids never took church seriously.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. If there was no real fear of the horrors contained in the bible , let alone the incredible absurdities and blatant erroneous nature of many of the stories most ”normal” parents would have no qualms about reading the stories ”as is” to kids.
        Of course, the wholly fictitious drivel of Hell is one of those extra-biblical tales that are indoctrinated into a lot of kids by evangelical hardliners and this is blatant child abuse.
        In fact, practically the entire bible is built upon false premise so, while not always intentional, parents are passing on lies with each subsequent generation that is subject to this nonsense.

        Like

      8. Not to you , maybe, but to hard-line evangelicals it is a core doctrine,
        Convert or burn for eternity. I know you are aware of this,.
        It was something that left me completely gobsmacked when i discovered there were such idiotic, and quite likely , mentally unstable Christians who actually believe in a literal Hell and indoctrinate it into kids!
        How is that NOT child abuse?
        And then there are the absolute kooks who emphatically deny evolution!

        This is why it is difficult to square away a divinely revealed text – the idea of an omniscient deity leaving such crucial aspects of belief in the hands of such morons is untenable.

        Like

      9. Actually he did not…. and I am surprised you would say so.
        he was a Jew. The Jews have no concept of the Christian version of hell, which is a later doctrinal addition.

        Like

      10. That’s because you believe you actually understand the bible …. and you don’t. T«Really… you are a louse example of a biblical scholar n any sense.
        And if you still do not realise that Gehenna is not the christian hell that fundamentalists indoctrinate their kids with then you are either flat out lying or simply being disingenuous.
        You choose …

        Liked by 1 person

      11. He cannot be taken seriously, I had this conversation with him two years ago.

        Jesus did talk about the reality of hell — in fact, He talked about it more than any other person in the Bible. He warned, “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28).

        Did He say this simply to scare us? The reality of hell should frighten us, because not one word in the Bible about hell would ever make you want to go there — not if you take it seriously. The Bible speaks of hell as a place of absolute loneliness and despair and hopelessness. It calls it a place of “darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 22:13).

        But Jesus didn’t talk about hell just to scare us. He talked about it instead because He wanted us to know that God has provided a way of escape! Listen: God doesn’t want you to be separated from Him forever. He loves you, and He wants you to spend eternity with Him in heaven. Unlike hell, heaven is a place of joy and peace and freedom from all the fears and pains of this world. Who wouldn’t want to go there?

        Don’t gamble with your soul, and don’t turn your back on Jesus. Instead, by faith turn to Christ and commit your life to Him. He alone gives us hope.

        Like

  9. Matthew,

    I am really tired of atheists mentioning Santa and Jesus in the same sentence because it’s, well, dumb.

    It really comes down to whether or not either one can reasonably be proven to exist. Very few people deny the historic reality of Jesus; and though millions of children affirm the existence of Santa, we know well that the minds of children are not capable of differentiating between fantasy and reality–particularly when the parents they are trusting tell them Santa is real.

    For an atheist to reject Jesus’ existence based on arguments found against Santa Claus demonstrates the inability for the atheist to distinguish between historical, verifiable documents and known, constructed children’s stories. Jesus was an actual historical figure. Santa, of course, is not.

    Your comment is really good and you are right, a creator is necessary and that is obvious to all who care to look around. Romans 1:20 says all we need to know about that.

    As far as lying about Santa, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy goes, meh, so what.

    My kids are too old but for it all now but I can’t wait to be in on these lies when I have grandchildren.

    Like

    1. Yeah, only the people who don’t think about the differences in claims actually lump them together. What I see most of the time is the grouping of different monotheistic religions. I think most of my atheistic friends are bigger advocates of Islam than most Muslims are haha.
      Most people want to know the differences in religions, so they take a shallow look into each of them. They see truths in each religion and go “how can you tell that your religion is the true one?” Which is a very valid question- and definitely more valid than the Santa Claus and Jesus comparison.

      What is sadly hilarious, though, is when people forgo what makes a worldview a worldview: origin, meaning, purpose, and destiny out of their examination of scripture; and all they look at are the violence and laws of the Old Testament- then say “see, Judeo-Christianity must be false because God is immoral in the Bible.”. They can’t even see their fallacious reasoning.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. That was supposed to say: origin, meaning, morality, and destiny.
        Either way, my point was that they don’t even focus on one.

        Like

  10. indoctrination
    noun
    the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
    “I would never subject children to religious indoctrination”
    archaic
    teaching; instruction.
    “methods that were approved for indoctrination in divinity”

    Just in case some do not understand, and a reminder to those people who seem to forget the meaning of the word and the concept it is used in.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Indoctrination : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments

      Just in case some do not understand, and a reminder to those people who seem to forget that some words have multiple meanings.

      Like

      1. The only difference being the methodology of the instruction. Repetitious instruction and guidance of a doctrine is also information replacement and that is totally different to an instruction in the fundamentals of an ideology, where it is simply the process of passing on knowledge and information.

        Like

    2. The key word is “uncritically”. A fallacy is when people assume that all religious households don’t allow for questions to be asked. In the United States of America, the exposure of many religions- due to our freedom- allows for many, many, questions to be asked. Go to countries where people are killed for leaving their religion, then you can talk about indoctrination.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “uncritically” is a good word to describe the position of an ideology that is repetitiously fed to young and\or troubled minds.

        uncritically
        adverb
        with a lack of criticism or consideration of whether something is right or wrong.
        “he uncritically accepts lunatic ideas and believes almost anything”

        You say “Go to countries where people are killed for leaving their religion, then you can talk about indoctrination.”

        I think you are talking about radicalised fundamentalists that I believe is a step further than indoctrination.

        Like

      2. No, it’s not a step further to say that. Seeing people die for being an apostate is an effective way to discourage criticism ( I don’t advocate killing people for leaving their religion, but if I saw somebody die for leaving Islam, for instance, that would have a great impact on my staying a Muslim- if I were one).
        Repeating of ideas is not making kids uncritical. Have you ever gone to school? Specifically math class? Teachers will repeat ideas ( sometimes, it seems almost too much) and will still answer questions like “Why is the answer 7?” although we’ve gone through the steps many, many, times. Now, if the teacher never answered the question, or yelled at the kid for asking it, that may count for indoctrination- I just call it lousy teaching.

        Like

      3. Your comment “Seeing people die for being an apostate is an effective way to discourage criticism ( I don’t advocate killing people for leaving their religion, but if I saw somebody die for leaving Islam, for instance, that would have a great impact on my staying a Muslim- if I were one).”

        This is typical of an ancient method for controlling people and carried out by the crazy radicalised groups. The subservience for a god is a result of indoctrination and it is also supported by incentives to toe the line such as heaven and hell.

        Your comment “Repeating of ideas is not making kids uncritical.” I agree; however, it is not just an “idea” we are talking about, this is way more involved than that. Indoctrination is when an individual is systematically instructed and groomed to live their life of worship, faith and devotion along with the church community and expected to follow the doctrine of the religious order until they die.

        Mathematics is not a religious ideology, you do not pray to a God etc. A massive difference that you appear to have missed. After many repeated steps the child will learn to do the math but it is not going to have a lasting emotional effect or an ancient book will not dictate how they live their life.

        Yelling at a kid does not count as indoctrination, I advise you read my earlier comment where I copied the meaning or Google it.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Sklyjd, if you want to have an intelligent discussion, don’t act like I don’t know how to read. I obviously read the definition, other wise I wouldn’t have commented in the first place.
        It says “set of beliefs”, with the synonyms “teaching” and “instruction”. Those are very broad terms.
        Also, “uncritically” is the key word of the definition. You are teaching them to uncritically accept a set of beliefs. You are teaching them to be uncritical. Punishing a kid for being critical would be teaching them to not be critical. It could be mild, by yelling at them when they are critical, or extreme, like killing them for leaving a religion.
        Either way, “uncritically” is the key word. If you take that out, you have no way of differientiating “indoctrinaters” from “teachers” or “instructors”.

        But who is swaying from the definition here?
        “Indoctrination is when an individual is systematically instructed and groomed to live their life of worship, faith and devotion along with the church community and expected to follow the doctrine of the religious order until they die.”

        That is not a part of the definition you posted, that is the definition you made up to suit your argument. That won’t work here, sorry.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Indoctrination from this definition tells me that the instructions you receive could be but should not be questioned and must be carried out. It is said that soldiers are indoctrinated into a system for undertaking their duties and as we know many of them die carrying these duties out.

        I have served, and I was prepared or indoctrinated enough to put my life on the line for my colleagues. The political or religious position of the conflict was not an issue for most of us.

        I was doing my job, I did not think it was indoctrination but more like comradeship but this still could be classed as indoctrination by definition because all questions and doubts were well covered by the military establishment and I was given no excuse not to do my duty without question.

        Religious belief is very much the same, you may ask the questions but there is always an answer and you are not expected to disagree with it. If you do not commit to what you are told and accept the answers you are out of the section, locked up and eventually discharged.

        Teachers and instructors in normal schools do only that, however if they were to impose subject matter of a philosophy, ideology or the corporate principles of organisations such as military, religious or political movements that are bound by a set doctrine onto a young mind through a regular system of instruction what would that be called according to you?

        So, you tell me my definition is swaying off the mark. Where exactly? Or are you saying you disagree with the process and content of indoctrination for a religious recruit?

        Like

      6. It’s funny how you are restricting “set of beliefs” to only military, political, and religious sects. Mathematics is a set of beliefs. I am currently learning fundamental geometry in college right now. It is a systematic approach to learn a set of beliefs, in this case, Euclidean geometry. It allows for critical questions to be asked. This is much like many religious households in the United States, including my own. I have asked, and still ask critical questions about Christianity.
        Christianity is a relationship. It can be described as God as our heavenly Father, and the Church as the Bride of Christ. Christianity is relational. You cannot force somebody to genuinely love something.
        Worship comes from “worth-ship”, meaning that when you worship something, you are giving somebody the worth that they deserve. You cannot worship God if you do not believe He is worthy of being praised. Nobody can force you to worship God.
        If you ask a Christian for their testimony, they will not give you the same exact reason for becoming a Christian. So their faith is their own, not somebody else’s.
        Like worship, you also cannot force somebody to be devoted to any one thing.
        So your own definition fails in three ways:
        1) It is restricting “set of beliefs” to religion. Then you just expanded that to military and politics.
        2) Worship, faith, and devotion cannot be forced.
        3) Christians still ask critical questions about Christianity.

        Implying that all religious households do not allow for criticism, especially in the United States, is highly erroneous.

        Like

      7. “It’s funny how you are restricting “set of beliefs” to only military, political, and religious sects. Mathematics is a set of beliefs.”

        Just think about it for a second, military, political, and religious sects are ruled by a doctrine, principles, faith, policies, a hierarchy, committees, boards, etc. Where mathematics is something you learn to advance your overall education.

        “I have asked, and still ask critical questions about Christianity.” Have you asked the most critical questions such as for the evidence that God exists? Why is Christianity so much like much older religions? Why is the Bible full of stories that never happened? Unfortunately, You will get an answer given to you by your leadership because you are indoctrinated to accept what they tell you.

        You fail to understand basic facts in 3 ways:

        1) You obviously struggle to understand the difference between an establishment supported by a doctrine with a common subject for education purposes such as mathematics.

        2) You are narrow minded and uneducated about indoctrination; young children are forced into religious faith every day.

        3) Christians take everything on faith and hope, so they dare not ask the hard questions that have answers based on scientific evidence because it would ostracise them from their flock.

        Like

      8. The school system is also ruled by a doctrine, principles, faith, a hierarchy, committees, boards, etc. You are the one who is failing to give the difference between “indoctrination” and “education”. I have already specified the difference.
        “Have you asked the most critical questions such as for the evidence that God exists? Why is Christianity so much like much older religions? Why is the Bible full of stories that never happened?”
        I already said I’ve been critical. Are these the most critical questions to you?
        “Unfortunately, You will get an answer given to you by your leadership because you are indoctrinated to accept what they tell you.”
        I accept what teachers tell me as well. You are again failing to show the difference.
        “You fail to understand basic facts in 3 ways:

        1) You obviously struggle to understand the difference between an establishment supported by a doctrine with a common subject for education purposes such as mathematics.”
        You are failing to understand how the school system works.
        “2) You are narrow minded and uneducated about indoctrination; young children are forced into religious faith every day.”
        I never denied this. I denied that all Christian housholds, especially in the United States ,are forced to become a Christian. Christianity is a personal relationship- it cannot be forced. However, the school system is definitely forced upon Americans.
        “Christians take everything on faith and hope, so they dare not ask the hard questions that have answers based on scientific evidence because it would ostracise them from their flock.”
        You cannot say “They dare not ask the hard questions” and “They will get an answer from their leadership.” You obviously cannot get answers without asking questions.
        You really need to be consistent.

        Like

      9. Good God, you know how to twist everything around. For your God’s sake, be truthful for once, you have not specified the difference in anything, you pathetically attempted to compare mathematics lessons to indoctrination, not the school system.

        The fact that you do not ask the type of questions I would means you are frightened of the outcome. I cannot blame you however.

        I understand the school system quite well as I am quite involved with the school my daughter attends. I am a great supporter of our Australian public school system.

        Again, be honest. What is the purpose of Sunday school and what is the purpose of a state school? The school system makes sure you can read and write, and I think that is a good thing, don’t you?

        If you are in doubt about the indoctrination of children who cannot read or write visit this site http://www.abcjesuslovesme.com/ideas/wordless-book

        Like

      10. Read the comment where I first mentioned math. I asked you if you’d ever been in school ( that implied the school system) then I specified math class to prove a point. I already said the difference between “indoctrination” and “education” is the word “uncriticallly”. You have yet to prove that all religious households do not allow for criticism. In fact, you say that people get answers from their leaders. Which, as I pointed out, is inconsistent. You cannot get answers without asking critical questions.
        I haven’t twisted anything around. I’m pointing out to you that all of your qualifiications to “indoctrination” can be applied to “education”. I’m just pointing out your double standard. I’ve been consistent in the actual definition- you’ve literally made up your own.
        Oh, but the purpose of Sunday School is to expose truth to young children in an age-appropriate manner.

        Like

      11. “Oh, but the purpose of Sunday School is to expose TRUTH (my emphasis) to young children”

        This is a joke, apparently? And you are not indoctrinated? *smh*

        Liked by 1 person

      12. “I’m pointing out to you that all of your qualifiications to “indoctrination” can be applied to “education”.

        Ok are you saying nobody should go to school and get indoctrinated with maths, English, physics and my fav science. Why not dumb down the whole country and rely on God to guide us, hey the Islamic Muslims have done that and what a great role model they are.

        “Oh, but the purpose of Sunday School is to expose truth to young children in an age-appropriate manner.”

        Age appropriate? Don’t make me laugh, did you check out the link? Nope, or maybe you did, but it is easier to ignore what emotional sickness is forced onto some children in the real world and just make up stories that suit your mythology.

        Like

      13. I love that emphasis Carmen. Sunday School is exposure to “The Way and the Truth and the Life”.

        I am still very critical of Christianity, I have not been indoctrinated.

        Until you guys can show that all religious households, especially in the United States, do not allow for criticism about religious ideas, you do not have a point about indoctrination.

        Like

      14. No, Sklyjd, I am saying by YOUR standard about “indoctrination” YOU should believe that nobody should be “educated”. I believe in criticism in all areas of life- including religious exposure. You’ve yet to show that in all religious households, they do not allow for criticism.

        Like

      15. What did you make of this link?

        http://www.abcjesuslovesme.com/ideas/wordless-book

        Don’t believe it, right? your lack of comment speaks volumes.

        I believe education is great and am grateful, unlike you who should be happy you were not born in a third world Muslim country where Islamic indoctrination is the only education and everything else is scarce.

        “You’ve yet to show that in all religious households, they do not allow for criticism.”

        How do you propose anyone can do that, by knocking on every door? It is impossible, like asking if all households discuss sex. It is customary and commonplace that all religions evangelise and much of this process starts with children who can barely read or tie a shoelace. Home schooling for religious education must be the worst, therefore, what chance do these kids have of asking questions of qualified academics and having any chance of making a decision of their own?

        Survey data from the National Household Education Survey (NHES) conducted every four years. This data reveals that the top reasons parents home-school have consistently been concerns about the school environment, a desire to provide religious or moral instruction, and dissatisfaction with academics in other schools.

        Liked by 1 person

      16. One, that link doesn’t apply to my church nor the church I attended when I grew up as a kid.
        Secondly, how wouldn’t that be an age-appropriate delivery of the Gospel message? Educationally- speaking, it is spot on.
        Thirdly, did you even read the last step where it says to tell your parents and brothers and sisters? Obviously, they can’t be indoctrinated at home if they are encouraged to tell their parents about the Gospel message.

        Oh, but you have not addressed:
        1) The relational nature of Christianity; how people cannot be forced to be devoted to nor to worship God and how a Christian’s testinomy faith is their own- individually.
        2) That the only difference between indoctrination and education is that indoctrination does not allow for criticism- and that you have a blatant double standard.
        Your silence spoke volumes.
        But thanks for showing that you cannot prove that all religious households indoctrinate their children ( by the actual definition)- you proved my point.

        Like

      17. I have answered all the questions and you keep repeating them to not lose face. go back and read what I write properly because I am tired of trying to educate you in facts about indoctrination. Typically, you are told by your leaders that atheists are talking rubbish, do not read their foul words and are advocates of the devil etc. And why would you not believe your religious teachers?

        A fact that you cannot hide from, children are forced to believe in an ideology and it is a recognised fact religions indoctrinate children between 0 and 7 years before they are even potty trained and able to ask questions. You should be disgusted that you support such behaviour because it often violates the child’s basic rights and effects very important decisions later in life and has the potential for long term phycological harm.

        For your education, this came from a web page regarding Catholicism. This process for a very young child begins with what is understood by religions as “formation” and by science as “Theory of mind”. The process is carried out as young as possible to ensure lifelong entrapment and absolute obedience on demand through traumatic and emotional bonding of the child and usually carried out by the parents, who were themselves entrapped as children and are now doing precisely as instructed.

        If you do not understand the difference between a public-school education and the indoctrination process into an ideology by now it is a total waste of time, especially yours trying to understand it. Peace be with you mate.

        Like

      18. Only you guys cannot understand the difference:

        The difference between education and indoctrination is vast, but it is often subtle when the mind thinks of these two subjects. Education involves the seeking of facts, and learning about what is the truth, and what is not. … You can be indoctrinated into a political party, a cult, or a belief system.

        Like

      19. We totally understand the difference.
        The objection being raised is against your claim that ALL religious teaching is ‘indoctrination’.

        …please…please…please don’t repeat the definition of these terms.

        Like

      20. Well, all the younger children in all religions are indoctrinated because they are unable to know what is going on.

        Like

      21. Nonsense.
        You’re still labeling education that you oppose as ‘indoctrination’. Matthew has told you what his religious education was like.
        Children are much smarter than you give them credit for.

        Like

      22. Talking to children about what is something they must accept and understand in life is not pushing a belief in a religion or political issue. You are unable to change the sexual orientation of a child simply informing them about gender issues. I agree that they could be influenced strongly to change that orientation, however that would-be recognised as child abuse and would take the form of an intense indoctrination process. One or two discussions with them about these issues is not going to have a mind-altering effect on how they live the rest of their lives.

        You can also talk to children about political situations or even Donald Trump and this will or should not have a marked effect on the rest of their lives. It is about the content of the discussion, the intensity and seriousness and how it is expressed but most importantly how regularly the content is fed to the children.

        For example, you would not say to a male child of 5 years that it is good if he grows up to love and marry another boy because girls are bad for him. This would not make any impact on one or two occasions but if this is preached on a regular basis to him every day for many years this is nothing less than phycological abuse. The child may have problems with sexual issues for the rest of his life with this sort of abuse.

        Like

      23. Do you really think you’re being consistent?

        Or do you see now that your definition of what is appropriate and what is inappropriate to teach a child is based solely on your opinion (and what has already been taught to you.)

        On another thread, Ron mentioned that morality comes from “social conditioning.” Which means you have been conditioned to think the way you do about sexual orientation and religion…

        Like

      24. It is my opinion that an average parent is able to understand what is appropriate for their child. They would be concerned if the sexual, horror and violence content was to explicit in a story book, discussion or movie for example.

        Children should be exposed to what they will face in their future lives. Like I have said it is dependent on how the information is presented and the regularity of the delivery before it becomes a problem. Unfortunately, the ideal outcome for many parents is to turn their children into little Christians or Islamic followers as soon as they can walk and I do not think any parent and especially no other person has the fundamental right to force any ideology onto any child.

        I have said all religions indoctrinate their children and this does not mean every parent does. I think all children should be exposed to all the religions and political ideologies that exist in their own country, after all they will encounter these things one time or another.

        Social conditioning, I agree can be a great influence on a child, but if parents give a child room to think and experience life by encouraging free thought they will eventually decide for themselves on these issues and it does not become an obligation for them to deal with or lose favour from family members. This liberal attitude I know does happen in some less enthusiastic Christian families, however I should imagine it is rare in the USA because the of the dominant church influence.

        Like

      25. Yes–and the ideal outcome for many parents is to turn their children into little Naturalist/Humanists.

        The point is, you have a bias against religion, and that bias will be evident in whatever lesson you were to teach a child. You believe that non-religious parents teach only “facts” while religious parents shove fiction down their child’s throat…
        But, the point of all the Christians here is that all parents teach their kids what they believe to be true. And I will not change what I teach to my own kids, based solely on the biased opinion of religion-hating Atheists. 🙂

        Like

      26. Actually, sklyjt is being very diplomatic. The point of the post that all non-believing commenters have stuck to is that religious parents LIE to their children. Blatant, nose-growing, pants-on-fire lies – that’s what we are talking about here. The pastor, James, lies to his congregants. Branyan lies to his audience — as a matter of course, in their chosen professions. Now, if you want to cling to the ‘what I believe to be true’ bullshit and consider yourself a good person, by all means keep deluding yourself. The point is that you’ve been indoctrinated to believe that bullshit – just like Matthew – and now you are doing the same to your own children.

        The thing is, children eventually figure out that what Mummy and Daddy have conjured up in their imagination is NOT real. . . then they let loose on sites such as Homeschoolers Anonymous – it isn’t pretty. (Or you might have read about millennials leaving the churches in droves? – they figured it out) Nor is it, in my mind, one bit excusable to just say, “Well, I believed it!”. You really should be prepared to say, “I was wrong”.

        OWN IT.

        Like

      27. I thought you weren’t interested in a conversation with me, Carmen?

        Were you LYING?

        Well, what I told you still stands (and my children will testify that I always mean what I say). You’re not going to dive bomb me with insults and then wiggle away when it’s time to defend your accusations. What have I lied about?

        Like

      28. Keep being you, Carmen. 🙂

        Someday, my children will see that I wasn’t lying about your brand of Atheists.

        “Wow. Evangelical Atheists REALLY ARE crazier than anything I’ve ever personally seen at church…”

        Like

      29. Your point is taken but it is misguided. As we are all exposed to bias during our life time and most of us can handle it one way or another. The real point is does this bias indoctrinate a child? I would say yes it can do if it is fed in such a way that the child wants to embrace it and in a repetitive system of delivery.

        You automatically find an argument to try and reverse the issue. My point is that indoctrination of children in all religions is a commonplace practice and you do not have to be a believer to recognise this practice takes place regularly. Denying it happens is obviously an absolute lie, saying atheists do it on the same scale is absurd and the argument can be seen for what it really is.

        Many atheists such as myself attended Sunday school and religiously organised events as a child and those of us who remember are not stupid enough to not know what was going on, we just did not understand it at the time. You teach your kids your religious philosophy on a regular basis, send them to Sunday school, drag them to church, thank the Lord 3 or 4 times a day and read the Bible together and inevitable they are going to be a mini you.

        The fact that the child has no say in the matter I suppose does not worry you because you believe you have given them a leg up into heaven and want to protect her from hell. I must ask how devastated are you going to be if your daughter were to reject everything you taught her?

        As a parent, I would be more satisfied if my child were to make up her own mind, and because atheists have no heaven to give our children a leg up into or any hell to worry about we have no need to indoctrinate our children. By the way, I have dropped my daughter who was about 12 at church meetings to see her friends and it did not concern me, plus I do not hate religions but I dislike them for many reasons and I do not offer hate only sympathy and advice for the followers.

        Like

      30. …The moment you start describing the way I teach my children, never having met me, is the moment you lose all credibility.

        Thanks for playing, Steve, but I’m growing tired of your anti-religion ranting.

        You (as Matthew has said multiple times) don’t know what you’re talking about.

        Like

      31. OK you got me. I understand more of your philosophy now and it appears you are determined to allow the children to make up their minds for themselves. I hope they are taught proper science in the schools they attend because that opens up many careers, the wonders of the world and beyond.

        “And here’s a picture of me with Cami, for visual reference. 🙂 (Stinking cute, if I say so myself.)”

        Got to agree with that one.

        Liked by 1 person

      32. You were right… they think “religion” is stapling a kid’s eyes open and making them watch Jesus movies… There is no way for them to recognize their own indoctrination. That’s what they were indoctrinated to miss!

        My education was good….my education was good… my education was good….

        Religion is bad… religion is bad… religion is bad… religion is bad…

        Like

      33. “The difference is vast but often subtle.”
        Huh?

        No, it’s quite simple. Anything that makes an Atheist uncomfortable is “indoctrination” and anything which sounds sufficiently unspiritual is “fact.”

        It’s okay. You can say it.

        Like

      34. Sklyjd – The fault in understanding is with the receiver(s) in this case, not with your delivery. I mean, when one thinks of it, they’ve managed to convince themselves the imaginary is REAL; they must, to adhere to their worldview. (Of course, they’ve also convinced themselves that atheism is a worldview. . . what can anyone do with that kind of delusion?) So any attempt at asking them to think logically must be dismissed; they cannot do it and will not. It’s called willful blindness. It takes practice, and they all do it with zeal.
        All one can do is shake one’s head. Oh, and hope that a ray of enlightenment will break through their delusions one day – it IS possible! 🙂

        Like

      35. For the record. Your entire comment is ad hominem.
        You know, that thing you keep accusing me of doing to you?
        Just FYI in case you really do care about stuff like that.

        Like

      36. I understand exactly what you are saying. I have heard it said that Religion is a powerful drug. It rules their lives, takes their money, and ruins their concept of reality, but what is worse, they will be utterly disappointed when they die. Blackness, zilch, nothingness, quietness, no problems… now that is real heaven.

        Reminds me its early to bed tonight, work in the morning. Good night fellow bloggers.

        Like

      37. “…they will be utterly disappointed when they die…”

        BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

        You have to keep this up, Steve. Now I’m convinced you’re not trying to be funny, but your jokes are hysterical!

        Think about what you just said for a second.

        Like

      38. Our friend Pete Heck was told something like that by an Atheist before, and it made us crack up then, too!

        “Someday, when you’re staring out at the nothingness, you will realize you were wrong.” –Goofy Atheist

        HAHAHAHA! Have you figured out why that’s a dumb thing to say yet?

        Like

      39. “I have answered all the questions and you keep repeating them to not lose face. go back and read what I write properly because I am tired of trying to educate you in facts about indoctrination.”

        No where did you mention the relational nature of Christianity- try again.
        Also, you never denied the fact that the school system was led by doctrines, faith, hiarchies, committees, boards, etc. You tried to say that I never mentioned the school system so I was “twisting things around”- which I pointed out that I did.
        You never denied that students accept what teachers say at a young age.

        “Typically, you are told by your leaders that atheists are talking rubbish, do not read their foul words and are advocates of the devil etc. And why would you not believe your religious teachers?”
        False.

        “A fact that you cannot hide from, children are forced to believe in an ideology and it is a recognised fact religions indoctrinate children between 0 and 7 years before they are even potty trained and able to ask questions.”

        When do atheists potty-train their children?
        Here in the United States, religious folks have their children potty- trained before or around the age of three. They also start asking a lot of questions at age 3. This is way before they turn 7 years old.

        You should be disgusted that you support such behaviour because it often violates the child’s basic rights and effects very important decisions later in life and has the potential for long term phycological harm.

        Yeah, teaching about truth and love is a total sham. ( Highly sarcastic).

        “For your education, this came from a web page regarding Catholicism. This process for a very young child begins with what is understood by religions as “formation” and by science as “Theory of mind”. The process is carried out as young as possible to ensure lifelong entrapment and absolute obedience on demand through traumatic and emotional bonding of the child and usually carried out by the parents, who were themselves entrapped as children and are now doing precisely as instructed.”

        I think you threw in your opinion in the study.

        “If you do not understand the difference between a public-school education and the indoctrination process into an ideology by now it is a total waste of time, especially yours trying to understand it. Peace be with you mate.”

        Indoctrination doesn’t allow for criticism. I’ve said this many times now.

        Carmen, if not from atheism, where will this “enlightenment” come from?

        Like

      40. If you read it properly I wrote between ages 0 to 7 years of age, I guess this is part of the reason why you lack the ability to absorb information you do not like. Just because children ask simple questions at any of these ages does not mean they are ripe for altering their thinking by shoving religious beliefs into their heads. I would guess you have no children or you would not be so flippant with your righteous attitude.

        You say “Yeah, teaching about truth and love is a total sham. ( Highly sarcastic).”
        Is it not on faith that you base your truth? And you mean love me or go to hell don’t you? So yeah it is a real sham. (highly realistic)

        The passage about Catholicism is almost copied exactly from the site, but of course you would know best. Read it and educate yourself here http://www.traumainreligion.com/

        Young children are taken to Church to pray and be indoctrinated. Wafers said to be the flesh of Christ are thrust into the mouths of seven-year-olds in Catholicism. Children are expected despite their naivety and inexperience to believe and are treated as true believers. This is a prime example of manipulation on the part of the Church. The evil of blind faith and blind obedience is demanded of the children, degrading them, debasing them, abusing them. From here read more http://www.romancatholicism.co.uk/catholicindoctrination.html

        And on top of this there is a chance that some dirty old priest will stick his hand or something worse in your pants in the name of the Father.

        Like

      41. “If you read it properly I wrote between ages 0 to 7 years of age, I guess this is part of the reason why you lack the ability to absorb information you do not like. ”

        Hahaha. Okay, here’s the quote that you wrote.
        “A fact that you cannot hide from, children are forced to believe in an ideology and it is a recognised fact religions indoctrinate children between 0 and 7 years before they are even potty trained and able to ask questions. ”

        If you want to examine how I read it- I’ll break it down for you.

        First, you didn’t say “between ages 0 to 7 years of age”. “Of age” isn’t a part of the quote. I can’t read what you didn’t write. However, I knew it was implied. But you still have literary issues.
        Secondly, without the use of commas ( to separate events), you made “before they are even potty-trained and able to ask questions” the prepositional phrase in which I should reference “between 0 and 7 years”. How it is written changes its meaning. Now, it implies that there is a 0-7 year range before kids are potty trained and able to ask questions.”

        So let’s fix the quote using the first two steps. I’ll focus on the last part, because the first part of your paragraph is full of more grammatical errors.

        “…between 0 and 7 years of age, before they are even potty trained and able to ask questions. ”

        Now brings up the third issue- redundancy. This is why I asked about when you potty-trained your children. If you don’t potty-train your children between the ages of 0-7, and if they don’t start asking questions between the ages of 0-7, you have no redundancy .

        However, for religious folk in the United States, they potty-train their children before or around the age of three- and children start asking questions soon after they begin to speak- which is definitely before potty-training ( for religious folks in the United States).
        So, for concise and non-redundant writing, you would use the first chronological event: ” before they are able to ask questions”.

        So let’s take a look at my fixed quote for you.

        “This is a fact that you cannot hide from: children are forced to believe in an ideology. It is a recognised fact that religions indoctrinate children before they are able to ask questions. ”

        Now, it is proper. You’re welcome.

        Oh, but you need to address my points about the relational nature of Christianity ( specifically- Worship, faith, and devotion) and how it cannot be forced.

        “Just because children ask simple questions at any of these ages does not mean they are ripe for altering their thinking by shoving religious beliefs into their heads. I would guess you have no children or you would not be so flippant with your righteous attitude.”

        Well, this would mean that kids can criticize their parents’ answers. Thus, no indoctrination. You’re proving my point.

        “You say “Yeah, teaching about truth and love is a total sham. ( Highly sarcastic).”
Is it not on faith that you base your truth? ”

        Nope, it is truth that I base my faith on, not the other way around.

        “And you mean love me or go to hell don’t you? So yeah it is a real sham. (highly realistic)”

        Nope. People go where they directed their love. If they directed their love towards God and their neighbors, they go to Him. If they directed their love towards themselves, they go to the place that they loved the most.

        “The passage about Catholicism is almost copied exactly from the site, but of course you would know best. Read it and educate yourself here http://www.traumainreligion.com/
        Young children are taken to Church to pray and be indoctrinated. Wafers said to be the flesh of Christ are thrust into the mouths of seven-year-olds in Catholicism. Children are expected despite their naivety and inexperience to believe and are treated as true believers. This is a prime example of manipulation on the part of the Church. The evil of blind faith and blind obedience is demanded of the children, degrading them, debasing them, abusing them. From here read more http://www.romancatholicism.co.uk/catholicindoctrination.html
        And on top of this there is a chance that some dirty old priest will stick his hand or something worse in your pants in the name of the Father.”

        Well, if you actually gave the sources the first time, I wouldn’t have criticized you; I would have criticized your sources. You’re arguing: with a non-scholarly sources ( so this isn’t a scholarly study- which I thought it would be if you claim to love education so much- but it is as opinionated as you), against a religion that I do not follow, in a country that I do not live in.
        Try again, dude.

        Oh, but next time, please address the relational nature of Christianity, and my specific three points. Then, your argument may actually apply to me.

        Like

      42. It appears your understanding of anything in the English language hinges on if a comma is inserted or not, and you had to use a truckload of bullshit to explain why you were so confused. This is a good way to remove the focus on the real issues.

        Your comment “Oh, but you need to address my points about the relational nature of Christianity ( specifically- Worship, faith, and devotion) and how it cannot be forced.”

        It is forced through indoctrination as I have said. First of all, the difference between education and indoctrination is as obvious as your nose on your face.

        We are all subtly indoctrinated into a belief system to some extent by information and influences fed to us during childhood, however they do not usually become a life commitment or a fearful belief for the future so we pursue education as we grow older and this opens our minds and allows us to develop our own beliefs.

        Read more here, http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-education-and-indoctrination/

        http://democraticeducation.org/index.php/blog/article/education_or_indoctrination/

        This site argues that Indoctrination is education that lacks good reasoning.

        https://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/2010/12/27/raising-children-education-and-indoctrination/

        You say “You’re arguing: with non-scholarly sources” I would guess all sites not affiliated to a religion would be non-scholarly sources according to you.

        Like

      43. “The thing is, children eventually figure out that what Mummy and Daddy have conjured up in their imagination is NOT real. . . then they let loose on sites such as Homeschoolers Anonymous – it isn’t pretty. (Or you might have read about millennials leaving the churches in droves? – they figured it out) Nor is it, in my mind, one bit excusable to just say, “Well, I believed it!”. You really should be prepared to say, “I was wrong”.

        OWN IT.”

        Hey Carmen, if people cannot be critical of their faith ( which would be the definition of indoctrination), they wouldn’t be leaving in droves.
        Oh, but I suggest reading “You Lost Me” by David Kinnaman to know the true reasons why Christians are leaving. One chapter is dedicated towards “Anti-science”. You might like it.
        It has to do with the percieved inconsistencies of Christians’ actions and attitudes vs Christians’ beliefs. It’s a great read.
        Many Americans that have left the church are disappointed that Christians aren’t acting like they believe they should- not with Christians’ actual beliefs.

        Like

      44. Carmen, sklyjd’s comment was about indoctrination- not whether or not people have been duped. Stay on topic, please. If people are able to leave and “figure things out”- they haven’t been indoctrinated- because they are being critical.

        Like

      45. No. I don’t know what you meant, Clem.

        It seems that you only oppose ‘indoctrination’ when it applies to religion. Atheist ‘indoctrination’ is logical. Is that what you meant to say?

        Like

      46. If people have the capability of rejecting the religion that they grew up in (as you said- they are doing it in droves) they were never indoctrinated in the first place. Being able to make criticism is the sign that indoctrination never happened. You cannot say that you were both “lied to” and “indoctrinated”. If you were truly indoctrinated, you’d never say that you believed a lie. Also, you’d never be able to say that you believed the truth, because critical reasoning is how you test truth. Basically, people who are truly indoctrinated cannot make any critical claims. And the only one here denying that they have a worldview is you, Carmen.

        Liked by 1 person

      47. Actually, I had to read it through several times to try to make sense of it — it’s rather convoluted logic. But then, you know, with my stupidity problem. .. what can I say? (speaking of ad hominem)

        Like

      48. Indoctrination is not permanent, some can free themselves from indoctrination. Probably not everyone can but some have the ability to seriously look beyond what they are supposed to believe. Granted some theists are not as indoctrinated as others and play the game for a while, just as some non-believers who have a more central position but claim to be atheists.

        If indoctrination were permanent the dominant communist countries of the 50’s and 60’s such as Russia and China would still be closed communist regimes.

        Read these about North Korea to really get a handle on how powerful indoctrination can be.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/for-north-koreas-kims-its-never-too-soon-to-start-brainwashing/2015/01/15/a23871c6-9a67-11e4-86a3-1b56f64925f6_story.html?utm_term=.56df0464b5dc

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2307937/North-Korea-Haunting-images-indoctrination-ceremony-communist-cult-leaders-threatening-nuclear-war-poisoning-generation.html

        Like

      49. “Granted some theists are not as indoctrinated as others and play the game for a while, just as some non-believers who have a more central position but claim to be atheists. ”

        Then, to help us understand, you link to articles about North Korea. Powerful stuff, Steve. Thanks for the fair-minded comparison.

        I’m going to do some soul searching now. If I can find any differences between my Sunday School indoctrination and North Korean dictatorship policies, can I let you know?

        Like

      50. There are some differences as you must appreciate, however the principle is the same, get them while they are young and arrange their beliefs for them.

        Like

      51. She linked you to an actual conversation we had about indoctrination. You haven’t read it. You’re still spewing crap. You don’t know what you’re talking about because you REALLY don’t know what we believe.
        You are completing your own indoctrination right before our eyes. You have been told ‘THIS is what ALL religious people do’. And you fell for it.

        Like

      52. “And you fell for it” says the man who believes there’s an invisible . . .whatever. .. and, further to that, believes that people cannot have morals without believing in this invisible . . . whatever. . .

        And it’s REAL!!!

        *smh*

        Like

      53. Nope, not sure I ever did. But look, you go ahead and believe what you want. You’ve got the art perfected. 🙂

        Like

      54. You know that’s not true. But I understand why you must cling to that illusion, JB. Illusions are what keep you putting one foot in front of the other.

        Why can’t you accept reality?

        Like

      55. Disappear down your own rabbit hole; I have no intention of going down there with you. Besides, the kids are coming in the door – they commandeer my electronics. 🙂

        Like

      56. You’re not able to reach her. She’s too far gone. 🙂

        What we need is for one of her kids to watch an episode of Cosmos with her, and then ask a simple question afterward: “You don’t really believe all that, do you, Mum?”

        That ought to be the beginning of her wrestling with concepts like morality and freewill and objective truth. It can’t be just any punk kid embarrassing her by exposing how little she knows… maybe it needs to be HER kids, specifically, who point out she’s just as clueless about what’s going on as she ever was.

        Like

      57. You must have gotten your computer back from the grandkids. Congratulations!

        Please clarify which aspect of reality you think I do not accept.

        Or…were you just firing ad hominem at me?

        Like

      58. I told you yesterday – ad hominem would be saying you are an asshole. 🙂

        (or is it dickhead? I mean, if the condom fits, wear it!)

        Like

      59. Carmen has very interesting definitions for things. Ad-hominem is saying “You are an asshole.” (But not, “JB is a shithead” apparently? And not saying you have a case of “Short Man Syndrome.”)

        Lol.

        Meanwhile, a compliment is when you say, to another commenter, that you’re happy the American REFRAINED from using an American word.

        She’s a sweetie.

        Also, she’s not here for conversation.

        Like

      60. Meanwhile, I’m counting the number of times she has inserted herself into the comment thread SINCE telling me “no, thank you” to actually participating in the conversation.

        So far, I’ve counted six.

        It’s strange. You’d think someone as enlightened as Carmen would do better than jumping in to launch insults before slinking away again.

        Like

      61. INSULTS!??
        All of her comments are based on reason and logic! That’s what I’m told, anyway.

        She asked me why I don’t accept reality and I’m eager to explain myself. As soon as she tells me what aspect of reality I’m rejecting, I’ll give her my reasoning.
        (I don’t think she is accusing me of rejecting ALL reality because that would be a pretty unreasonable thing to say. So I’m asking her to clarify so we can have a conversation.)

        Like

      62. …and does it bother you knowing that you’ve contributed nothing to the conversation except derisive meanness? Or do you not even know what you’re doing?

        Obviously, you’re not going to respond to my question. This is because you CAN’T respond to the question. Your comment was simply a nasty, personal jab.

        You should stay away from here, Carmen. This water is too deep for you.
        Stay on the atheist blogs. Tell them what a dickhead I am. They will agree. You can say whatever you want to the heathen and it will not be challenged. It will make you feel warm and fuzzy.

        Like

      63. Hey sklyjd, if you are going to accuse me of not reading things properly, you better make sure that your writing is properly stated. I read what you wrote- I am sorry that you apparently didn’t proof-read your own writing. Proof-reading is what educated people do in their writing; it isn’t a made- up thing, I promise. I didn’t even correct your spelling of “recognized” that you did with an “s” instead of a “z”. Oh, but as far as scholarly and credible sources go- here’s a link for that. http://www.usg.edu/galileo/skills/unit07/internet07_08.phtml

        You cannot be physically born into Christianity. Christianity is a relationship. I was never forced to love anybody or anything in my entire life. Neither were you, or any of us. Love is a choice. Keeping relationships is a choice. Choices require criticism. Deciding somebody is worthy of praise takes criticism. Being devoted to somebody takes criticism. The fact that every Christian finds Jesus differently shows that every Christian has a different moment in time where they were critical about choosing to follow Him. Christianity isn’t forced nor indoctrinated. Every religion besides Christianity is works-based. You can force people to do those things that they believe in. Christianity is relationship-based. Relationships are decided, not forced.
        http://www.churchfinder.com/churches/oh/newton-falls
        The link above gives a little glimpse into my childhood. In a town of less than 5,000 people, there are that many churches. This leads to many questions like:
        Why don’t they combine into one big church?
        With all of these options, why don’t people go to church?
        Why do these different churches believe what they do?
        Is there a “best” church?
        If people here are Christians, why are we not the “Christian Church”?
        If we baptize people, why aren’t we Baptists?
        So on and so forth.
        I was always asking critical questions about WHAT we believed and WHY we believed it.
        Also, my dad was an interim pastor- meaning that he would go to different churches to preach when those churches were in need of a pastor. We went to over a dozen different churches in the span of 6 years. This also led to the question “Is there a difference between these churches?”
        Another thing that happened, a group of people from the Newton Falls Church of God left to make another church “Harvest Point” which started in a garage, moved on into a high school, bounced around a few other places, and in a few years- will finally get a church building of their own. This led to the question “Why are we leaving?” “Why is the church in a garage?” “Are we still a ‘church’?”
        Again, I was always critical- even on things that we did.
        Oh, and I still am. But now I’m actually critical of why others believe what they do as well. If anything, growing up in pastors’ homes make their children MORE critical about what they believe than the rest.

        But, to examine the material in your sources (not concerning Korea- John Branyan already touched on that)- you cannot say that the difference between “indoctrination” and “education” is “bias”. “Biased” and “unbiased” aren’t a part of either definition. You also can’t determine them by what they are “motivated by”. “Motivation” isn’t a part of either definition. The difference is that “uncritically” is used in “indoctrination” but not “education”- as I’ve said several times before now. So look up the actual definitions for yourself (dictionaries are great for getting definitions- by the way) instead of basing your belief system on opinions of sub-par sites. This conversation would have ended long ago if you did.

        Like

      64. Sklyjd-
        Matthew impudence is only exceeded by his ignorance of worldwide spellings. 🙂 But I was happy to see mrsmcmum refrain from using the Americanism “Mom”.

        Like

      65. For ONCE, can you make a constructive comment, instead of just cheering for whoever is opposing the Theist?

        You’ve commented dozens and dozens of times at the Sojourn–and it has never been anything more than airing your personal opinions about how awful all religious people are in general (and the Christians who comment here in particular.)

        It gets old.

        Like

      66. Hey! I gave you a compliment!

        It really must be irksome though, as the theists are always so charitable, pleasant, confidence-inspiring and affirming; it just gives all of us the ‘warm fuzzies’. 🙂

        Like

      67. See, like that comment… no purpose, whatsoever.

        I asked you several direct questions early on, and you said, “I don’t find conversations with you particularly edifying.”

        So, if you don’t want to have conversations, then stop coming here–where I am–and putting my name in your comments.

        Like

      68. You have again proved your lack of understanding. Recognised can be spelt with an s and it originally was always spelt that way, it is the original English spelling. For some reason Americans have tried to adapt their own spelling, possibly so people such as yourself find it easier to handle. Here are some more simple ones, colour\color, labour\labor, cheque\check, jewellery\jewelry, centre\center, litre\liter. Get the picture, educated people do know this. Thank you for the link. From what I read it appears almost anything can be unreliable one way or another.

        Think again, if you are a Christian you are forced to worship and love a god due to the horrors of hell if you do not. And indoctrination, especially from childhood is a reality. Obviously, none of what I have explained or given you the chance to investigate has sunk in.

        It is typical that you get so many churches, people through human nature think things could be done better so they create their own and change what they don’t like. God cannot keep them together and if he existed he would have a hard time figuring out which ones meet his criteria. It is not new, this has happened since men worshiped gods.

        I said if you are subjected to enough bias it could have a marked influence on your life. For example if I told my daughter during her 5-12 years every day that I hated the religious people because of this reason and that reason it could have had a profound effect on her views about religious people. This is repetitive and would soak right into a young naïve brain and would be indoctrination, whereas most adults in this case would rebuke me or ignore my discriminative comments.

        I have looked up the definitions well before you did, and I have posted this one before, you must have missed it.
        “Indoctrination”: the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. “I would never subject children to religious indoctrination”
        teaching; instruction. “methods that were approved for indoctrination in divinity”

        “teach”: the occupation, profession, or work of a teacher. “I went into teaching because I like working with children”
        ideas or principles taught by an authority. “the teachings of the Koran”

        Do you have a problem with these?

        Like

      69. “You have again proved your lack of understanding. Recognised can be spelt with an s and it originally was always spelt that way, it is the original English spelling. For some reason Americans have tried to adapt their own spelling, possibly so people such as yourself find it easier to handle. Here are some more simple ones, colour\color, labour\labor, cheque\check, jewellery\jewelry, centre\center, litre\liter. Get the picture, educated people do know this.”

        Yep, that’s why I didn’t even correct it- because I knew it could be spelled both ways. You guys took that bait too easily. Next time, ask why I didn’t correct it.

        “Thank you for the link.
        From what I read it appears almost anything can be unreliable one way or another.”

        Exactly. So refer to books for reliable information, and specifically- dictionaries are for definitions.

        “Think again, if you are a Christian you are forced to worship and love a god due to the horrors of hell if you do not.”

        Haha, have you ever been forced to love anything? That’s rhetorical, of course. Love, devotion, and worship cannot be forced.
        Prove to me that the “horrors of hell” were a part of the discussions that I had while I was a child. Back up your assumption with proof.

        “And indoctrination, especially from childhood is a reality. Obviously, none of what I have explained or given you the chance to investigate has sunk in.”

        Well, when I go by the dictionary’s definition of indoctrination- rather than unreliable sources- my factual information will override your opinionated information every single day.

        “It is typical that you get so many churches, people through human nature think things could be done better so they create their own and change what they don’t like.”

        Oh, so religious people are critical. Thank you, yet again, for proving my point.

        “God cannot keep them together and if he existed he would have a hard time figuring out which ones meet his criteria. It is not new, this has happened since men worshiped gods.”

        Yeah, because an omniscient God has trouble knowing things hahahahaha. ( I’ll note “sarcasm” so you don’t quote me on that).

        “I said if you are subjected to enough bias it could have a marked influence on your life. For example if I told my daughter during her 5-12 years every day that I hated the religious people because of this reason and that reason it could have had a profound effect on her views about religious people. This is repetitive and would soak right into a young naïve brain and would be indoctrination, whereas most adults in this case would rebuke me or ignore my discriminative comments.”

        Indoctrination is about being uncritical- not about being repetitive to the young. Refer to the dictionary again, please.

        “I have looked up the definitions well before you did, and I have posted this one before, you must have missed it.
“Indoctrination”: the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically. “I would never subject children to religious indoctrination”
teaching; instruction. “methods that were approved for indoctrination in divinity”
        “teach”: the occupation, profession, or work of a teacher. “I went into teaching because I like working with children”
ideas or principles taught by an authority. “the teachings of the Koran”
        Do you have a problem with these?”

        I didn’t miss it. I commented on it. And you’re replying to my comment on it. I have no problems with dictionaries. I’m trying to explain that “uncritically” is what separates the two terms. You see it? It’s right there on your screen ( look above and re-read the two definitions for a refresher).

        So- I hope this has been educational for you.

        1. Indoctrination doesn’t allow for criticism- education does.
        2. Christians are critical, thus they aren’t indoctrinated.
        3. Christianity is about relational love, which cannot be forced.
        4. God is omniscient.
        5. Dictionaries are obviously very reliable for definitions, while websites are highly opinionated and can often be unreliable.

        With those points to ponder, I’ll leave you with your thoughts. Bye sklyjd ( and Carmen)! I hope you have a nice weekend.

        God Bless 🙂

        Like

      70. Indoctrination in North Korea strongly expects and demands the children to love Kim Jong-un unquestionably. He demands devotion and worship as a god does. If they criticise him they may be killed, quite a good incentive to try and love the bastard don’t you think.

        Indoctrination in Christianity or any religion also expects and demands love, devotion and worship to be able to atone for your sins and go to heaven when you die, and if it is done properly all these things will eventually happen to the child. Even though love cannot be directly demanded as an immediate action, love devotion and worship are obviously the major consequences of the indoctrination process that is forced on them.

        What do you say to a child if they ask “What happens if I do not want God?” You are a naughty boy may be the solution for really young children but you have to be honest to the kids. If you do not ask these questions as a youngster you will probably never hear about what hell is all about.

        If this God is omniscient why did he not see what his creation was going to turn out like? He and had made one cock up already and had to drown the world and start humans again with a handful of people did he not?

        Repetition is used in advertising to get you to buy their product. It is a form of indoctrination and if you hear it a dozen times you may be influenced to buy this product. If you hear something once and to decide to devote your time to this something and possibly your life to a particular belief it means you have decided this is what you want, no indoctrination required and the chances are you are an adult making up your mind not a child.

        The dictionary will not go into such details but It is true that if anything is repeated sufficiently frequently it will be believed, that is common knowledge. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda genius, pioneered most of the methods which are still used by modern spin doctors. “A lie repeated many times becomes the Truth” was one of his particularly effective insights.

        I should have realised, you could not, or more to the point you will not acknowledge any indoctrination takes place while being indoctrinated yourself. Your view of Christianity is squeaky clean and all the 5-year-old children decided Christianity was just great and they immediately wanted to spend the rest of their lives loving and worshiping a god. If that is what you really think and what you want to hear about your precious faith you are way out of luck. Ponder that if you can and have a good weekend yourself. Good luck.

        Like

  11. John,

    So let me throw a few thoughts out there… I am late to the game and there are nearly 250 comments already… so I may not even be seen way down here in post-vitriol wilderness.

    I see that the Bible clearly says that without God’s forgiveness through Christ, people spend an eternity in Hell.

    Now, I believe that. 100%

    Since I believe that, it would be inconceivable to *not* “indoctrinate” my children with the knowledge of Christ and salvation.

    Only a fool or a sociopath would not share such things with his children. I am unconcerned with what the world thinks about me and what I would teach to my children (I have none thus far in my temporal sojourn). I am more concerned with the Almighty’s thoughts on the matter and the state of my (potential future) child’s soul.

    The unbelievers sound like monsters to me. “Let your child be free from God until they can make their own choices,” they say. I wonder if they have the same thoughts about giving a very ill child medical treatment. If they are too young to understand and make choices about whether they wish to go through something like chemo or choose to die, would not their logic dictate that they wait for the child to grow up and then make the choice? True, the child may just die… but at least they were not forced to be treated or convinced of the truth that the treatment can help.

    This particular breed of unbelievers are beginning to make me ill. I was not going to post on this one, but I was too grieved to let it pass.They have great evil in their hearts and minds These are some pretty sick cats, willing to “gamble” with the lives of their children because of their anger at God. And they do believe in God. They just hate Him and strive to work against Him.

    These unbelievers will not only have to give an account to the Lord for their lives, but for the lives they harmed with their deadly lies. Their hearts are filled with malice toward the Lord and His people. But this has not taken the Lord by surprise. Scripture spoke of these days and the ones to come.

    My prayers are for God to change their hearts, as always, but added to my prayer is that their children and grandchildren are delivered from the harm they have done to them.

    Dave

    Matthew 12:36-37 (ESV) – I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.

    Like

    1. “Only a fool or a sociopath would not share such things with his children.”

      “I wonder if they have the same thoughts about giving a very ill child medical treatment. If they are too young to understand and make choices about whether they wish to go through something like chemo or choose to die,”

      “These are some pretty sick cats, willing to “gamble” with the lives of their children because of their anger at God.”

      What a weird analogy, atheists for a start do not like been judged by angry theists as sociopathic and do not recognise any gods exist so why would they be angry at a myth. Atheists are not three eyed monsters and love their children like any parent does and would be the first to accept medical treatment. I think you must have some disorder of your own or you are poorly educated and never met an atheist to come out with such unqualified rubbish.

      In fact, Google says it has been Jehovah’s Witnesses who have refused blood transfusions, Christian Scientists refuse most medical treatment and rely on prayers and The Faith Tabernacle Congregation in Altoona, PA believes that disease is caused by the devil.

      Liked by 1 person

  12. I’d like to know why atheists believe they have an authority on how ALL Christians have been indoctrinated, and that it has been done EXACTLY how they assume it. I’m sure they must think that from the time we can open our eyes we’re strapped into chairs in a white room with a record player screaming “JESUS IS LORD” on repeat. Whilst they may not believe this specifically, it’s how they talk about Christians “teaching their kids about God”. When will they realise Christianity doesn’t have a monopoly on “indoctrination”? Indoctrination is not discriminatory. There are plenty of kids who have been raised to believe there is no God by their parents! HELLO? THIS IS INDOCTRINATION. Every parent does it, period.

    Thankfully for every atheist I am yet to meet, I don’t believe every godless person is an abrasive, offensive jerk such as those I have been subjected to here. All I hope for is a little of the same respect, that yes, there are people who call themselves Christians who parent atrociously in the name of God. There are also those who teach their kids with love and open-mindedness. If you guys could admit that FACT, we could part on good terms.

    Like

    1. Indoctrination is a fact and it has been used for many centuries by religions and political regimes, nobody is making anything up. Atheists do not have the tools to indoctrinate children such as “you are born as a sinner”, “you will go to heaven or hell” “you owe your life to Jesus” “you must repent your sins” type of incentives to help manipulate the young vulnerable minds.

      “There are also those who teach their kids with love and open-mindedness.”

      I am sure there are, however this would be the exception against the rule, especially in strong religious communities. The children are often coerced to go to church, they will pray with the family before every meal, read and study the Bible daily. It is well established how family life is committed to the faith and doctrine that includes the belief that the children need to be saved from hell so therefore their indoctrination is obligatory.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Replying, but speaking to everyone: does no one else find it ironic how atheists apparently know EXACTLY how Christians indoctrinate their kids? It really baffles me how there is absolute no exception for you guys. If 1. you’re a Christian, plus 2. you teach your kids, you equal an automatic 3.—”you tell your kids they’re going to hell in order to manipulate them to do what you want. YOU’RE A CHILD ABUSER!”

        Face it, your logic sucks, and this is meant to be an example to me of critical thinking.

        P.S. Atheists indoctrinate kids too. This fact still hasn’t been acknowledged.

        Like

      2. Do you not know how to Google these things? Christians have indoctrinated their kids for centuries just like the Islamic believers do.

        Look at this logically for just one minute. Atheism is not guided by a set of rules. Call it an ideology if you like, but it has nothing to indoctrinate children with apart from simply “there is no gods” but the best and fair part is when the atheist children go to school and learn real scientific information in a science class about life they will be able to tell what is logical, what has the most evidence and decide what they want to believe and not be told by their parents that science is wrong and scientists are lying.

        Jasmine you sound like you live in a very sheltered Christian environment. I have known many non-believers, agnostics and atheists in my life time so far and they do not give religion a second thought and have better things to do than try to figure out how to indoctrinate their children. It is pure rubbish to claim that they do, how many atheists do you actually know who do this indoctrination and can you find some evidence?

        Like

      3. Read the comment thread, Steve.

        Carmen and Ark are perfect examples of anti-religious people who do not treat all views fairly.

        Also, here’s a quote by (Atheist) John Dunphy which demonstrates you HAVE been indoctrinated by godlessness, and you don’t even know it:

        “The battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: A religion of humanity — utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to carry humanist values into wherever they teach. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new — the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism.”

        Liked by 3 people

      4. That is a dramatic statement you have found, and it is a long stretch to believe you can be indoctrinated in godlessness if you have never believed in any gods in the first place?

        Teachers in public non-religious schools do not actually believe their job is to proselytize, this guy either has got mixed up or I favour that he has purposely intended to poke fun at the church.

        Like

      5. Some if it is self-taught. You don’t want there to be a God, and so you submit to the godlessness indoctrination. You even believe that religious people are the only ones who CAN be indoctrinated! It’s hilarious!

        Like

      6. It is hilarious that I indoctrinated myself. Oh yes I was watching Christopher Hitchens on YouTube and he spoke to me from atheist ally and from that day on…well you know I fell in love and I want to have eternal damnation. Good night dear.

        Like

      7. Hey Jasmine,

        Atheists have no idea how every single Christian on Earth raises theor kids, nor do they know what goes on in every church.

        The only thing they know for sure is that “indoctrination” is a pejorative and they like saying it over and over and over.

        Fact is, atheists cannot fathom the idea that people can come to faith rationally and of their own free will therefore it must be forced on them and/or they must be coerced into it.

        Liked by 1 person

  13. He cannot be taken seriously, I had this conversation with him two years ago.

    Jesus did talk about the reality of hell — in fact, He talked about it more than any other person in the Bible. He warned, “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28).

    No he didn’t. The specific words in this case that were used in the bible were Sheol and Gehenna.neither of which is anything like the Hell described in Christian doctrine.
    Please learn your bible James, otherwise you simply come across as an indoctrinated half-wit,

    The character Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew. He taught and upheld Mosaic Law.
    The Christian version of hell does not feature anywhere in Jewish Law.

    Furthermore, you are a Young Earth Creationist. My dialogue with SOM should seriously offend you are he is a staunch Catholic
    whom you regard as not real Christians and just like atheists like me, are all destined for the Christian hell to be tortured for eternity. Which makes you nothing but a hypocritical arsehole.

    Furthermore, as you are someone who believe in a world that is no older than 10,000 years, and who firmly believes dinosaurs roamed the earth with humans, no one in their right mind really gives a monkey’s uncle what an anti-science idiot like you believes.

    Why not go and chat on Facebook with Ken Ham?

    Like

  14. @James

    Fact is, atheists cannot fathom the idea that people can come to faith rationally and of their own free will therefore it must be forced on them and/or they must be coerced into it.

    People(adults) come to faith usually because of reasons to do with emotional trauma, and this is often heavily influenced by cultural mores.
    Children are invariably brought upon the relgioj of their parents and will remain within this relgion depending on the strength of their faith which is inevitable dependent on how strong the influence of the immediate circle is.

    I was raised in a a Christian home and as I grew I realised it was nothing but nonsense and eventually simply ignored it, and no one in my immediate circle batted an eyelid.

    If your religion was the be all and end all then the Muslim world would ditch Islam and become Christian in a heartbeat. As would Hindus, Jainists, Buddhists, and every other non-Christian religion.
    Furthermore, there would be no ambiguity within Christianity itself and everyone of you would all ”come to faith” (sic) in the same way.

    Like

      1. Not in the least.
        If you compare the testimonies of 100 Born Again Christians you will find that, although there may be specifics that differ there will be a noticeable similar thread running through them all.
        Why not post your own testimony and let’s see how close it mirrors many of your regular visitors?

        As for children:

        Desist from indoctrinating them for one generation … just one , and see how quickly your religion will be relegated to the waste dump.

        Like

      2. “Not in the least.”

        …and THIS is why you will be moved to spam. You don’t give a shit about conversation. You’re only interested in shouting your fundamentalism.

        Like

      3. There you go, Ark. Getting too close to the truth for old Branyan. . . he can’t have that! What’s hilarious is the example being set by those who have come to defend their position – all thoroughly INDOCTRINATED – and prove the point of this post! Just giggle-worthy, it is! 🙂

        Like

      4. Congrats, Carmen!
        I’m giving you your own post! Just a collection of your ugly, mean spirited words to my daughter. So if you have anything else you want included, please keep talking.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Oh joy! No doubt those little tidbits will be cherry-picked and – OF COURSE – will not include any of the nasty comments she’s sent others’ way. Discerning readers know different, Branyan. Your Little Man Syndrome just cannot be underestimated. ..

        Like

      6. This is the first time that I can ever recall that you have made a response to me, while utter tripe, has not been asinine diatribe.

        If you doubt my assertion then run a post and encourage all Born Again Christians to describe their testimony: maybe even write a post of their own and link it. Or if they have already done a testimony then provide the link for it.
        Why not start with your own and amanda’s and we can see if I am talking complete rubbish or not.

        Like

      7. The testimonials of a handful of Christians will not prove your point. Refusing to admit that you are just making things up is textbook fundamentalism. You have repeated your challenge twice now. Shut up about it.

        Like

      8. A hard-core religious fundamentalist calling someone else one. . .I believe there’s an expression for that. .. 🙂 Then using an expression that even my own heathen children considered a swear word. Tut, tut Branyan.

        Like

      9. It will lay a foundation that I am correct in my assertions or I am not and then we can call in more if you are still not convinced.
        And of course it should not be too difficult to source any number of deconverts and ask for their testimony regarding why they became a reborn Christian.

        Surely you are not afraid?
        So, let us start with yours’ and then amanda’s.

        Like

      10. You are supposed to lay the foundation for your own claims before making those claims.
        Go ahead and start with your own testimony. Then we’ll see if it lines up with other atheists.

        Like

      11. I have no ”testimony”. I already mentioned in a comment up thread I was brought up in a Christian environment and as I grew older realised it was nonsense and simply stopped.

        So why are you afraid to reveal your own testimony?

        Like

      12. I posted my testimony for you and you simply insisted I was lying because there was no sex, drugs, rock and roll, or mental breakdown.

        You can’t continually ask for something and, when you get it, simply wave your hand and say it’s BS.

        Liked by 2 people

      13. Well, post a link for everyone here.
        I can’t remember the postmin question.
        But this is what my assertion is all about.

        Let’s get it out in the open once and for all. and let everyone here read it and they can be the judge.
        You of all people are not afraid, James are you? Surely not?

        And while we are about it, is my assertion accurate that you, as a YEC, honestly believe that Catholics are not really true Christians ?

        Like

      14. The link is below for all to see. And, as all will see, you were asking the exact same questions back in November 2014 that you do today.

        Never trying to learn or grow, just trolling Christians to frustrate and annoy.

        https:/
        /thei535project.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/my-conversion-story-or-the-day-i-went-insane/

        Liked by 1 person

      15. Was this the one where your co-worker or something nagged and nagged and nagged … you to go to church and eventually you went and found god?
        I would definitely call this emotional blackmail of a sort.

        Like

  15. @Carmen

    While I acknowledge Banyan’s willingness to allow all comments to stand, unlike our toothless lion friend, as you note, when we get near the knuckle, he balks.
    Oh, it’s fine to ladle ad homs will- nilly…. that’s just par for the course, a bit of sparring. But when we start demanding evidence for claims, then the Theological Two Step begins.

    And the hypocrisy!

    James is a Young Earth Creationist who believes humans very likely once had tame dinosaurs hitched to carts etc. and T Rex was once a Veggiesaurus until man sinned and then it grew those nasty pointy teeth.
    Ouch!
    I expect he drools over every Ken Ham Youtube video and can’t wait to drag his kids along to the Ark Encounter ( that’s not a meeting with me by the way!) … however old they may be.
    ”See, children, it’s true! We dd live with dinosaurs!”

    And here he is, standing cheek to jowl with SOM, a staunch Catholic and advocate for evolution whom he is utterly convinced is going to Christian Hell for eternity unless he renounces Catholicism and becomes a Young Earth Creationist.
    And he thinks the same fate will befall the Branyans and Jasmine …. make no mistake.
    It is hilarious.

    They condemn their own kind as easily as the atheist.

    How can one not laugh at such blatant hypocrisy?

    Like

  16. The link is below for all to see. And, as all will see, you were asking the exact same questions back in November 2014 that you do today.

    Never trying to learn or grow, just trolling Christians to frustrate and annoy.

    https://thei535project.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/my-conversion-story-or-the-day-i-went-insane/

    Excellent! Thank you James. Although, in my book, growth would be away from superstition and make believe.

    I whole heatedly encourage everyone on this thread to go see how an apparent god -hating atheist (sic) James, became a fully-fledged, science-denying, biblical literalist & Young Earth Creationist who considers all non-Christians (including, please note …, Catholics) will burn in Hell for eternity)

    Like

    1. No, I never lie. I stated that you are a YEC and believe in a literal Hell and thus consider that everyone who does not follow such doctrine will burn in ”Hell” for eternity.
      Furthermore, as a Young Earth Creationist you do not consider Catholics, such as Silence of Mind, to be True/Real Christians and thus they too will burn in hell.

      Do you deny any of this statement?
      If so please explain exactly what your beliefs are and I will make a public apology on Branyan’s blog if I am wrong.

      Like

      1. . . .because, of course, there’s no such thing as hell. As you know, James. It exists the same place as heaven does – in your imagination. Where you conjured up people existing alongside dinosaurs.

        Like

      2. This strikes me as somewhat ambiguous, James as if you are hedging.
        I apologise if this not the case, and I will make public apology as I stated.
        So, just to clarify.
        1.You do beleive in a literal Hell , as per your doctrine, am I correct?

        2.Do you consider Catholics to be True Christians?

        3. What do you beleive happens to all those who are not Christians when they die?
        (Me, for example)

        Like

      3. You said:

        “I stated that you are a YEC and believe in a literal Hell and thus consider that everyone who does not follow such doctrine will burn in ”Hell” for eternity.”

        I said:

        “I have said in no uncertain terms that people who do not share my YEC opinion are NOT destined for Hell because of that.”

        That is the lie Ark. Now you are adding a bunch of nonsense.

        Like

      4. I do not lie.
        And where have touy stated in no uncertain terms :
        ” ….. that people who do not share my YEC opinion are NOT destined for Hell because of that.”

        Now, what’s so difficult about answering the questions I put to you?

        Like

      5. Again your position is ambiguous as was demonstrated with the post.
        So let me reiterate:
        The YEC doctrine, which you adhere to, includes belief that the earth is no older than ten thousand years, dinosaurs co-existed with human and were once vegetarian and anyone who do not adhere t this belief is not a true Christian?
        Is this correct, yes or no?

        Like

      6. This.
        Is why you are no longer allowed to comment unchecked.

        James said, flat-out, that he didn’t believe people who didn’t ascribe to YEC doctrine would go to hell. THAT was the answer to your question.

        You have now jumped onto a completely different topic. And are demanding answers to questions you have already asked MILLIONS of times before.

        You are a fool.
        If James continues to interact with you, you should thank him. Seriously. He is doing you a favor every time he responds. You are unworthy of his time.

        Like

      7. It was James who twisted the thread Branyan ….
        This was many original comment.
        Scroll up and read it again.

        I wholeheartedly encourage everyone on this thread to go see how an apparent god -hating atheist (sic) James, became a fully-fledged, science-denying, biblical literalist & Young Earth Creationist who considers all non-Christians (including, please note …, Catholics) will burn in Hell for eternity)

        That was what I wrote and I stand by it.
        The emphasis was on his belief that all non Christians – including Catholics would burn in hell for eternity.

        Like

      8. JAMES DOESN’T BELIEVE THAT ALL NON-CHRISTIANS, INCLUDING CATHOLICS, WILL BURN IN HELL FOR ETERNITY.

        He has said that, in no uncertain terms.

        What in the world is wrong with you?!

        Like

      9. I’ve already got an appointment for a bloodbath with Wally and James, and I’ve invited Silence to the war, too.

        So–your big fantasy about all of us Christians being completely unable to get along is about to come true!

        Stay tuned. It’s going to get ugly! 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      10. You invited SOM to the butchering too?

        What about Kevin and Matt? They should be invited since they probably don’t agree precisely with you on every point of doctrine.

        Like

      11. Excellent! I look forward to it.Meantime… how about you doing a post on your personal testimony?
        After all, ths was how this rather drawn out thread between James and I began.
        Let’s see if my original assertion pans out.

        Like

      12. I’ve written bits and pieces about my life on my blog many times. I’ve also told you there was no conversion “moment” where a switch flipped.

        The only reason you want a single, “conversion” post or testimony is so you can diagnose me as mentally ill. And, since you’re going to do that either way, I might as well save myself the time. 🙂

        (Oh, and like James, I never struggled with premarital sex–no drugs or alcohol–no “deep, dark sin” as you’re constantly asking Christians to divulge. So…my story would be disappointing.)

        Like

      13. Oh, I am so terribly sorry. Stating that Hell is real and all those who do not fall in line will end up in Hell is not stating what James believes?
        Then please explain exactly what it is you think eh DOES beleive then in that case.

        Oh, and are you too scared to ask him if he considers Catholics are true Christians?
        Don’t wimp out on me now Branyon, you have the bit between your teeth.
        Let’s clear this up once and for all shall we.
        ASK him.

        Oh, and just so’s we can get it on record, do you personally beleive Catholics are True Christians?
        Just so’s we can get that out the way, too.

        Like

      14. James and I are on the same team.
        Colorstorm, Wally, SOM, Matt, Kevin and I are on the same team.

        We cleared that up a long time ago.
        You are just too stupid to understand it.

        Like

      15. Also, Jamine, Mooseman, Dave and I are on the same team. Everyone who embraces reason and logic is on my team.

        You are on the team with all the irrational people.

        Like

      16. So you are too afraid to make an arse of yourself and thus refuse to answer whether you think Catholics are True Christians?

        There are a number of Christian denominations that do not consider Catholics to be Christian – James adheres to one such – and thus, as they are not considered Christians they are doomed to Hell … according to the made-up Christian doctrine.

        Like

      17. He’s talking to me. But I’m not afraid either! I’m a full blooded horse’s arse!

        And you two lose every debate we have.

        BTW: Your feature will be up soon!

        Like

      18. He was replying to JB with that comment, Carmen.

        I want to make sure your insults are directed at the right person! 😉 😉 😉 😉

        By the way, do you know the difference between Catholic and Protestant “doctrine”? Ark won’t tell me.

        Like

      19. …you and Ark used the word ‘arse’ first.
        A clear indication you’re a pissed-off loser.

        Hey! You should go read your post! Lots of deep philosophy! You will be proud.

        Like

      20. Moving the goal posts.

        Your words:
        “I never lie. I stated that you are a YEC and believe in a literal Hell and thus consider that everyone who does not follow such doctrine will burn in ‘Hell’ for eternity.”

        And you threw “including Catholics” into the mix, too.

        Stop putting words in people’s mouths.

        Like

      21. I read it, Einstein.

        You’re trying to create artificial disagreements between Christians again. I’m sure there are doctrinal differences between James and I, regarding Hell. But, I know better than to trust your interpretation of what he believes.

        All of us know you’re a liar.

        We are not on teams of Catholics vs. Protestants or YECs vs. OECs or Literal Biblicists vs. Mythicists…

        As Silence said, we’re on a team of reason against those who have rejected the Logos (and, thus, are incapable of reasoning at all).

        Like

      22. History is replete with the wars and atrocities between the inventors of your religion, the Catholic and the heretics …. you, the Protestants.
        I didn’t create anything. You did.

        If you believe in reason then why are you not Catholic?

        Like

      23. A perfectly logical question.
        There is a reason why you are not a Catholic ( I know that reason and so do you Let’s see how hnest you are

        What is the reason, amanda?

        Like

      24. Multiple Atheists have told me I’m not a Christian at all. For all I know, maybe you’d say I AM a Catholic?

        I need to know what Protestants and Catholics argue about, in the warped head of yours.

        So–what’s the difference?

        Like

      25. Well, they have been at war for centuries on and off. So they must be fighting about something, yes?
        How about doctrine for one thing.
        You remember Luther, I presume?

        So why are you NOT a Catholic, amanda?

        Like

      26. I just told you …. doctrine for one thing.
        And consider Northern Ireland.
        And consider History.
        The Cathars for one.
        And consider Luther.
        So why are you not a Catholic, amanda?
        After all, they are the ones who invented your religion, so why do you not follow the original version?
        Why do you not offer obsequiousness to the Pope, amanda?

        Like

      27. Ouch! Call the burn unit
        The second in command is having a 5 year. old tantrum.

        Oh, I knew the answer, but it is just so much easier than typing out an entire comment just to have you write something trite afterwards.
        You are nothing but a hypocrite amanda, and deep down you know it.

        Like

      28. @James.
        I have re-read the dialogue.

        Fair enough … I acknowledge the error in the semantic wordplay and I apologise.
        You are absolutely correct. Although I did not lie, which implies intent, but rather made an error. I was careless.

        I shall be more careful with my word choice in future , James.
        Once again, I apoligise.

        So …. do you consider Catholics t0 be True Christians, yes or no?

        Like

      29. Ark,

        I could argue about semantics and wordplay but I will pass and simply accept your apology.

        Now, for your question.

        This is not our first interaction Ark and if I know one thing about you it’s that you have no interest in what James from Louisiana thinks about Catholics. Instead, what you want is for a fundamentalist to say publicly that Catholics are not true Christians so you can use that statement as a wedge you can drive between regular commenters on this blog and cause infighting and derision.

        Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but that is not going happen.

        What I will do, with the understanding that I don’t even owe you an answer at all, is write a post that unambiguously and with grace, care, and introspection explains what I think about Catholics and publish it to my blog, where I control the conversation.

        And, in fairness since you asked the question, I will allow you to comment as long as your comments are fair, not insulting, free of profanity, and on message.

        Fair enough?

        Like

      30. You can’t follow but you go ahead and comment.
        Like I said, you’re useless.

        I am delighted that we are relegating most of your noise to spam now!
        Maybe you’ll quit reading this blog too, eh?

        Like

      31. Well let’s be honest you dialogue with hr more than anyone else on this blog.
        In itself this is somewhat odd.
        Bit narcissistic at best.
        At worst ….

        Like

      32. I think pseudo -incestuous would probably be more accurate.
        I have to guard my terms these days.
        Can’t be ‘avin’ with apologizing to you as well. Sheesh! That’s one thing that would really stick in my craw.
        But we can keep full blown Dickead and narcissist no probs.

        Like

      33. Are we tired of Ark on this post, yet?

        He has asked his Catholic question repeatedly but claims he won’t even read a response from the one person taking the time to clarify.

        And, now, more repetition of “you’re not funny.”

        So, since this thread has reached 400, is that enough?

        Like

      34. You are such a damned liar, ginslingert, you truly are.
        I said to James ”Fair enough” and asked him to give me a heads up as I don’t follow his blog any more as he banned me.
        Truly you are such a em>disgusting individual, you really are.

        Like

      35. Fabulous. Everyone can read about what a damned liar I am.

        And the rest of your comments will go to spam.

        There should be another post up later today, featuring the newest episode of the podcast (since today is Monday). But, unless you listen to it and respond with something on topic and thoughtful, it will be the only other time we hear from you today. 🙂

        I’m looking forward to it…

        Like

      36. If you think that last comment was important, you better save it for your “thoughtful comment” on the next post! 🙂

        P.S. That conversation was last summer–as I was slowly figuring out there’s something seriously wrong with all of you. OR, you’re all robots. I haven’t ruled out that theory.

        Like

      37. This is where we drew the line in the sand. It seems fair to me that as long as he stays on this post, he’s operating under the old covenant. He hasn’t evolved into the new covenant. Sort of poetic, don’t you think?

        Liked by 1 person

      38. 😀

        Once I realized that sending Ark (and JZ) to spam is EXACTLY like sending a 4-year-old to his room, I hit my stride. I am a PROFESSIONAL at using time-out to restore order.
        Look out.

        Liked by 1 person

      39. By the way, don’t you hear it? That little foot stomp? The almost manic tone in his voice? He’s looking for the line RIGHT NOW. He actually WANTS you to send him to spam! I’ve seen it in preschoolers over and over and over. Knowing clearly where a line is, and then having a parent who will enforce that line consistently, is how they feel secure and loved.

        Tell Ark you love him.

        Send him to spam.

        🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      40. There you go… the “incestuous relationship” comment. (I don’t know why he’s shying away from typing it out here. He said it forthright on KIA’s blog.) He’s not usually one to use “…” when being disgusting is an option.

        PLEASE send him to spam?

        Like

      41. It’s all crashing down. He’s panicking. This blog has given him celebrity status for over a year. He’s never had so many people see his comments. It’s hard to step out of the spotlight into obscurity.

        Liked by 1 person

      42. Well, I’m sure THAT’S true. But it’s not good for a little guy to get that much attention for acting like a devil spawn. They get worse and worse and worse. (I’ve seen it.)

        Like

  17. What the hell is this madness? Generally if I see a breed of stupidity I don’t understand, I can still admire the person’s unswerving dedication to it, but this… This is psychotic. EVERY SINGLE THING about Christianity, you atheists believe you fully understand and know, when the reality is you know nothing at all!!! At this stage, you make me want to embrace Christianity SOLELY so I can retain some individuality and give other people the respect of not assuming I know EVERYTHING about them!! What on earth do you think you’re doing?? Are you really so deluded that you think you know exactly what I believe?! You think us Christians are all at war with one another of doctrinal differences? EVEN ATHEISTS DO THAT! We are all on the same team, you know why? Because we believe in a Creator. End of story.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @Jasmine
      More stupid than believing dinosaurs were once vegetarian and roamed the earth alongside humans?
      More stupid than believing in a worldwide flood and an old man who collected animals two by two just so that a man- made god called Yahweh could commit global genocide?

      Well, you stick with your version of psychosis then …. because to my mind that is ultimate stupidity.

      Like

      1. Oh, yes, I go to sleep at night bewailing the fact that I simply cannot accept that a single incestuous family built a wooden frakking boat and the some made-up god drowned the rest of the planet.
        This makes me unbelievably distraught.
        Truly, jJasmine, please explain why can I not simply be an indoctrinated science denier like you lot?

        Like

      2. As much as I feel sorry for you being unable to think for yourself and must always have the most basic things explained to you, I’ve quit holding that job in your life. Just as I know where to go for science, you know where to go to for truth. You shouldn’t have to terrorize bloggers on the internet for it.

        Like

      3. This is an open forum. I am sure if JB and his sidekick did not want to interact with atheists they would put up a notice saying ” No Thanks” and simply continue taking the piss without the distraction of anyone challenging their god-bothering.

        If you wish to champion your beliefs, Jasmine, especially in an open forum, then be prepared to have them scrutinized and have the integrity to defend them with knowledge and honesty instead of whining because the ”nasty atheists” call out your ignorance.

        Like

      4. I will grant you I am sometimes ”unpleasant” around fundamentalist diatribe of the sort you punt ( you can’t like everyone, Branyan, right?) ,but imbecile I take umbrage over.

        Like

    2. EVERY SINGLE THING about Christianity, you atheists believe you fully understand and know, when the reality is you know nothing at all!!!

      This is probably one of the most ignorant and plainly idiotic comments about atheists I have read in a long, long while.
      have you still not realised that most atheists were once Christian?
      They became atheist because they discovered that the crap that is Christianity ( and all religion) had become untenable when put up against science and reality.
      When it comes to the bible, archaeology history and any related discipline you care to mention most atheists are simply light years ahead f the average Christian because when the crisis of faith arrived they researched and studied until heir damn eyes almost bled!
      And this point is more than ably demonstrated by your claim that you beleive there was a global flood! and the biblical tale is historically accurate.

      It is almost impossible to know how to even approach such wanton ignorance.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I really can’t get my head around such a comment as what she has written.
        It truly is so mind numbingly obtuse as to defy all reason.
        Oh, and in case this comment goes in the bin …. amanda is now limiting my quota of comments and deleting when I go over the limit!
        How funny is that?
        Loved your dedicated ”Carmen Post”, by the way. They are such a pair of sweeties to think of you!
        🙂

        Like

      2. “They are such a pair of sweeties to think of you!”

        Haven’t read it but I’m sure it’s full of ‘warm fuzzies’. . just like all the other ‘tributes’ Branyan has penned to his mentors on this site. Isn’t it wonderful to have such a good example of christian charity and noble intent in our midst?

        Bet he had a grin-on the whole time . . (it probably squelched some the effects of his LMS)

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Actually it’s the most accurate thing you’ve read, but you’re too full of it to realize. I don’t care if you were the pope himself before you Devon edged. YOU do not have the authority on what *I* believe. You might THINK you know what I believe, but you don’t. Period. And you don’t want to know. So I’m not going to tell you.

        Like