Leaving christianity, a bit of my story

[robvalue]

Stop indoctrinating them, and the church will be done.

On some level, people must know this.

That is my point. We need to stop indoctrinating the children and the church will be stronger and bigger than ever. 

Indoctrinating defined as: teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.

Okay, I'm glad you agree with my position if not my conclusion.

I really hope for the day when indoctrination stops. I predict religion will then stop having any power very quickly, and will fade into irrelevancy. But if it doesn't, I'll just be glad people are entering into it willingly rather than because they got their mind blasted before the age of reason.

[Lek]

I really hope for the day when indoctrination stops. I predict religion will then stop having any power very quickly, and will fade into irrelevancy. But if it doesn't, I'll just be glad people are entering into it willingly rather than because they got their mind blasted before the age of reason.

Do you think we should teach our children that christianity is true and then try to encourage them to check out other positions?  It may be a good idea because it would demand that anyone who is a christian would need to be able to effectively defend their faith and have tested it out.  We should not only teach our kids about the faith, but discuss their opinions and ask and answer questions.  Too many kids leave the faith when they go to college or otherwise out on their own because they have never done enough research to be able to defend it.  In the days when society supported christianity it might have enough to say "shut up and believe it", but nowadays we're constantly being challenged.

[robvalue]

What I would hope parents would do is:

1) Leave religion alone completely when the children are young, and concentrate on teaching them how to think rather than telling them what to think, as far as possible. They don't need to know about it this early. Jamming religious stuff into their head this young is an abuse of power, and an admission that it requires the child being unable to reason in order to believe it.

2) Once they've reached the age of reason, present your religious beliefs, owned as your beliefs. Not presented as fact that it is simply true. Explain why you think it is true, and then leave them to decide for themselves.

3) Explain that there are many other belief systems, that people believe for their own reasons. Tell them you will love them whether they join your belief system, join another or don't join any at all.

This kind of process works really well for things that are actually true. They don't need slotting into an impressionable young mind, because they can be demonstrated, explained and evidenced.

Yes, there are some things children have to accept as true ahead of time, for their own safety. Religion is not one of these things, unless God is so vindictive as to be grading the actions of an infant. And such crucial things can be explained later, unlike religion.

[Lek]

What I would hope parents would do is:

1) Leave religion alone completely when the children are young, and concentrate on teaching them how to think rather than telling them what to think, as far as possible. They don't need to know about it this early. Jamming religious stuff into their head this young is an abuse of power, and an admission that it requires the child being unable to reason in order to believe it.

I don't think we should try to teach them religion before the age of reason, but I think we should tell them about God and simple prayer.

2) Once they've reached the age of reason, present your religious beliefs, owned as your beliefs. Not presented as fact that it is simply true. Explain why you think it is true, and then leave them to decide for themselves.

I present other things as true.  Why would I not present christianity as true and then be open to discussion?  I wouldn't tell them that I don't believe in racism, and then tell them that the principle is not necessarily true because it's not accepted by everyone.

3) Explain that there are many other belief systems, that people believe for their own reasons. Tell them you will love them whether they join your belief system, join another or don't join any at all.

OK.

This kind of process works really well for things that are actually true. They don't need slotting into an impressionable young mind, because they can be demonstrated, explained and evidenced.

I present true things as true and explain why I believe they are true.

Yes, there are some things children have to accept as true ahead of time, for their own safety. Religion is not one of these things, unless God is so vindictive as to be grading the actions of an infant. And such crucial things can be explained later, unlike religion.

Kids below the age of reason are too young for religion, but not for the concept of God.  You're right that God is not vindictive toward children or anyone.

[Crossless2.0]

What I would hope parents would do is:

1) Leave religion alone completely when the children are young, and concentrate on teaching them how to think rather than telling them what to think, as far as possible. They don't need to know about it this early. Jamming religious stuff into their head this young is an abuse of power, and an admission that it requires the child being unable to reason in order to believe it.

I don't think we should try to teach them religion before the age of reason, but I think we should tell them about God and simple prayer.

2) Once they've reached the age of reason, present your religious beliefs, owned as your beliefs. Not presented as fact that it is simply true. Explain why you think it is true, and then leave them to decide for themselves.

I present other things as true.  Why would I not present christianity as true and then be open to discussion?  I wouldn't tell them that I don't believe in racism, and then tell them that the principle is not necessarily true because it's not accepted by everyone.

3) Explain that there are many other belief systems, that people believe for their own reasons. Tell them you will love them whether they join your belief system, join another or don't join any at all.

OK.

This kind of process works really well for things that are actually true. They don't need slotting into an impressionable young mind, because they can be demonstrated, explained and evidenced.

I present true things as true and explain why I believe they are true.

Yes, there are some things children have to accept as true ahead of time, for their own safety. Religion is not one of these things, unless God is so vindictive as to be grading the actions of an infant. And such crucial things can be explained later, unlike religion.

Kids below the age of reason are too young for religion, but not for the concept of God.  You're right that God is not vindictive toward children or anyone.

Two things with regard to the parts I bolded: First, yeah, no kidding you shouldn't teach religion to children who haven't reached the age of reason, but why does 'God' get a pass? Oh wait, it has something to do with them not having reached the age of reason, no? Get 'em while they're young and believe in things like invisible friends . . . is that the angle?

Second, in what possible sense is the alleged truth of Christianity similar to a principle that is not universally shared (e.g., racism is bad)? Yours is the religion supposedly grounded in historical 'fact'. You either have the evidentiary goods or you don't. While you're sharing this 'truth' with your kids, are you making any effort to expose them to the actual scholarly consensus on what is established fact versus what is merely claimed, or are you willing to queer the 'evidence' you present to them?

[Lek]

Two things with regard to the parts I bolded: First, yeah, no kidding you shouldn't teach religion to children who haven't reached the age of reason, but why does 'God' get a pass? Oh wait, it has something to do with them not having reached the age of reason, no? Get 'em while they're young and believe in things like invisible friends . . . is that the angle?

Religion is a complicated subject and not easy to comprehend, even for adults. The concept of God is a simple concept to grasp.

Second, in what possible sense is the alleged truth of Christianity similar to a principle that is not universally shared (e.g., racism is bad)? Yours is the religion supposedly grounded in historical 'fact'. You either have the evidentiary goods or you don't. While you're sharing this 'truth' with your kids, are you making any effort to expose them to the actual scholarly consensus on what is established fact versus what is merely claimed, or are you willing to queer the 'evidence' you present to them?

The concepts of christianity are not universally accepted and the concepts of racism are not universally accepted.

You don't even know what evidence I accept. Maybe I accept much of the same evidence that you do. Secondly, I've found that there is very little consensus among scholars. Thirdly, I'm honest with my kids.

[robvalue]

The concept of god must be introduced before the age of reason? Why?

Again, isn't this just an admission that you need a brain incapable of properly assessing the subject matter? Otherwise, why can't it wait?

Same with prayer. Why? Do you fear a reasoned, thinking child will laugh at the idea? Because they likely will. I did.

Will God not be interested in a kid that hasn't had this stuff poured into their vulnerable brain? If so, maybe that tells you something.

[Lek]

The concept of god must be introduced before the age of reason? Why?

Again, isn't this just an admission that you need a brain incapable of properly assessing the subject matter? Otherwise, why can't it wait?

Same with prayer. Why? Do you fear a reasoned, thinking child will laugh at the idea? Because they likely will. I did.

Will God not be interested in a kid that hasn't had this stuff poured into their vulnerable brain? If so, maybe that tells you something.

We introduce our kids to good and bad before the age of reason. Why not introduce them to a good concept like God and prayer? It doesn't have anything to do with fear of how they will receive it. I believe you think the way you do because you think those are bad concepts. You're demonstrating your own bias in your theory.

[Crossless2.0]

Two things with regard to the parts I bolded: First, yeah, no kidding you shouldn't teach religion to children who haven't reached the age of reason, but why does 'God' get a pass? Oh wait, it has something to do with them not having reached the age of reason, no? Get 'em while they're young and believe in things like invisible friends . . . is that the angle?

Religion is a complicated subject and not easy to comprehend, even for adults.  The concept of God is a simple concept to grasp.  

Second, in what possible sense is the alleged truth of Christianity similar to a principle that is not universally shared (e.g., racism is bad)? Yours is the religion supposedly grounded in historical 'fact'. You either have the evidentiary goods or you don't. While you're sharing this 'truth' with your kids, are you making any effort to expose them to the actual scholarly consensus on what is established fact versus what is merely claimed, or are you willing to queer the 'evidence' you present to them?

The concepts of christianity are not universally accepted and the concepts of racism are not universally accepted.

You don't even know what evidence I accept.  Maybe I accept much of the same evidence that you do.  Secondly, I've found that there is very little consensus among scholars.  Thirdly, I'm honest with my kids.

Religion is complicated but 'God' is a simple concept to grasp? Really? Ok, explain 'God' to me like I'm a five year old without resorting to "The Bible says . . . ", some philosophical argument that presumably would also be too sophisticated for a child to grasp, or some bad analogy e.g. "think about how much Daddy loves you; now think about how much God our Heavenly father loves all of us, his children".

As for the Christianity/racism thing, I'm still not seeing it. In the case of racists, they may base their views on discredited notions of race and 'inherent' characteristics supposedly held by all members of the "race"; they may do so on the basis of crime statistics that may or may not be accurate or may be presented in a skewed manner; they may unfairly generalize about an entire group based on one bad experience they had with one person or small group of people; it could be good old-fashioned xenophobia, etc. In each case, the belief is based on faulty reasoning, lack of good research, or fear.

The "concepts" of Christianity, on the other hand, are all based on un-evidenced entities (a god, angels, a devil) and documents that make outrageous claims that aren't independently attested outside the holy book itself. In lieu of compelling evidence that meet minimal standards of good intellectual hygiene, rejecting the claims without further corroboration is the sensible position.

[RoadRunner79]

The concept of god must be introduced before the age of reason? Why?

Again, isn't this just an admission that you need a brain incapable of properly assessing the subject matter? Otherwise, why can't it wait?

Same with prayer. Why? Do you fear a reasoned, thinking child will laugh at the idea? Because they likely will. I did.

Will God not be interested in a kid that hasn't had this stuff poured into their vulnerable brain? If so, maybe that tells you something.

We introduce our kids to good and bad before the age of reason.  Why not introduce them to a good concept like God and prayer?   It doesn't have anything to do with fear of how they will receive it.   I believe you think the way you do because you think those are bad concepts.  You're demonstrating your own bias in your theory.

I agree with you here.  

But I call shenanigans on the things being presented.... The idea, that you shouldn't teach kids anything about something, until they are capable of a full understanding is ridiculous. 

I remember watching a documentary about one of the church groups, that I think could be considered as indoctrinating children (turning them against parents as well, it was a little scary).  But it stood out to me, because they had an atheist mother who was interviewed with her two small girls.  What the mother said, sounded very good and reasonable; then it came to where she was talking about not teaching them either way, and leaving them to make their own choice.  Like a dog preforming on command for a treat, the repeated back almost exactly what she had just said.... looking up at their mother for loving approval.   It wasn't to the extreme of the subjects of the documentary, but I thought it was very noticeable.

I don't think that there is anything wrong with teaching a child the values and ideas that you hold dear.  The question and I believe not an easy one to answer is when does that become indoctrination.  I think that it is hard to pin down, because it depends on a number of variables, and perhaps not any one thing.  I don't think that the difference between indoctrination and teaching is based on the subject though.