Raised Christian

[HelioPrime]

I thought I'd bring this up.

It's been used as a point to attack religion that people are only of a select faith because they were raised in an atmosphere of that faith.

Why is this a problem?

The assumption of this idea say in a christian example would be that if God were real all people would naturally believe, and not need to be taught about God. Where does this notion come from?

The spread of christianity according to the bible was taught by the selected who went out and instructed the faith. From the texts its pretty clear that the faith to become known as christianity would need to be spread by people, not something gained just from birth.

[Jack]

I don't think of it as a "point of attack", but I suggest we all know people who are Christian simply because they were raised that way. They have never made a positive determination to be Christian, it's more a default belief.

I've heard other Christians call these people "wishy-washy" Christians, or not "true" Christians, but to those of us on the outside, they're not all that different from those who decided for themselves to become Christian.

A lot of the other atheists I know or socialize with were once Christians. Some of us were Christian by choice (like me) or were raised as Christians (like those mentioned above).

Those raised Christian can become atheists just by realizing that their faith isn't their own choice, that when they honestly think about it they don't really believe.

Those of us who chose to become Christian may leave it behind in our continuing quest to understand the "spiritual" side of our nature. It was that quest that led us to religion in the first place, and when religion didn't supply sufficient answers, we moved on.

People who are raised with a certain mindset and never feel encouraged to or have any reason to question it are often not very zealous in their beliefs.

[Morality Games]

Why is this a problem?

Humans are very impressionable. Initial appearances generally go unchallenged unless they directly contradict internalized bias. Since young people have few internalized biases and are highly receptive to their immediate enviroment, their worldview tends to develop along the lines of their parent's reasoning. Once in place, this perspective on life is almost impossible to shift, mainly because humans have no strong psychological motivations to ruin something that apparently works for them. This makes a fair analysis of the alternatives difficult. The malproductive effects this has on communication are too numerous to count. Communication is essential to human development on both individual and communual levels. Therefore, youthful exposure to just one trend of thought is harmful across the board.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Isherwood I don't think of it as a "point of attack", but I suggest we all know people who are Christian simply because they were raised that way. They have never made a positive determination to be Christian, it's more a default belief. I've heard other Christians call these people "wishy-washy" Christians, or not "true" Christians, but to those of us on the outside, they're not all that different from those who decided for themselves to become Christian. A lot of the other atheists I know or socialize with were once Christians. Some of us were Christian by choice (like me) or were raised as Christians (like those mentioned above). Those raised Christian can become atheists just by realizing that their faith isn't their own choice, that when they honestly think about it they don't really believe. Those of us who chose to become Christian may leave it behind in our continuing quest to understand the "spiritual" side of our nature. It was that quest that led us to religion in the first place, and when religion didn't supply sufficient answers, we moved on. People who are raised with a certain mindset and never feel encouraged to or have any reason to question it are often not very zealous in their beliefs.

But Mama tried.

It is sometimes difficult to seperate a person's belief system from the actural person. For example: If someone really did have a strong bond to their mother or father, and if their mom and pop also were very religious, it would be hard to mentally seperate the those two aspects, and therefore very difficult to reject the belief system without rejecting also the mother or father. Because what we think or remember about them is templated by how religious they were.

We can see that being played out in the now famous Obama-Wright sistuation, it is hard for Obama to distance his self from Wright's belief system (religion) and to move on. Attempting to keep Wright but reject some of this belefs, and yet not to become a total atheist in the process. Obama has become like the wayward son who ended up with the pigs of politics. Right smack dap in all that mud. Catch 22.
Obama is forced to have faith in Rev. Wright as many would have faith in the Bible, cherry picking the parts of the Bible they really find agreeable and rejecting those parts of the Bible that might cause contravercy.

To be raised Christian without being seen as a raisen flake. Breakfast anyone?

[Zhavric]

Quote by: HelioPrime I thought I'd bring this up. It's been used as a point to attack religion that people are only of a select faith because they were raised in an atmosphere of that faith. Why is this a problem?

Morality Games explained it. You never really chose to be a Christian and you've adopted a different set of logical rules that you only use for Christianity.

The assumption of this idea say in a christian example would be that if God were real all people would naturally believe, and not need to be taught about God. Where does this notion come from?

The alternative is to raise children agnostic and wait until they're old enough to understand the world better before exposing them to religion. Consider this:

A set of parents teach their 4 year old that social security is evil, that abortion is murder and abortion doctors are scum, that serving in the military is the only acceptable career, and that they're going to vote Republican in every election they're ever eligable for. They continue to drill this into the child for years. Another set of parents does their best not to imprint their opinions on their children and stresses the importance of an informed decision when the child is old enough.

Which set of parents is better?

The spread of christianity according to the bible was taught by the selected who went out and instructed the faith. From the texts its pretty clear that the faith to become known as christianity would need to be spread by people, not something gained just from birth.

Irrelevant. No one is arguing that people are born Christian. We're arguing that people are indoctrinated into being Christian before they're old enought to know better.

[Technosoul]

If one moves past the concepts of religion they really have no place to go, no final theory based on a unified principle, no place to rest their sleepy head.

Turning to science for anwers leds them towards an obsession with darkness, that would suck everything into some black hole of confusion and and doubt.

Instead of light they offer you DARKNESS.

No doubt you want to see evidence to back up my statement... here is a link that might confirm my ranting.

http://www.thefinaltheory.com/sciencearticles.html

[grandpa]

Quote by: Zhavric Morality Games explained it. You never really chose to be a Christian and you've adopted a different set of logical rules that you only use for Christianity.

Christians are really good at it, too.

Grandpa h.

[Tycoon]

Technosoul;

It is sometimes difficult to seperate a person's belief system from the actural person. For example: If someone really did have a strong bond to their mother or father, and if their mom and pop also were very religious, it would be hard to mentally seperate the those two aspects, and therefore very difficult to reject the belief system without rejecting also the mother or father. Because what we think or remember about them is templated by how religious they were.

It's not necessarily people don't question their beliefs because they don't want to defy their parents. I was born into a Christian family and raised Christian and never given any reason to question it. Like Morality Games said, it worked for me.

It doesn't any more.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Isherwood Those of us who chose to become Christian may leave it behind in our continuing quest to understand the "spiritual" side of our nature. It was that quest that led us to religion in the first place, and when religion didn't supply sufficient answers, we moved on. People who are raised with a certain mindset and never feel encouraged to or have any reason to question it are often not very zealous in their beliefs.

Can you explain that? How does someone choose to become christian then leave it behind in the search of spiritual answers? Do you mean someone who becomes a christian later in life the becomes and atheist after that?

Morality Games explained it. You never really chose to be a Christian and you've adopted a different set of logical rules that you only use for Christianity.

That doesn't explain those who become christian later in life. A number of adults were confirmed at the same time as my confirmation. They were mostly asian and I'd guess not of US birth. In fact they seem to just the opposite of your position, being raised in an eastern culture where western religion is not prevalent, yet they still find christianity something they desire to accept.

Secondly, if your going to say christians use a different set of rules then your admitting you yourself are just using your own version of rules for everything.



Otherwise this thread is going off topic... I was looking for people to admit why they feel the fact religion needs to be taught is a failing.

[Tycoon]

That doesn't explain those who become christian later in life. A number of adults were confirmed at the same time as my confirmation. They were mostly asian and I'd guess not of US birth. In fact they seem to just the opposite of your position, being raised in an eastern culture where western religion is not prevalent, yet they still find christianity something they desire to accept.

First of all, the number of adults who turn to religion later in life is much smaller than those raised into their particular religion.

Second of all, there is a lot of pressure to belong to a religion here in the United States.

Third of all, there could be many other deciding factors. For example, a man could marry a Christian woman and take up Christianity himself for the sake of the family he is going to raise.

[Tycoon]

Otherwise this thread is going off topic... I was looking for people to admit why they feel the fact religion needs to be taught is a failing.

Okay then, regarding the OP...

Why is this a problem?

This is a problem because in the humongous debate concerning whether or not God exists, people's motives for believing in God come into question. Because of the lack of proof and evidence for God's existance, people often turn to the excuse that religion just makes sense to them, that they believe there has to be something bigger than them. This is only so because they were raised into it at an impressionable age. As much as they think they have their own beleifs really a lot of people just have their parents' beliefs.

[Tycoon]

The assumption of this idea say in a christian example would be that if God were real all people would naturally believe, and not need to be taught about God. Where does this notion come from?

Are you trying to say if there was real evidence of God's existence? If that were the case then only the dumbest of dumb people wouldn't beleive because they would know what was coming and what had to be done.

The spread of christianity according to the bible was taught by the selected who went out and instructed the faith. From the texts its pretty clear that the faith to become known as christianity would need to be spread by people, not something gained just from birth.

Christianity actually was spread in a very militant (and immoral) way, wasn't it? The Native Americans were forced to take up Christianity.

Earlier in history most people were converted to Christianity. That period is over for the most part. Now most people are Christian because they were raised that way.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon First of all, the number of adults who turn to religion later in life is much smaller than those raised into their particular religion. Second of all, there is a lot of pressure to belong to a religion here in the United States. Third of all, there could be many other deciding factors. For example, a man could marry a Christian woman and take up Christianity himself for the sake of the family he is going to raise.

This has nothing to do with the topic, sorry.

I could say among suburban gays there is immense pressure to not be religious. Christians are a joke and anyone religious is ridiculed.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon Okay then, regarding the OP... This is a problem because in the humongous debate concerning whether or not God exists, people's motives for believing in God come into question. Because of the lack of proof and evidence for God's existance, people often turn to the excuse that religion just makes sense to them, that they believe there has to be something bigger than them. This is only so because they were raised into it at an impressionable age. As much as they think they have their own beleifs really a lot of people just have their parents' beliefs.

And people could not just as easily become religious later in life? I did a project on the UUSE (unitarian unaversalist society east) and I interviewed a number of people. They had different personal beliefs, pagan, christian, agnostic, etc... but most of them joined this church during their adult life. In fact the unitarian church did not allow children under 18 to participate in services.

[Tycoon]

This has nothing to do with the topic, sorry. I could say among suburban gays there is immense pressure to not be religious. Christians are a joke and anyone religious is ridiculed.

You saying the suburban gays statement is off topic or that my statement was off topic?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon Are you trying to say if there was real evidence of God's existence? If that were the case then only the dumbest of dumb people wouldn't beleive because they would know what was coming and what had to be done. .

In some ways thats exactly the reason debating about evidence is folly.

If heaven and hell are real then you can easily see why God would ensure no real evidence ever surfaces. If we all knew for a fact then what's the point of living and eventual judgement.

Bringing it back to topic this is why religion is taught. Because knowledge just gained from birth would negate any reason to judge the dead.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Tycoon You saying the suburban gays statement is off topic or that my statement was off topic?

Well you brought it up

[Tycoon]

And people could not just as easily become religious later in life? I did a project on the UUSE (unitarian unaversalist society east) and I interviewed a number of people. They had different personal beliefs, pagan, christian, agnostic, etc... but most of them joined this church during their adult life. In fact the unitarian church did not allow children under 18 to participate in services.

No, people cannot just as easily become religious later in life. They aren't as impressionable and may have already decided most of what they believe.

And as for your example, I wouldn't say it's a good example. Just the fact that they didn't allow children under eighteen to participate shows that it excludes most of what really happens.

[Tycoon]

Well you brought it up

.... I'm not really seeing an answer in there.

[Tycoon]

If heaven and hell are real then you can easily see why God would ensure no real evidence ever surfaces. If we all knew for a fact then what's the point of living and eventual judgement.

That does make a nice excuse for religion to hide behind, doesn't it? At least science and logic don't hide behind such excuses.

Besides, God certainly is a selfish immoral being to judge us.

Tell me... when somebody has a strong mental disease and ends up killing somebody, how does God judge them?