100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Religious parenting skills... | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
spqr
on
Wed 02/27/08 10:32 PM
|
|
awwww this one is just as they say right up my alley.....or just one I could not pass on responding to.... creative wrote: I have often wondered how much a parent's religious beliefs affect exactly what and how the parent teaches the child. Answer: My Children's relationship with the Creator.......yes Creator is their relationship.....Do we use as a teaching tool God, Christ, or the bible.....every single day.....And my children will grow up strong and secure because it was them that wanted to know about God, It was them that accepted Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior. Creative Wrote: I have often witnessed a parent claiming to support the techniques being used to discipline and/or teach the child in question with some claim of religious belief. Answer: Yes and what exactly is your point here. Creative wrote: Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? Answer: Where do you come up with this stuff...... If a parent is religious and has always made sure that her children are wanting to know about God, and Christ for their own reasons....then what basis would this question have. The only thing that I have seen that good spiritual background gives my kids, is kindness, do for others, tender heart for the poor, and abundance of love for all humanity. I also see that my 15 year old daughter on her own made a promise to God to stay a virgin until she is married......This is the skill level and abilities of my children....and I am darn proud to be their mom. And like I have said many times....well two things......there is no way that I fell from the sky, turned into a tadpole, that crawled out and turned into a monekey, that then turned into an ape that then became a human....no way no how.....and honestly if you really really think hard about that.....would it make sense to you....You can look back in the last 400 years...there has never been one living thing that was one thing and then turned into a completly different species......hmmmmmmm I say get a clue. Ever heard of mutating germs? Adapting to medicine and developing immunity to it? How's that for an example? A kid will believe what you tell him/her because you are a parent, thy don't have enough knowledge or intelligence (yet) to discern bethween reality and myth. Kind of like Santa Claus, but with more consequences. Like the sense of guilt that feeds every religion myth. To me teaching religion to childrens is pure brainwashing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of scientists who believe in intelligent design. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss creationism as a scientific theory any more than evolution. Heck takes more faith to believe everything just popped out from a big bang & makes sense. Sorry. And even Darwin questioned his own theories when he was dying.  Intelligent design is creationism rebranded. And science is not based on faith, so no, it doesn't take "more faith". Can you plese name this "scientists"? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Abracadabra
on
Wed 02/27/08 10:52 PM
|
|
again awful judgemental of you you to think the above..... That’s not a judgment. That’s a fact based on what other people have told me about how religion affected their lives. I’m talking about reality here, not just an opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have often wondered how much a parent's religious beliefs affect exactly what and how the parent teaches the child. I have often witnessed a parent claiming to support the techniques being used to discipline and/or teach the child in question with some claim of religious belief. Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? Hmmmm... what if the upbringing of a child is devoid of religious beliefs... discipline, etc... I don't know Michael... I have not utilised discipline through religious teachings, however, the base philosophies of buddhism, namely compassion, and empathy, and letting go of assumed slights, guilt, and anger, have been part of their upbringing, although they have been exposed to many different flavours, of religion.. Are they more psychologically balanced? I wouldn't like to use a religious upbringing as a comparison, however overall they are well adjusted respectful compassionate empathic people, as observed by many of my peers, trained in psychology, and practising counsellors.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Redykeulous
on
Thu 02/28/08 07:48 AM
|
|
I also see that my 15 year old daughter on her own made a promise to God to stay a virgin until she is married...... Oh, wow, I assured my parents in pretty much the same way. I held to it too, it wasn't difficult. What was difficult was the night my new husband came to the bed "fully" ready to cash in on his patience. I was appauled and ashamed and embarrassed and I can't even tell you what else. What was supposed to happen did not. It took a trip to the doctor and a hand full of muscle relaxers and a couple glasses of wine before the price was paid. In those days it was nearly inconceivable to admit to atheism, but it was a sickness to admit to being a homosexual. So in true "Christian" form I believed in the "sickness" and followed the way that society proclaimed was "right". When a religion shapes society, a whole culture it is psycholocally damaging to those who do not, can not follow. HOWEVER, religion on a personal level, within a family or even a close circle of social outlets, is not, in my opinion, a bad thing. At least not to a small few. EXAMPLE: One family several results. My son has an Aunt and Uncle, both teachers, very intelligent and in the center of their life was their church, thier god. I can not remember a time when their lives, their decisions, thier focus was not directed to that center. They had three children, great kids, all. One found individuality with his first college experience. Striking out on his own, the unequivacable philosopher, it wasn't long before he declared his agnotisism, and soon his atheism. At 38, a couple months ago, he proclaimed to my son that he felt somewhat resistant to the idea that he may have conformed, as he had actually had a full time job AND health insurance for the first time. But knowing how he is, I'm sure its transitory. The second one, followed in the steps of her religious upbringing. Marrying a fellow believer and immediately making babies. To spite the growing abuse of a male chauvinist she stayed and prayed. Several years until the abuse becan to affect her health, and even her parents begged her to yield. Returning home with her kids and ending the relationship, she completed college and became a teacher, and resumed her life in the "Social Circle" of the religion she had been most comfortable in. It is doubtful that she will ever leave that tiny part of the world, but she is happy, productive and her kids will have a chance, because TODAY, social and cultural diversity is out there, and they will have the choice I felt was not available so many years before. The third was profoundly affected by the life he grew up in, but sports was where he found the spotlight. In college he developed a rare cancer. At deaths door several times in the following two years, the family turned to their center. He survived and chose to attend seminary. It was not what he wanted. He lives now in the hub of one of the larges cities in the U.S.. His "focus" has changed and he is finding his way as an individual. He keeps his beliefs to himself, so what he believes is not really known, but how he lives indicates that his background has not affected his ability to be a great person, full of life and love. Perhaps he is still searching. But what I fear is what is what Abra is so adament about. That he is at odds with the psychological effects of having a family so entrenched in their beliefs, and wondering all the time, was it god that saved his life? You see a short time after his recovery from cancer his Dad developed inoperable cancer. On his death bed he proclaimed to the family, not to be sad, that this was the price he was willing to pay. For two years while his son suffered he prayed that god would take his life and spare his son. WHAT A HORRIBLE LEGACY TO LEAVE HIS SON. In the end, psychological damage DOES HAPPEN. It happens, I'm sure, innocently but its effects can damage, often beyond repair. One child who could not exist without the singular "social environment" of her youth, another estranged from a family in shame and guilt and one who seems to think that any way of life, even the way of an individualist, requires the same extreme "focus" as the belief he grew up with. And me, of course. I found the strength, in my twenties, to risk alienation from my family and admit to my atheism. However, the cultural and social "norms" of a dominantly Christian society had to change before I could finally admit to homosexuality. In my case I can't blame Christianity totally, however, it was that environment that weakened MY WILL; damaged me psychologically. In this country the religion we blame for such things is Christianity, but in other countries it is the ferver with which other religious beleifs affect social thought,that cause these kinds psychological disadvantages. In all fairness to every religion, I can only say any time a "belief" system becomes the soul that streams though a society, it will and does cause disfunction. It affects, thought, creativity and promotes lies, deceit, feeds anger and despair, and eventually violence in word and deed ensue. There is a reason that religion in modern society, is constantly being portrayed as a "personal belief", it is because the effects of religion are understood by those who must maintain order within a society. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
awwww this one is just as they say right up my alley.....or just one I could not pass on responding to.... creative wrote: I have often wondered how much a parent's religious beliefs affect exactly what and how the parent teaches the child. Answer: My Children's relationship with the Creator.......yes Creator is their relationship.....Do we use as a teaching tool God, Christ, or the bible.....every single day.....And my children will grow up strong and secure because it was them that wanted to know about God, It was them that accepted Jesus Christ as their Personal Savior. Creative Wrote: I have often witnessed a parent claiming to support the techniques being used to discipline and/or teach the child in question with some claim of religious belief. Answer: Yes and what exactly is your point here. Creative wrote: Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? Answer: Where do you come up with this stuff...... If a parent is religious and has always made sure that her children are wanting to know about God, and Christ for their own reasons....then what basis would this question have. The only thing that I have seen that good spiritual background gives my kids, is kindness, do for others, tender heart for the poor, and abundance of love for all humanity. I also see that my 15 year old daughter on her own made a promise to God to stay a virgin until she is married......This is the skill level and abilities of my children....and I am darn proud to be their mom. And like I have said many times....well two things......there is no way that I fell from the sky, turned into a tadpole, that crawled out and turned into a monekey, that then turned into an ape that then became a human....no way no how.....and honestly if you really really think hard about that.....would it make sense to you....You can look back in the last 400 years...there has never been one living thing that was one thing and then turned into a completly different species......hmmmmmmm I say get a clue. Ever heard of mutating germs? Adapting to medicine and developing immunity to it? How's that for an example? A kid will believe what you tell him/her because you are a parent, thy don't have enough knowledge or intelligence (yet) to discern bethween reality and myth. Kind of like Santa Claus, but with more consequences. Like the sense of guilt that feeds every religion myth. To me teaching religion to childrens is pure brainwashing. I hate to dissapoint here....but they totally do.....kids are alot smarter then most give them credit for. All I can do is answer for myself.......Where my children are with their walk with the Lord is theirs......I do not and would not ever let it not be totally their choice......I never have and I never will. And as far as the big bang theory..........GOD SAID AND BANG IT WAS. Pretty simple....and if anyone can show me one just one animal or anything that was one creature and then was mutated or whatever to be a complete separate animal.........not going to happen......tadpoles turn into frogs always have.....baby horses cannot turn into baby cows....and when people mess with what God and intentially planned it's a mess...I know because I deal with the animals that people try to genitically change.....ligras for one......If God intended for the tiger and the lion to breed he would of never made them two separate species.....and the mess you get when you fool with mother nature is a crying shame. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
feralcatlady
on
Thu 02/28/08 09:14 AM
|
|
There are a lot of scientists who believe in intelligent design. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss creationism as a scientific theory any more than evolution. Heck takes more faith to believe everything just popped out from a big bang & makes sense. Sorry. And even Darwin questioned his own theories when he was dying. Intelligent design is creationism rebranded. And science is not based on faith, so no, it doesn't take "more faith". Can you plese name this "scientists"? I can name alot of scientist who believe that God and science go hand and hand....would you like me too. I think that because of God that we have science.......I think because of God we have alot......and please show me where God, Jesus or the Bible has ever been called or referred to as a theory......hmmmmmmm not going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
Is belief in the existence of God irrational? These days, many famous scientists are also strong proponents of atheism. However, in the past, and even today, many scientists believe that God exists and is responsible for what we see in nature. This is a small sampling of scientists who contributed to the development of modern science while believing in God. Although many people believe in a "God of the gaps", these scientists, and still others alive today, believe because of the evidence. Rich Deem 1. Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible. 2. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627) acon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism) 3. Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled! 4. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts. 5. Rene Descartes (1596-1650) Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era. 6. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being." 7. Robert Boyle (1791-1867) One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era. 8. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity. 9. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution. 10. William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating). 11. Max Planck (1858-1947) Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!" 12. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The big difference Redy is I have had no influence on her decision....this is hers and hers alone......As I have said before I don't cram anything down my childrens throat....their decision to walk with Jesus Christ has always been their decision. This is why for me....I do know of people where it was crammed down their throat and when they got older they rebelled.......Well since it's always been their decision I don't think this will happen....Now of course I cannot say 100% that they won't at some point change their mind......and again their choice. But the foundation is their and it's a foundation on the Rock of the Lord Jesus Christ and it's their decision.
I remember leaving church one day with my youngest who was 7 at the time. She asked me if she could tell me something and I would not get mad..I said of course honey what? She said Mom I love God more then you.......All I said was Praise God.....and that was that.....any studying of the Bible, and classes my girls take and they do alot....Is entirely their choice.....and if they ever said mom I don't want to go anymore...that would be it...... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? If this were confirmed...that religious people produce less intelligent children, what would be the desired response in your mind? What would be the correct course to help our "kids"? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? If this were confirmed...that religious people produce less intelligent children, what would be the desired response in your mind? What would be the correct course to help our "kids"? It's the biggest bunch of bahoogie I have ever read....Because both my kids are far above average in education. I would dare anyone to have a conversation with my 15 year old and say she is not the most well adjusted intelligent kid they have met. And what makes it even better for me.....I think because of heer solid foundation in Christ she is not swayed to be a follower she is a leader. She does not ever conform to what the "in kids are doing" She would rather just be herself and that my dear friends is going to benefit her in life.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My daughter is 8 years old she has already come to me with questions about religion , I had to take a moment ( about a week to give myself time to see how I could go about it in the most loving and proper way and thought of the same questions u have just asked and my views are that .... The parents beliefs do affect a child, I myself was raised Catholic but am a Atheist now, As a young girl myself I never had any other knowledge about any other religion only that they were the wrong ones and we the Catholics were the only true right believers of the right faith/ God/ religion............ No one explained to me why the other religions were the wrong ones or what they truly believed or the differences of their religions to ours. So looking back and thinking about how I had the lack of knowledge or someone to allow me the opportunity to be exposed to other books ( bibles/debates/ history and any other information on other religions .....I was forces to be molded to what my parents believed and that was it.
I came to the decision to allowed my daughter to know that when it is her time to come to a decision on religion it is her decision and hers alone..... when she finds facts and or that gut feeling that a certain religion is for her or if any at all, that it is up to her and that I Mommy have no say in what she feels to be the truth inside of her. I don't know it all, but I do know that I would feel awful if i were to mold my child's hopes or idea of belief based just on my own views, I don't want that much control over her. I want her to grow to be smart and understand that knowledge and deep thought and feeling is key to find that perfect fit to what u believe or don't believe and that word of mouth should never be just good enough not even if its coming from a parent, that she must take the time to study up on it and be sure and true of how she feels about it. I love her enough that I put my own views aside (which is hard at times believe me ) and allow her to gather info for her self, ( as in exposing her to many different religions beliefs / documentaries / church/ bibles stories for her age group /etc. The key thing about being a parent is u never know what ur doing is the right perfect way but u hope u give ur child enough information that it allows them to have their own thoughts/ opinions/ ideas and builds them in to a open minded adult, I don't want to repeat a mistake of having a blinder over her eyes about other religions such it was placed on me as a child. My job is to love her no matter what and if to love her is to put my views aside to allow her to gather her own then so bit it. If she grows to be a Catholic/Christian/a Jehovah's witness/ Muslim/Atheist/ or any other, I love her and shes my baby and all I can do is be happy she found something she believes to be a true fit for her. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
feralcatlady
on
Thu 02/28/08 10:16 AM
|
|
My daughter is 8 years old she has already come to me with questions about religion , I had to take a moment ( about a week to give myself time to see how I could go about it in the most loving and proper way and thought of the same questions u have just asked and my views are that .... The parents beliefs do affect a child, I myself was raised Catholic but am a Atheist now, As a young girl myself I never had any other knowledge about any other religion only that they were the wrong ones and we the Catholics were the only true right believers of the right faith/ God/ religion............ No one explained to me why the other religions were the wrong ones or what they truly believed or the differences of their religions to ours. So looking back and thinking about how I had the lack of knowledge or someone to allow me the opportunity to be exposed to other books ( bibles/debates/ history and any other information on other religions .....I was forces to be molded to what my parents believed and that was it. I came to the decision to allowed my daughter to know that when it is her time to come to a decision on religion it is her decision and hers alone..... when she finds facts and or that gut feeling that a certain religion is for her or if any at all, that it is up to her and that I Mommy have no say in what she feels to be the truth inside of her. I don't know it all, but I do know that I would feel awful if i were to mold my child's hopes or idea of belief based just on my own views, I don't want that much control over her. I want her to grow to be smart and understand that knowledge and deep thought and feeling is key to find that perfect fit to what u believe or don't believe and that word of mouth should never be just good enough not even if its coming from a parent, that she must take the time to study up on it and be sure and true of how she feels about it. I love her enough that I put my own views aside (which is hard at times believe me ) and allow her to gather info for her self, ( as in exposing her to many different religions beliefs / documentaries / church/ bibles stories for her age group /etc. The key thing about being a parent is u never know what ur doing is the right perfect way but u hope u give ur child enough information that it allows them to have their own thoughts/ opinions/ ideas and builds them in to a open minded adult, I don't want to repeat a mistake of having a blinder over her eyes about other religions such it was placed on me as a child. My job is to love her no matter what and if to love her is to put my views aside to allow her to gather her own then so bit it. If she grows to be a Catholic/Christian/a Jehovah's witness/ Muslim/Atheist/ or any other, I love her and shes my baby and all I can do is be happy she found something she believes to be a true fit for her. Very Very Very true and I think the right thing......As I said it has always been my daugters journey not mine....And I will continue to let it be up to them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kudos on being a True Good Mommy(one of the hardest jobs in the world) A child is only a little adult that u build to have understanding of how smart and beautiful and lovely and gifted and powerful they are .... to have them grow in to the best possible person they can be. Good views, thank you for the comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? If this were confirmed...that religious people produce less intelligent children, what would be the desired response in your mind? What would be the correct course to help our "kids"? It's the biggest bunch of bahoogie I have ever read....Because both my kids are far above average in education. I would dare anyone to have a conversation with my 15 year old and say she is not the most well adjusted intelligent kid they have met. And what makes it even better for me.....I think because of heer solid foundation in Christ she is not swayed to be a follower she is a leader. She does not ever conform to what the "in kids are doing" She would rather just be herself and that my dear friends is going to benefit her in life.... That doesn't matter one bit. The spotlight fallacy is used all the time. I have one son who is mentally retarded and another who is autistic. If someone spotlights my family and uses us as an example, what would the outcome be? (ignoring the genetic component of my boys handicap is a given) I can only think of one "logical" outcome. We have to do what is best for the kids. So if parents insist on teaching their kids "destructive" "myths and faerie tales" then we *MUST* do what's right for the kids. I've seen this argument used a lot. It's been made by Dawkins and it's become very popular. The argument goes like this: Religion is a form of mind control, which destroys the intellect of children, therefore teaching religion to children is child abuse. And you simply can't leave a child in an abusive home... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? If this were confirmed...that religious people produce less intelligent children, what would be the desired response in your mind? What would be the correct course to help our "kids"? It's the biggest bunch of bahoogie I have ever read....Because both my kids are far above average in education. I would dare anyone to have a conversation with my 15 year old and say she is not the most well adjusted intelligent kid they have met. And what makes it even better for me.....I think because of heer solid foundation in Christ she is not swayed to be a follower she is a leader. She does not ever conform to what the "in kids are doing" She would rather just be herself and that my dear friends is going to benefit her in life.... That doesn't matter one bit. The spotlight fallacy is used all the time. I have one son who is mentally retarded and another who is autistic. If someone spotlights my family and uses us as an example, what would the outcome be? (ignoring the genetic component of my boys handicap is a given) I can only think of one "logical" outcome. We have to do what is best for the kids. So if parents insist on teaching their kids "destructive" "myths and faerie tales" then we *MUST* do what's right for the kids. I've seen this argument used a lot. It's been made by Dawkins and it's become very popular. The argument goes like this: Religion is a form of mind control, which destroys the intellect of children, therefore teaching religion to children is child abuse. And you simply can't leave a child in an abusive home... I agree spider and I also think your a man beyond your years. And like I have said so many many times. I don't care about religion for it is man made....I do however care about God, Christ his Son, and the Holy Bible. As far as believing in this for my children....It's their choice, plain and simple......And I think the productive children in our society in 20-30 years will be the kids that have Christ as their foundation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could there be a direct psychological correlation between what religious beliefs are taught by a parent and the cognitive skill levels and/or abilities of the children? If this were confirmed...that religious people produce less intelligent children, what would be the desired response in your mind? What would be the correct course to help our "kids"? It's the biggest bunch of bahoogie I have ever read....Because both my kids are far above average in education. I would dare anyone to have a conversation with my 15 year old and say she is not the most well adjusted intelligent kid they have met. And what makes it even better for me.....I think because of heer solid foundation in Christ she is not swayed to be a follower she is a leader. She does not ever conform to what the "in kids are doing" She would rather just be herself and that my dear friends is going to benefit her in life.... That doesn't matter one bit. The spotlight fallacy is used all the time. I have one son who is mentally retarded and another who is autistic. If someone spotlights my family and uses us as an example, what would the outcome be? (ignoring the genetic component of my boys handicap is a given) I can only think of one "logical" outcome. We have to do what is best for the kids. So if parents insist on teaching their kids "destructive" "myths and faerie tales" then we *MUST* do what's right for the kids. I've seen this argument used a lot. It's been made by Dawkins and it's become very popular. The argument goes like this: Religion is a form of mind control, which destroys the intellect of children, therefore teaching religion to children is child abuse. And you simply can't leave a child in an abusive home... I agree spider and I also think your a man beyond your years. And like I have said so many many times. I don't care about religion for it is man made....I do however care about God, Christ his Son, and the Holy Bible. As far as believing in this for my children....It's their choice, plain and simple......And I think the productive children in our society in 20-30 years will be the kids that have Christ as their foundation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Famous Scientists Who Believed in God Thank you for finally acknowledging pantheism as a valid view of God.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INteresting thoughts there...
hhmmm.... productivity means adding to something. I don't believe that success can be measured by the ability of an individual to take and hoard.  Those that take and take don't know how to give and give. Knowing the difference between giving and taking does give the giver much more to receive. BNeing productive requires a foundation in life that establishes how the house is built. The selfless and generous are always going to be productive and eclipse their peers that are only concerned with their own advantage and privelege. It stands to reason that well adjusted children with a healthy relationship with God from their youth are always going to be examples and models of leadership qualities to be emulated by all those that recognize healthy models of behaviour and motive. The steadfastness of living well and being productive takes a lifetime to be measured and quantified, but can never model the qualification without good works. Inspiration and motivation is more often than not exhibited by those we love and admire and the encouragement of such individuals in our lives , that live productively, are establishing for us all, young and old, how best to influence our own destiny with a sense of purpose. That requires faith. Faith moves mountains.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Famous Scientists Who Believed in God Is belief in the existence of God irrational? These days, many famous scientists are also strong proponents of atheism. However, in the past, and even today, many scientists believe that God exists and is responsible for what we see in nature. This is a small sampling of scientists who contributed to the development of modern science while believing in God. Although many people believe in a "God of the gaps", these scientists, and still others alive today, believe because of the evidence. Rich Deem 1. Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible. 2. Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627) acon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism) 3. Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled! 4. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts. 5. Rene Descartes (1596-1650) Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era. 6. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being." 7. Robert Boyle (1791-1867) One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era. 8. Michael Faraday (1791-1867) Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity. 9. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution. 10. William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating). 11. Max Planck (1858-1947) Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!" 12. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Sweetheart...what the hell are you talking about? Where did you get that (crap) ??? I respect you..but your sources are biased...to say the least...check better, maybe outside of a christian web site, Geez. Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime. The geocentric view had been dominant since the time of Aristotle, and the controversy engendered by Galileo's opposition to this view resulted in the Catholic Church's prohibiting the advocacy of heliocentrism as potentially factual, because that theory had no decisive proof and was contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture.[7] __because that theory had no decisive proof and was contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture.[7]__ Galileo was eventually forced to recant his heliocentrism and spent the last years of his life under house arrest on orders of the Inquisition. ---forced to recant his heliocentrism and spent the last years of his life under house arrest on orders of the Inquisition. --- Nicolaus Copernicus (February 19, 1473 – May 24, 1543) was a Polish astronomer and the first person to formulate a scientifically based heliocentric cosmology that displaced the Earth from the center of the universe. His epochal book, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), is often regarded as the starting point of modern astronomy and the defining epiphany that began the Scientific Revolution. Francis Bacon, 1st Viscount St Alban (22 January 1561 – 9 April 1626) was an English philosopher, statesman, and essayist. He is also known as a proponent of the scientific revolution. Indeed, according to John Aubrey, his dedication may have brought him into a rare historical group of scientists who were killed by their own experiments. His works established and popularized an inductive methodology for scientific inquiry, often called the Baconian method or simply, the scientific method. In the context of his time such methods were connected with the occult trends of hermeticism and alchemy[citation needed]. Nevertheless, his demand for a planned procedure of investigating all things natural marked a new turn in the rhetorical and theoretical framework for science, much of which still informs conceptions of proper methodology today. Albert Einstein & Spinoza's God: Harmony in the Universe I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings. - Albert Einstein, responding to Rabbi Herbert Goldstein's question "Do you believe in God?" quoted in: Has Science Found God?, by Victor J Stenger Albert Einstein was born into a Jewish family and had a lifelong respect for his Jewish heritage. Around the time Einstein was eleven years old he went through an intense religious phase, during which time he followed Jewish religious precepts in detail, including abstaining from eating pork. During this time he composed several songs in honor of God. But during most of his life Einstein was not a practicing Jew. Einstein was opposed to atheism. Various sources refer to him as a mostly non-practicing Jew, an agnostic, or simply as a person with an idiosyncratic personal worldview. mostly from Wikipedia.org |
|
|
|
|
