Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Behaviour/development

Talk to others about child development and behaviour stages here. You can find more information on our development calendar.

Original poster

Explaining god - advice needed by non-religious parents

274 replies

BadHair · 18/02/2004 23:20

Ds1 has developed a fascination for churches. He knows the names of all the churches for miles around and can tell you if they have spires, clocks, towers etc. Although I find this a bit strange, as we're not a religious family by any stretch of the imagination, I also think its quite sweet.
However, he's started to ask what churches are, and who lives in them. I've told him that no-one lives in them and that they're places where some people like to go to sing hymns and say prayers, and so far he's happy with that. But its only a matter of time before he asks what hymns and prayers are.
So, how on earth do atheist parents give a simple explanation of god etc to a 3 yr old in a balanced, sensible fashion?

OP posts:
bloss · 25/02/2004 22:39

Message withdrawn

twiglett · 25/02/2004 22:45

message withdrawn

bloss · 25/02/2004 22:54

Message withdrawn

Clarinet60 · 25/02/2004 23:01

I still can't work out why living a good life isn't enough to avoid the bomb. I can't work out why all those good people would be thrown away. There must be more to it than that, because it is this line that makes the whole thing smack of man's Word rather than God's. I think it puts more people off than anything else, which is ironic really.

Clarinet60 · 25/02/2004 23:05

I've just looked back at one of your earlier posts where you say it's OK to act as if you are committed, even if you don't understand. I don't quite get how this differs from just living a good life and not disrespecting God.

robinw · 26/02/2004 08:08

message withdrawn

slug · 26/02/2004 09:24

Oooh Robinw, that's just completly out of line. As an athiest I absolutly do not believe in your imaginary friends. Why on earth did you think I would? You can beleive in them if you like, but don't assume that just because you do the rest of the world does as well. After all, you are in the minority. The lastest survey suggests that only 46% of Britions believe in God.

Gomez · 26/02/2004 09:43

Robinw - what on earth is your basis for such an absurd statement? Like Slug I am very aware of my own beliefs and can assure I believe in no 'greater being'. As a converse can I state that the majority of Christians do not believe in God but hide behind the man-made idol to justify their behaviours and make up for short-falls in their personality - please tell be how and why you do this?

sis · 26/02/2004 09:51

If we don't want to admit to the existence of (your) god, why don't the believers accept our state of denial and leave us alone? Surely, we have a right to be in denial and if we don't want to leave our state of denial or find out why we are in denial then that too is our right.

aloha · 26/02/2004 09:53

I have no doubt that Bloss is entirely sincere in her beliefs and I can see the point that if you believe that what you say can literally save others, then it is your duty to say so - 'Don't get into the truck, it goes direct to Ravensbruck'. However, it can be deeply irritating to others who don't believe... though personally I don't find it insulting, though I do find it insulting when it is implied that not believing in a god makes you a selfish, possibly psychopathic personality (ie doing anything you can get away with). And no, I really don't believe in the christian God any more than I beleive in Zeus or Thor or spirits that live in trees, all of which were fervently believed in at one time but are regarded as nothing more than myths now (except by a very few rare individuals). That's exactly how I feel about God. I have no doubt that a faith can be immensely sustaining and that religious communities can feel very warm and comforting and fulfill some deep human needs. Churches are beautiful, Cathedrals are awesome, some religious music (eg Bach) is profoundly moving. But I can like all these things (just as I like Greek temples) and not believe in God.

slug · 26/02/2004 09:54

I'm not in denial. I KNOW there is no such thing as a god.

suedonim · 26/02/2004 10:05

What a crazy thing to say, Robin. You might just as well say that women who are raped like it really, they're just denying it to themselves.

musica · 26/02/2004 10:06

I think that's a really good point aloha, I was trying to put that into words in my head. If someone DOES believe in God, they therefore believe they are right. And if they believe that being a Christian will lead to being saved and heaven, then surely it is right to try and tell your people. If you care about people, you want everyone to know the way to being saved.

It's not insulting - just that if you believe it, then it is the only answer.

Jimjams · 26/02/2004 10:10

Because Droile God is a bit of a Tony Blair, he loves power and adoration, and if you don;t do that you are dammed dammed dammed.

robinw- you never answered my question about what you meant (on the teaching thread) by "those who have least with which to compare it". That means I assumed the worst (as I said I would). In which case that has to be the most disgusting, vile comment that anyone has ever made to me. And if that is allowed to be utterd by a Christian then have no wish to be part of it.

I don't believe in God. I don't need to. If God existed he wouldn't allow things like disability. If he did then he would be one sick bastard. or maybe disabled children are being punished for their sins. But then maybe the comment about least with which to compare it with shows what the Christian view of disability is. Hmmm.

Gomez · 26/02/2004 10:23

Musica/Aloha - being saved from what exactly?

To look at it another way - I know that eating cakes is going to make that random lady in the bakers fat and lead to her eventual death from cardiac disease. Does that give me the right to knock on her door and tell her? Send her unsolicited mail - with my opinion/knowledge? I think not. So why different rules for those who believe?

musica · 26/02/2004 10:34

Well that's the question Gomez. If you're not a Christian then 'being saved' sounds horribly patronising. But I think it's being saved from separation from God.

If the woman in the bakers really didn't know that she was going to die from cardiac disease then it probably is your duty to tell her. Same as if someone is smoking and doesn't know it can hurt them. It's a question of knowing the risks. You don't need to keep telling her, but she does need to know. Otherwise what sort of friend are you? If you see a friend doing something that will hurt them, you tell them.

Gomez · 26/02/2004 10:49

So in essence Musica I have got nothing to be saved from, since as far as I am concerned there is no God for me to be seperated from.

The lady in the bakers is not my friend but a random stranger who would in all probability punch me on the nose ( and quite rightly too!)if I felt I had the right to question her right to eat what she wants - whether she is already aware of the dangers or not. A response similar to mine when Christians feel the right to tell me how to live! Or to try and 'save me'.

slug · 26/02/2004 10:50

But wouldn't you feel horribly patronised if I pursued you, because I 'know' there is no God, and insisted on telling you that you waste hours of your life in meaningless ritual? Wouldn't you feel harassed if at every turn I insisted that your meaningless rituals only act to underscore your lesser place in society because the organisation that intill these beliefs has a vested interest in keeping you in a lower social position? How would you feel if I activly insisted every time I talk to you that all you haqe to do is shed your beliefs to rid yourself of those chains?

The difference between Athiests and the evangilical religious is that athiests tend not to be as aggagant and patronising and in your face as those who seek to impose their views on others.

Batters · 26/02/2004 11:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

musica · 26/02/2004 11:14

I didn't really want to be drawn into this argument, but I'll answer your two points Gomez and slug, how I see them.

Gomez - yes, if you don't believe there is a God, then there is nothing to be saved from in your belief. I think the analogy with the baker shop is not wholly accurate though, because eating cakes won't definitely make you die of cardiac disease. If you saw somebody about to walk out in front of a lorry you would grab them, not exercise their right to do so. Please note, I'm not saying that you are wrong in believing there is nothing to be saved from, but to a Christian, it is as real as the lorry.

slug, of course it is wrong for someone to insist that every time you talk to them they tell you how wrong you are. Obviously you should not be harassed. That doesn't make all Christians arrogant. Perhaps some of the more evangelical factions can be a bit 'in your face' but that isn't everybody's style.

I really don't want to argue about this - I think I'll leave it there.

marthamoo · 26/02/2004 11:21

"Come on, all you atheists... you know that when you teach your children about right and wrong, when it comes down to it, you are saying, 'It's right because I say so.' Why is wrong to thump X? Because it hurts him? Why is it wrong to hurt him?... No answer to that except 'because I think so'. It's no logical answer to say, 'because you wouldn't like it done to you, would you?' Because an equally logical answer would be, 'I don't like it being done to me, but I don't mind it being done to him...' In the end Christians say 'It's wrong because God says so', and atheists say 'It's wrong because I say so'."

Late to this but, bloss, I just cannot get my head round this. I want my children to be kind to others, and not to hurt anyone. I want them to know this is wrong - for themselves. I want them to take responsibility for their own actions. I don't want them to pass the buck to a God - I do this/don't do this because God says so. Thumping another person is wrong - my six year old knows this (two year old doesn't, but I'm working on it ). He KNOWS it. I know it. Any right-minded person knows it. Why do we need God to give us moral certainty?

You say you don't know about non-Christians getting into your lifeboat - what about children? If my six year old died tomorrow, without loving God in the way you describe, would he get in your lifeboat? 'Cos I'm not getting in it without him.

Clarinet60 · 26/02/2004 11:24

TBH, I think agnosticism is a more logical position than atheism. You can't 'know' there isn't a God, as you don't know everything there is to know about the universe. You may have strong circumstantial evidence that leads you to suspect there isn't a god, which is a very different thing. I have weak, circumstantial evidence that leads me to suspect that there may be a higher being, but that's all I have. I can't therefore label myself as christian, agnostic or atheist - I am, as in many other issues, uncategorisable.

Janh · 26/02/2004 11:27

I thought atheism was a belief, not knowledge - opposite to believing that there is a god (or gods)? Believers don't "know" either.

And agnosticism is not knowing what to believe?

Janh · 26/02/2004 11:29

NB Have just jumped in at the shallow end and replied to Droile, not the rest of the thread, sorry, have to go now!

Clarinet60 · 26/02/2004 11:45

Hi Jan, it was just that slug said she KNOWS there isn't a god.