How do you maintain an enthusiastic demeanor about your child's school play, when inwardly you HATE that it is nativity?

[nevergoogledragonbutter]

Ok, so i'm not religious. I'm personally somewhere halfway between atheism and humanism depending on whether i can see a difference between the two, a moment that comes and goes.

But, I have come to accept that we live in a country that teaches a 'broadly christian' approach after being initially a bit wtf to find that him going to a non-faith school actually doesn't mean we can avoid the subject.

I don't feel that taking him out of assembly would make any difference other than to make him feel different about something he's too young to understand.

But, it irritates me highly that he is taught bible stories at a non-faith school and it irritates me even more that he will be expected to re-enact the nativity story and spend the next 6 weeks learning his songs and lines.

And while i would dearly love to see my 5 year old sing and dance or say some lines, the experience is marred by the play being religious. i have to somehow look past the religious aspect.

I don't want my own beliefs to ruin what could be a very enjoyable thing for him to do with his friends.

Is it possible to keep my feelings hidden? Is that the appropriate way to deal with it?
Why can't they do something else that would be entertaining for everyone?

(Sorry about the Americanised spelling, C&P job!).

And just to add, I'm not trying to preach to anyone, but the question was asked 'Why should God need us to have faith?', so am attempting to answer that, with, he doesn't really, if you take that argument.

sorry llama, posts don't always convey intended tone. This is a point of genuine mystification to me for which I've never had a convincing answer. You say yourself your answer won't convince, and I don't quite see how my saying its the kind of thing I'd have thought is patronizing... unless I'm head patting my former self at the same time. I meant more that I understood where you were coming from.

No drawl, just a bit disappointing.

Lily I like it.

Grimma I nearly put a actually because it was impressively done: the words "it doesn't really stand up to the slightest scrutiny, does it?" were ash-flickingly dismissive.

What kind of proof would you accept? If someone was on the news saying "I just met the new reincarnation of God" you would think nutter (as would I, and Lily I suspect). If the person you most trusted in the world who also happened to be a rocket scientist said it one would be concerned, and ask their colleagues if they'd been a bit strange recently. If it happened to you, you'd probably book yourself into the nearest secure unit.

OK, a lot of assumptions about you there. But seriously. What would you accept as proof?

How close to the Nativity story os this play actually to be???

My children attended several schools between them all in infant/primary school. Some state, some indy, some C of E and some non faith schools.

All of them did the nativity story at Christmas but only 2 did the traditional Nativity Story -the others were very very loosly based on it.

I mean we had Nativity plays with starfish in them , one with an Astronaut, one with hawian hula dancers and another involving goblins and the christmas fairy . All of these were "nativities" (as opposed to Christmas shows) with a Mary and Joseph, shepherds and a stable etc in it but with some very unusual add ons and twists.

I suppose a very religious Christian person may have taken the view that is was too loosley based on the traditional nativity but I found it all quite amusing!

Either way - the children loved the being involved.

Nativity plays these days are not always 100% the traditional nativity!

I heard an interesting statistic that amongst scientists, there are far more Christians amongst Physicists than Biologists. Because the Physicists realise how many answers we don't have (like what was before the Big Bang).

Interesting article here

I'll have a read of that.

Maybe we need faith because of our own fallibility. As in, we were given brains, and we are determined to use them. But they give us a buffer, too, between us and the divine. So a leap of faith is needed. Does that take me to free will?

Only skimmed thread but OP I feel the same as you. I'm really quite shocked that in schools, where you are supposed to learn about real things, religion, which is just the evidence-free point of view of a subsection of society, can be presented as fact. I can't for the life of me understand how that can be allowed. Religion is a personal choice, not a matter for school teaching ffs (except of course to teach about the phenomenon of religion which I am fine with).

But the nativity play doesn't bother me that much - I just regard it as fun, much like the Santa stuff which has equal standing IMO. It helps a lot that at DS's nursery they are very sensitive about this, asked me what our beliefs are and if I objected to anything they might tell DS about. I would not ban anything (because it's for DS to decide) but I'm glad they present it as what some people think, and give him all the scientific/evidence-based explanations he wants.

I think jolly along with it and make sure you represent it to your DS as a story. After all there are loads of stories surrounding our DC and they can tell the difference between that and reality I think. You don't have to tell him it's not true, there's not reason why he would assume any fantastical story is true is there?

MadameDuBain - I think in the vast majority of schools (even church schools) it is presented as 'this is what Christians believe' rather than fact.

But I have seen many threads on here with people saying that their DC's teachers have told them as fact that jesus died for our sins or god loves them etc. Of course not all teachers do it but there are religious teachers who use the fact that christianity in schools is state-sanctioned to push their fact-free beliefs on children too young to realise that they are being taught superstition in what is supposed to be a fact-based learning context. I think that's outrageous. It is literally no different from teaching children at school scientologist beliefs, nazi beliefs or that pigs can fly - there's no evidence for them either so how come christianity gets the nod? outrageous.

And it is true that schools are officially meant to have an act of worship that is predominantly christian. Yes you can remove your DC from it but what a lovely message that sends - if you're atheist or non-christian you can be excluded - nice.

It sends the message that if you are not a Christian you don't have to go? If people say their children are atheists then they'll be happy about it? The children I mean?

Or would you like to impose your own belief system on the rest of the school and have it dropped?

It sends the message that you can sit out of the group and be the odd one out and not join in. I don't want to do that to my DC (unless they want it) - would rather assembly could be completely secular.

And btw that is not "imposing my belief system" at all. I don't have a belief system - my understanding of reality is based on evidence, not belief. As school is an educational establishment, where you find out about the truth about how things work and the nature of the world, that's all that should matter there, too. that's my point - I can't see why "belief systems" have any place in school at all.

oof... a cycle from faith to proof to freewill and back to the OP while I was having lunch.

Proof seems somewhat irrelevant if llama can 'prove' there isn't a god but carry on with faith anyway...but since you ask, I'll try to give a serious attempt at an entirely personal answer. When my faith was breaking, I earnestly prayed,"Lord I believe; help thou my unbelief". Yet unbelief followed. (For some reason writing this down has me in tears.) 'Proof' at that point would have taken next to nothing...actually, I wasn't asking for proof. I was asking for faith. And if there was a God anything like the one I'd believed in, would that prayer have gone unanswered?

I have no idea if that makes the least bit of sense.

Once the filter of faith is gone, the 'proofs' of the type Lily mentions :
", I sent you Abraham, I sent you Moses, I sent you Elijah and Elishah and when you STILL didn't believe I sent you Jesus" dissipate into semi-historical documents and hearsay. The whole thing falls apart without faith. If it was real, I don't see why it would.

Grimma that's exceptionally heartfelt. I now understand your disappointment was definitely not patronising. However am only a llama with limited theological resources It did make sense.

I do agree that proof "seems irrelevant". I think it actually is irrelevant, because any atheist can always say: well it doesn't matter, your walls of Jericho, and your Ark of the Covenant, and your Dead Sea Scrolls, because you've set yourself up an omnipotent, all good being as the Creator of a world full of evil, which is self-contradictory, so which bit do you want to abandon?

In addition, if you have proof, and you then believe, then you de facto do not have faith, because faith only exists in the absence of proof.

I asked because I was following a train of thought myself triggered by your interesting question. Why do we need faith? Is it because there is no proof, or is it the other way round -- is proof not being provided because faith is necessary to God?

Is proof not being provided because it's useless to us, we wouldn't know what to do with it? And we wouldn't know because we are fallible -- and ahem without understanding (you know what I mean there.)

Having faith in the face of logic is (I find) like conflating a belief that this piece of paper is black, but it is also white. I can't work it out, and I can't think about it all the time, so I accept it.

ps none of this is an attempt at evangelism I absolutely assure you (which means I'm breaking some rule I'm sure)

I mean, conflating two beliefs, the belief that it's black, and the belief that it's white.

llama: well, at least there is some proof of the existence honest intelligent Christians to be had Though after all that I think you might understand why atheists are tempted to take Occam's razor to this sort of Gordian knot (I rather like mixing metaphors)

OK, so what about poor old Doubting Thomas?

"because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed."

This could be taken to mean that proof doesn't actually preclude faith but that God prefers 'blind' faith.

Faith is seen as an inherently virtuous quality - believers in seem to rate believers higher than unbelievers, even if the belief is in something quite contradictory. Any ideas on that?

Grimma! That made me tear up too for some reason. PMS, probably So do you completely not believe now, or are you agnostic? (Sorry don't have time to read the whole thread) And I'm genuinely curious, not being patronizing or anything. I'm sure whatever you believe is right for you.

That's nice Grimma and right back acha

Good point about Thomas and the other disciples. I suppose they had the biggest job of all so handing over a book wasn't going to cut it as inspiration.

I don't rate believers "higher" than unbelievers, though I do see faith is seen as an inherently virtuous quality -- mainly because it's so hard. After all, God did give us brains and cannot be surprised that they're put to good use deconstructing his story. But it's harder still after that to continue to believe.

I think I don't quite follow the script on "unbelievers" in the proper Christian way. More of a CS Lewis kind of way: that is, it may look like a different God, or the wrong God, but if you have faith and follow a "righteous path" with love then actually, it is the same God.

My Dad is a good and noble man and an agnostic. He follows the "good" and shows his trust in it by working with love and supreme tolerance. I have to say, if I get to heaven (unlikely) and he's not there I will get my coat.

Yank: I completely don't believe. I might call myself an agnostic atheist though, because I can't prove I'm right.

Oh, ok.

stuffit, I totally agree! I love CS Lewis too. The Great Divorce gets me every time.

But yeah, Nativity plays...adorable whether just an interesting story or a day of supreme faith.

problem of evil anyone?

occams razor?

let's not confuse the Jerusalem of faith with the Athens of reason....breastfeeding has a wadge of research behind it. I don't have to search my heart to know my norks exist, for one thing.

even some of those believers that dabble in proofs admit there is none, (e.g Peter Vardy) and resort to a bit of fudging (ie, 'its a mystery' or 'people believe dafter things')

i'm with Terry Pratchett
'It's enough to appreciate a beautiful garden, you don't have to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it.'

i love a bit of P of R. For one thing, being an atheist, i have the luxury of being right.

total hijack. I apologise for nothing.

SGB

You cannot describe faith. Its something that you either have or dont and does not mean that you are stuoid and just doing as you are told.

I accept that some people do not believe and i dont think that makes them a bad person. I do not preach to people and respect thier views whatever they are.

Millions of people follow Christ.Do you honestly think that they are just stupid or does it just suit to you to think that because you dont believe you are the intelligent infomed one?

Yank although I must say I think I've been rather woolly, in the end. I wonder if all Christians have to resort to a certain level of woolliness just to get by.

No maybe just me.

Nah, not just you