I believe most evengelical christians belief all men and women are basically bad. So everyone including envelgelicals can convert and become born again after deciding to change and return to Jesus, because they everyone strays.

Otherwise just think of conversion as two words. One describe a change in religion, while another describes a turn towards God.

It's like I quit smoking when I was twenty three, and have quit smoking 20 or so times since then.

Envelgelicals see sin (turning away from Jesus), and coversion (turning towards Jesus) the same way I would see a baby who started smoking Players Light as soon as the embilical cord is cut, but quits when they are children, and continues a cycle of quiting and returning to smoking.

Hi Alex,

They do *believe* everyone is bad, but they don't actually act this. It is peculiar how often children of evangelical parents "re-dedicate" themselves to the Lord, again, myself included. I have never met another evangelical who has not done this, and many who have admitted doing this more than four times before the age of 18.

Maybe I'm looking more at the psychology going on here. If you are raised a certain way, how much choice do you really have until a certain age?

I am not sure how much cjoice we even have as adults. However have you ever noticed the number of times religiousity skips generations.

I, my brother, and my sister all attend church and are believers. While my parents are agmostic, and my father goes to church rarely, while my mother never does. Our grandparents were religious.

I notice the same with Obama, his father ended up an atheist, while his Mom disavowed organised religion. His grandparents were devout Muslims and Christians.

Obama himself ended becoming a believer and joined and organised religion. UCC.

While I agree with the idea we have limited choice, I am not so certain about the generational skip. Religiousity has held steady in the majority of the world even in our time, much less the past. I would expect to see much more flux in a religion's numbers, or in the irreligious, if there was such a generational disparity.

One thing is for certain is that we are reactionary creatures, including when it comes to our religion. We respond to who are parents are and how they raised us - positively or negatively, but rarely neutrally. What is important to them is usually important to us (as a student of religious studies, albeit secular, I am still passionate in one form or another about my former religion).

Add to this the rapidly changing and ever-enclosing world we live in: only in the hustle and bustle of the ancient Roman cities has there ever been a comparable time where ideas were so fluid - but we have the advantage of instanteous conversation with those across the world.

As for Obama, I hold to my skepticism. Like most people I have high hopes, but I'm not drinking the kool-aid. Consider that the American people would vote for a Muslim President before an atheist when deciding whether any politician can really deliver his or her actual religious beliefs. Whether Obama really is a Christian or not I simply do not care - but one thing is for certain, if we wasn't and he admitted it, he would not be in office today.

I have heard the saving within the UCC that "God has no grandchildren". 

Meaning that you don't become a Christian through birth to Christian parents.  You may be exposed to your parents faith and to their church, but along the way you have to make your own choices "Is this something that I believe, that matters to me? or is it just something I've been told?"

Many may make the choices gradually over a period of time and hardly be aware that they are doing so.  Some may actually have a defining moment when they either say "This is bunk"  or "This is real". 

But many within the UCC by the time they reach their teens have asked lots of questions - they may have rejected some parts of their parents faith as they develop their own.  Sometime between the ages of 12 or so and 80 they may take classes and prepare themselves for confirmation within the church, or they may decide at any point, even at the completion of their classes, that this is not for me. 

But it is assumed that each person, regardless of what their parents believe, will choose their own path.  

I think that my relationship with the Holy is quite different from my parents.  My children both choose to follow the UCC although we have differences of opinion too.  I have no idea what direction my grandchildren might take.

Hey Brad,

All children are susceptable to 'direction' from parental authority. It's a necessity to prevent them stepping in front of the proverbial bus at the age of 3. So it's a pretty well established and genetically selected character trait.

Dawkins contends that in communities where investigation of nature has been limited by group think (ie. religious communities), children are likewise limited. This amounts to a kind of brainwashing.

Interesting to note the effect that education and generation gaps play.

 Dawkins contends that in communities where investigation of nature has been limited by group think (ie. religious communities), children are likewise limited. This amounts to a kind of brainwashing.

 * **

Mormons, Amish, Hutterites, for starters.

brad

It might help here if we could clarify what you mean by evangelicals.  Withing the Lutheran church there are two main groups that I know of;  evangelical Lutherans and then there are the evangelical Lutherans that are members of the Missouri synod.  The latter group take  the more strict stand whereas the former are much more open.  Some evangelicals think if you don't think or see it their way you are already condemned.

BTW I was raised in the latter of the two types but not Lutheran, as were my parents.  They never returned and I at 65 have absolutely no intentions of ever returning.

Shalom
Mate

God does not have any grandchildren.  So the children of the evangelicals go down two routes.   (well three if you count denouncing their faith)

1.  Baptism sometime between grade 5 and 8.  Where they go to baptism classes and the pastor makes sure that they have Jesus living in their hearst.

2.  Infant baptism and then confirmation classes ending with confirmation.

The evangelicals also believe that if you train up a child the way he should go when he is old he will not depart from it Proverbs 22:6.  So if for a time the child rebels and does not attend Church and pray at some point in the adult's life he/she will return to God like the prodigal son.

According to BARNA, in the states, 85% of children raised by Evangelical parents leave the church when they grow up

 * **

Mormons, Amish, Hutterites, for starters.

*************

Excellent extreme examples.  But you could attribute the statement to any faith that excludes other options (including the non option for religion) in children's formative years.

I thought there was another thread re kids being taught religion by their parents . However, I can't find it so I'll post this here although it may be a bit off topic. I did read in our Toronto Star that a university student does not have a complete education without having knowledge of the bible since so much of our culture is geared around it.

February 19, 2009

Stardust...I disagree.  You do not need any knowledge of the bible for a decent education.  If you include the bible then you should also include the combined works of Shakespeare.  A passing knowlege of it is useful.

Athiesto - are you saying that your education didn't include Shakespeare?! Where did you go to school, man???...cms

 The article posted is specifically talks about literature. I would add European social history and law, especially if you delve more deeply into it beyond the 100 level.   If one is studying literature then they would then likely study Shakespeare. Duh.  Last I checked most highschool does already include things like Shakespeare. He's pretty much an A level literary guy.

 I do agree with the point that people that don't know the Bible still can get things out of the study but it sure helped me when I was studying literature and history.  In most classes I took in english literature and history the folks who had some Biblical background and could leave their personal theology at home did have a leg up on many occaisions. It was just easier to get more out of the text and more out of various historical references.  To understand European and colonial history you really do have to have a good grounding in the history of Christian thought, the use of the Bible over the years. It permeates the whole kit and kaboodle.   It doesn't mean that you have to study it from a religioso perspective but love it or not it was and is an influential collection of texts.  It can be looked at in the exact same way that Shakespeare would be looked at.

 Even modern history.  For instance the civil rights movement. MLK's speechs and works are full of Biblical references. If you don't know them then you just miss a level of understanding what was going on.  It also sure helps with watching current US politics and especially listening to the current crop of right wing pols and pundits. Even just understanding the figures of speech or heck even recognizing their use  and the whistleblowing helps with having some knowledge. 

Hi Brads Ego,

I think sometimes we get all caught up in the process and forget about a key goal, if not the key goal in our spiritual journey  - a relationship with the divine...in the case of most of Christianity, a relationship with Jesus.

Liberal, conservative, evangelical, born again, saved, redeemed, mainstream, emerging, progressive, fundamentalist...one can go on and on and on.
 

Wherever we are in our journey a real litmus test for your spiritual state is where you are in your relationship with the divine - which for me is the resurrected son of God, Jesus.

My relationship with Jesus is not one that was forged easily - a difficult birth you might say.  But since the beginning of that relationship the seeking, questing and learning fostered by my doubts and  have forged a strong relationship between myself and the carpenter who laid down his tools to become my saviour.

I watched Jesus Camp with horrid fascination.  And what struck me most was that these poor kids were not being given a chance to forge a healthy relationship with Jesus.  There was no lying down in green pastures or leading to still waters...that was the saddest thing for me about Jesus camp; the lost opportunity for right relationship.

God bless,

Atheisto

No argument from me....lol. You're free to disagree. I won't lose any sleep over it . I did read that Shakespeare got some of  his inspiration and ideas from the bible.

Hi Brads Ego,

Just a quick p.s. 

For every Jesus camp out there, there are hundreds of wonderful and hugely beneficial Christian summer camps  that are a boon to thousands and thousands of kids.

It's like the ministers and church congregations.  For every fallen minister or corrupted congregation out there, there are hundreds and thousands of churches large and small, who quietly and without recognition go about the work of Jesus.  Almost none of their work gets a headline, nor should it, since that's not why they're doing it. 

But put one disgraced pastor out of a hundred in the headlines on Saturday afternoon, when parishioners from the 99 other churches walk into work on Monday, there will be co-workers who know you're a Christian who will lump you in with the one who's been disgraced.

Such is life.

God bless,

I was force fed Shakespeare...I now loathe it.  It's not big and it's not clever.

Atheisto....LOL !

Here's notes from the net:

Dave: your quote  to Brad's Ego:

  For every fallen minister or corrupted congregation out there, there are hundreds and thousands of churches large and small, who quietly and without recognition go about the work of Jesus.

I sure agree with this. I hate to say it but I also deplore those who think every priest is a pedophile. Talk about being narrow minded! There are 1000's of common ordinary priests out there who are good folks  doing lots of good works. Hey! I'm not even Catholic!

Hi Dave,

Just as a quick response. I am very much in agreement, and I am sorry if anything in my post would suggest anything otherwise. My parents, sister, grandparents, and cousins are all in the ministry and although I do not agree with their religious views, I love them and think that they truly love people; I extend this to probably the majority of loving, caring, humble, and compassionate Christian families - as well as all of the non-Christian families are targeted as immoral and, in the words of another member here, arrogant, people. Nobody should be pigeon-holed based on their religious or non-religious beliefs.

I agree completely that the stories, myths, and legends in the Bible should be part of the literature courses in our schools, just as Greek myth, Roman legends, Morse mythology, Native American stories, and yes, Homer, Shakespeare, Milton and some of the other great writers.  I also think that at some point (maybe grade 6 - 8) kids should be exposed to Huckaberry Finn and Anne of Green Gables.

This would not be a course in religion - although I don't see any harm in adding comparative religion to the curriculum (and yes, it would include Athiesism) - it would be part of the courses now given in literature.

Of course some people only value math and science - and will always be bored when 'forced' to take courses in literature or the arts.

Hi  Brads Ego,

You have posted nothing in this thread that requires an apology to me, or anyone else in my opinion.  I think I was just commenting in my p.s. on the varagies of human nature.

Thanks for starting such a thought provoking thread.

God bless,

I saw Jesus Camp and it horrified me. I am not surprised to hear that 85% of those kids reject it later--actually, I'm relieved.

And to study world literature without studying the Bible would be like expecting to be a good carpenter or architect and not know any math.  It's been far too influential on world thinking and writing to be ignored as a source. 

weeze

I still disagree with your last point.  Do you suggest that we also study the Koran, the Torah and any old historical book?

Knowledge of the bible is entirely optional.

I think the point is that children should be exposed to whatever is culturaly relevant.  In some cultures, the literature of society likely would not have any reference to the bible and it may, for example, have references to the qu'ran.  In that case, I would say that some knowledge of those texts would be beneficial...cms

So, what's our "culture" in contemporary southern Ontario? My wife's highschool is almost entirely integrated across several "cultures".

Hey Brads ego,

Just using the term "evangelical" it a bit too broad I think as some evangelicals are very strict and some are very liberal. As an evangelical, however, and growing up in an evangelical family, (I'm actually a minister's kid which is much much worse...) I think it depends on each child's path. For me, I had to leave the church and find my own identity instead of just being "the pastor's kid" before God could bring me back to Him. I think it all comes down to how each child is allowed to discover him/herself. Can children of evangelical parents have a "real" conversion experience? Absolutely. More often than not though, after having it forced down their throat for years, they abandon faith. (aside: My mom was a health nut and I basically ate seeds and organically grown carrots for 18 years - I gained 50lbs in my first two years of university)

I don't know how many of you watch the popular game shows on TV but bible questions came up fairly often (Jeopardy maybe?) more so than questions from other holy books. I come across biblical references in newspaper articles, cartoons, magazines, TV  shows etc. maybe even as a joke. My daughter as an example doesn't know the bible so I have to explain to her what the joke or article means. TV  comedy skits  in general or movies  about nuns etc. are a lot more funny if you understand something about the  bible or the Christian religion. I don't think so much fun is made of or permitted by the other world religions on TV or in the press.

I don't see these things at all but then the bible is irrelevant to me so I'm not looking.

 If you were studying Islamic and Hebrew literature and cultural history or studies then yes of course. If you were studying where different cultural history intertwined then yes most definately.  Same goes for Asian or Indian literture and culture with the writings of Buddhism, Confusionism and Hinduism respectively. 

 If you aren't interested in these areas of study then no you don't have to bother with any of it. If your a chemist or physicist it doesn't really matter. 

I don't know what the curriculum is now but when I was in highschool, social studies covered a broad variety of world religion and culture. We pretty much learned a little bit about the most common ones and learned the basics of the thinking and history of a good number of them. 

One thing I do have serious problems with is the church related school;  the Christian school etc.

The children are regimented so much that when school is over for the day all hell breaks loose.  How do I know?  I spoken to school bus drivers who have worked for both public and private schools.  They have very strong feelings about the private school.  The kids, once out of school, having been held down so much all day cause major problems on the bus.

A second problem I have is these children, in many cases, grow up not knowing how to handle the real world.  One good example is a young lady that was in a biblical history and interpretation class.  She was so upset by the discussion that she had a nervouse breakdown and ultimately had to leave the university..  She was not prepared, in any way, to handle academic life and a life of questioning and seeking.

For far too long she had been made to think that she was thinking when in fact she was unable to handle honest thought.

These children are simply not prepared for the real world out there.  They have little idea of how to relate to the public in general.  They have not learned the give and take of real life and find it hard to make friends.

Shalom

Mate

jump to the  "are we living in the end times" topic to get a real-life exemplar of just that kind of student.

I don't remember taking ANYTHING remotely religious in school.  I guess the closest we came to it was studying mythological archetypes (a la Jung) in English, for literary purposes.  And good ol' Shakespeare - we had a play of his every year. 

Now, I happen to love Shakespeare, and knowing the Bible as much as I did (which wasn't much) in school gave me an advantage over many of my peers.  But I knew absolutely nothing of other religions, and was never really given the chance to learn.  I think in Southern Ontario, our 'culture' is so up in the air, we *should* actually study a broad base of religions.  I would have known what Torah or Tao meant, and might have had more of an inkling to see it in other places back then.  Tolerance is the first step to broadening your mind.

This is a stereotype based on your questioning of a few bus drivers.  I went to a private school and none of the bus drivers said those things about me or any of my classmates.

I still remember one of the exercises we had to do when we covered the world religions chapters in grade 9.  We were given and scenario of two people meeting and had to take the persona of one of the people who was a specific relgion and write the conversation from that perspective.  The only stipulation was that it couldn't be our relgion if we had any.  I remember that I was a Confucianist.  I don't remember the specifics of what I wrote but I think the main 'teaching' of that exercise wasn't just the relgion but about the intellectual exercise of trying to look at things from someone elses perspective and culture and apply it an hypothetical real world situation.  I remember it being really hard thing to do and I spent hours on it,  but I expect that was the point, it can be hard to try to see things from someone elses shoes.  It is something though that has served me quite well ever since and consider that exercise to be one of the things I did in school that was a real turning point in how I see and work within the world. 

My ex-wife (I know I have mentioned her a bunch), she came from a very heavily evangelical/pentacostal family.  Her parents took her to a church when she was a kid where in her words "there was a fiery preacher who preached a lot of fire and brimstone".  She became extremely coo-coo for jesus after we got married and talked about kids (she was backslidden when we met).  I think that what was done to her as kid was brainwashing....  she had so many conflicting ideas about our world and she had a lot of problems fighting through the programming.  One of the things she really was adamant about was non-christian women, and how they can't be trusted because they have no morals.....  I had her best friend who worked where I worked at the time "keeping tabs" on me for her.  She would watch who I was talking to, and then my ex would question me on this.  I am not a cheater and never have been....  But because a female co-worker had spoken to me at work I would get the third degree.  But if that female co-worker was a christian (and I knew who they were at work because of my ex), there was no problem. 

This is just my life experience of how evagelicals find people who don't "walk with jesus" to be "bad".  Her parents made her this way because they took her to a to listen to a lunatic preacher, and I would get the third degree about not having any morals because I did not believe in god.  And in her words "if you choose not to believe certain parts of the bible and not others, where do you stop?"  So she chose to view the whole bible as literal, including Genesis.

(this may have ben a bit off topic, sorry if it is)

My ex also told me a similiar story.  A girl from her church when she was a teenager was going to university and moving away from home for the first time.  She ended up leaving university after the first year because of the "torment" she went through because no noe would agree with her biblical based ideas, when they were all talking real world stuff in their classes.  My ex referred to it as a biased secualr educational system, but where does the real bias reside??? 

Atheisto, your heart and mind are starving, starving to death. At a banquet. By choice. Gaunt and hollow-eyed, you stare at the feast and reject, reject, reject. It's like watching a kid with anorexia. Why do you hang around and stare and turn it all over with your fork and refuse to partake?

weeze

In my home, we have texts from a wide range of religions as well as atheist writings.  I have read them all and have some basic understanding but not as much as I would like.  I have no problem teaching children comparative religion (as we've discussed before).  I believe that this is one of the huge benefits on living in urban areas in Canada - we are multi-cultural.  My children celebrate and learn about a variety of different cultures and the religions in their lives.  This is a huge benefit, IMO...cms

Speaking for myself....

It's because we non-believing atheists are eating real food at the real banquet next door.

LL&P

Spock

Brad, I think your view of repentence and conversion I think is more inline with a mainstream than Evangelical view.  Evangelicals believe "for all of sinned and fell short of the glory of God."  Ergo, all are sinners and all need to repent.  Not long ago, I ran into someone who went to the Bible camp with which my family was involved.  She said one of the things that stopped her from believing is that a counsellor (my sister) told her that infant babies, who obviously haven't asked Jesus into their hearts, go to hell.  I appreciate many Evangelicals believe there is an "infant exception" from going to hell, but this exemption for some expires at as low as age 5.

So, yes, even though Evangelical kids can be "perfect" children, they still need to repent and "ask Jesus into their hearts".  In the Evangelical perspective, there is no need to lead a "sinful" life to be in need of salvation.

Practically speaking, are there Evangelicals raised by Evangelicals?  I know many who were perfect Evangelical children and are "good" (if there is such a thing)Evangelical adults.  A cousin of mine, for instance, I could easily believe has never uttered a swear word.  He faithfully goes to his Evangelical church.  He is a successful business man, a good husband and a good father.  Though corrupted by the Evangelical outlook and philosophy, he is a geniunely good person.  I know we all have secrets, but I imagine his are that he likes to sneak a look at the underwear section of the Sears catalog.

Having been raised Evangelical and still having many Evangelical relatives, I believe it is both sound in Evangelical theology and practically happens that Evangelicals raise Evangelicals.

So, Gilmore,

Evangelicalism...  good or bad ?

Spock

My feeling is that a course on comparagtive religions is a good way to introduce children to other cultures.  I also think that such a courswe should include atheism.  Then the children should be left alone to make up their own minds.  Brainwashing is out.

Shalom

Mate

Spock said:

"It's because we non-believing atheists are eating real food at the real banquet next door."

But, Spock, you're here.  Still hungry?

weeze

Find practically any post by me, actually read it and my point of view should be so God damn obvious it would make you feel foolish for asking.

I'm lazy.

So, Gilmore, is evangicalism good or bad?

Your laziness is not my problem.  If you can't figure it out, its not worth my effort.