| Would you tell a child heaven is a make-believe place parents tell kids about so they won't be afraid of dying? |
|
|
|
Asked 124 days ago
by Chipmonk  United States |
|
About
I'm short, cute, have four legs; my isn't Alvin and when I sing I don't sound like a tape recording played back at a faster speed (although *that* would be an improvement). :)
|
11 Points
|
My grand-nephew-in-law who is six was over at our house watching cartoons and a cartoon character died. He asked me what do I think happens when we die. I wasn't sure what he had been told so I told him many people have many ideas about it, what do you think? Without my even mentioning heaven or hell... out of the blue he said, "Mom told me heaven is a make-believe place parents tell kids about so they won't be afraid of dying." I didn't know whether to congratulate his mom for not helping to saddle the boy with a lifetime of guilt, or what. As it was I just smiled and said my parents used to tell me the same thing. Then we changed the subject. :-)
I think its a good approach, instead of telling kids "they have gone to a better place now" they should tell them that dying really really sucks and that they should try avoiding it.
That would be CRUEL
Yeah it's much better to lie to your kids about some 2000 year old magic genie in the sky.
There isn't much cruel about reality. Living in reality allows you to make sound choices in your life.
Heaven is not a make believe place. I can not believe a mother would tell her 6 year old something like this. It would have been better to not have said anything. No wonder so many kids grow up not knowing about God and Jesus. This is just wrong.
There is no "proof" there is a heaven. Not whatsoever. If you believe it through your faith, that is fine and I support and respect YOUR decision. But, to tell someone there is a heaven, God, Jesus, is to force your beliefs on others. This is where the problem starts. People forcing their faith on others that do not wish to listen. You believe what you wish, I believe what I wish. Maybe there is, but there's no proof of it. Remember, only a few hundred years ago, mankind thought the world was flat.
Proof has nothing to do with it. And your argument is foolish. Your answer assumes there is no heaven. My answer assumes there is. Both are beliefs. Neither is fact. Fact: No one on Earth knows exactly what happens after death.
You and I could discuss who is pushing what down who's throat all day long, but that Mother was teaching a belief system, not fact.
Proof was in reference to the comment that "Heaven is not a make believe place". If something is not "make believe" then it is real.
I am not the one pushing any agenda down someone's throat. If you have comfort from your beliefs, as I said to Lin, that is fine and I support and respect your decision.
Thank you for the respectful comment. Though I disagree with your assertion, I'm glad your values include treating others well as your decision.
Existing with no evidence of it is the same as not existing.
It's not a fact that we don't know what happens after death, that's a ridiculous assertion. Of course we know.
RE: Of course we know.
It is your belief that only things knowable by humans exist. That is an incredibly arrogant assumption. Notice that I don't claim that it makes my beliefs right. Because my being right actually makes a case FOR science. Your stance is the only negative one here.
"It is your belief that only things knowable by humans exist." It's not a belief. It is evidently observed.
See previous statement: "Existing with no evidence of it is the same as not existing."
You making a case for science? That'll be the fucking day.
That fact of yours, how do you know no one on earth doesn't knows exactly what happens after death? Are you God? Have you asked everyone?
..or is it something you just believe?
My belief is that humans are not capable of observing/detecting everything that can be known.
I'm actually pro-science. I just don't believe humans are the most important thing in the Multiverse.
This comment was deleted by Monday .
[3 points] 123 days ago byWHAT???!!!
Dam, I wish I was a fly on the wall for that, whatever it was...
"I'm actually pro-science."
No you are not. That's an outright fucking LIE. Do you ever get tired of lying?
Why don't you shut up for a while till you get your brains back. It gets real old hearing you spew poison.
I'm calling you out for the fucking LIAR you are every time, Joyce. Fucking DISHONEST Christian hypocrite.
Somebody sure got under your skin. Do you really think this comment was necessary?
I heard you every time. You are wrong. You are irritating. You can not be challenged without turning you into some kind of blind, brainless fool with a cruel streak. You are a drain on society and a destroyer by principle. Despite your intelligence, you throw it out the window when it suits.
You only have ethics when it suits you. When it's not convenient, you lie, cheat and steal. Your rants have no merit. Any more, they don't even make sense. I wonder what happened to turn you into such a worthless piece humanity. The more I hear from you, the less I like you.
I can hold a civilized conversation with anyone else on this board, but you won't allow it. You insist on poisoning every conversation.
You attempt to bully me and every other Christian or Conservative on this board. It really irritates you to have somebody that will actually stand up to you. I know that because you have all your little Brown Shirts running around marking down anyone that doesn't agree with you.
I made a decision a long time ago that your bullying behavior was not going to make me into a vindictive jerk like you. But don't mistake that for weakness or my responses to your valid posts as apology. They are neither.
You are a great example of society's problem with Atheists. There is no ethical reason not to do anything you want, to anybody you want. No matter how cruel and evil your actions, you can find a reason to carry them out.
I say all these things, not so much to you, but to warn others about how dangerous people like you can be. And to let others know that they don't have to be silenced by bullies or evil.
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
I like your reply. The privilege of being a parent is you can teach your children what you want. It happens all the time. Parents teach their children about religion as well as politics. Kids can always change when they are old enough to make decisions. Until then, I think parents should teach their children what they think is right. I am Catholic, I believe in God, and I am a liberal. That is what I taught my daughter. She is a law abiding citizen too.
Is she a Catholic as well?
My kids know about God and Jesus. They also learned about Zeus and Odin and Ra and lots of other mythological characters.
Whatever you say.
My oldest was quite interested in ancient Greek lit for a while. He read everything he could get his hands on. But he didn't erect a shrine and start praying to Olympus every night.
I believe as well, it is very important that children learn about other Gods / religions and to tolerate other's believes.
This comment was deleted by IAET .
[1 point] 123 days ago byThis comment was deleted by IAET .
[1 point] 123 days ago byMy answer to Lin above "It would have been better to not have just say anything" did show up here instead of under Reply.
All I wanted to say is: Lin, I believe, for several reasons it is very important to answer every child's question according to his development.
I completely agree with you. Parents that say things like this to there children have more affect on them than they can imagine.
What about parents who say things like there will be streets of gold in the afterlife? Is that meant to appeal to poor people's greed? Gold would be worthless if it was present in quantities large enough to use it as a paving material.
Yep, it's opened their minds to think rationally. How HORRIBLE is that!
This comment has been moderated down. (Show Comment)
Thanks. Most parents do what they think is right for their children. I don't always agree with what other parents do, but then it's their kids. I will do what is best for my family.
You have to admit the picture (of heaven) painted in the bible sounds a tad hokey. Streets of gold in the afterlife? Is that meant to appeal to poor people's greed? Gold would be worthless if present in quantities large enough to use it as a paving material.
Gold is a lousy choice for a road surface. Low friction results in poor traction. And it's so soft that it would have wear patterns and deep wheel tracks that would need repairing all the time.
Why have streets anyway? What's on them? Houses, stores, heavenly strip malls? Do I have a car, or do I have to use heaven's public transit system?
Those are the mysteries of the bible which religious people are not allowed to criticize or make conjectures about lest they surely go to hell. I reckon the standard is to just grin and bear it. :-)
Chip-
The pictures we have of heaven are rather hokey aren't they. I think it comes from trying to describe something we physically can not experience until we are reborn after this life is over. This point of view only makes sense if you are a believer, but it's a lot more satisfying than the 'don't criticize/grin and bear it' scenario you mentioned.
And BTW, honest criticism and conjecture are encouraged. Look up Peter and Thomas if you want to B^)
Thomas? The apostle whose "Book" was not allowed to become a part of the Bible?
Isn't it odd that Jesus thought all 12 apostles were good apostles (even Judas, whose betrayal of Jesus was essential to the grand scheme), yet "the Church" had prejudices against some apostles which Jesus never had, so doesn't it seem very uncool (for lack of a better word) this censorship that Jesus most likely would have never approved?
I think the recollections of Thomas make Jesus seem much more real to people who thoroughly recognize they are sinners. I have often heard that people who criticize the Church have nothing at all against Jesus, they are only against the way the Church claims to *know* exactly what message Jesus wanted to share with us. Even today can we be sure we really understand what He wanted us to know?
Re: Thomas? The apostle whose "Book" was not allowed to become a part of the Bible?
I was referring to the apostle, "Doubting" Thomas. Neither the Gospel of Thomas or the Book of Thomas were written by the apostle, Thomas. One of those was the sayings of Jesus as recorded by Mathaias. And the other was written by an unknown Hellenistic Jew around 340 AD.
So the Gospel of Thomas is unimportant?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas
I didn't mean to imply that it was unimportant. When I referred to Thomas earlier, I was speaking of the apostle because he is a well known skeptic.
Re: people ... criticize the Church have nothing at all against Jesus, they are ... against the ... Church claims to *know* ... message of Jesus.
That's where most denominations have their differences. Fortunately, our salvation does not depend on how well we understand Jesus, God or our denomination.
A "working knowledge" of his message is necessary so that you are not misled by Evil, but it seems to me that no one group has THE truth.
If no one group has THE truth is it not best to pray in secret like the bible says than in a room full of other people (a church) where everyone can see what you're up to?
The situation that was being addressed in the Bible was devout Jews that would stand up and pray these great flowery prayers in order to impress others in the congregation. Jesus said that the recognition of some of their fellows was all the reward they would get for those "wonderful" prayers. It certainly didn't impress God. At that time, personal prayer was an alien idea. Jesus was introducing a radical idea by taking it to it's logical extreme. Even if you go home and pray in a closet, God wants to hear your prayer.
This question is very biased in that it assumes the non-existence of an after life.
When I heard the little boy tell me that I came to the same conclusion; however, if he made the comment trusting his mother is right can you say he made anymore biased a statement than someone who professes a belief in an afterlife?