Intro to Christianity for Teens

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
181

Holy crapola. I was out of town for a couple of days, and I’m working really long hours on top of a 1:20 commute each way. I haven’t been able to work my way through all this yet. Just wanted to say thanks again to everyone. I’ll update on my son when I have a little longer. Short answer–it didn’t seem to take.

Anyway, thanks for the advice and the kind words. I wasn’t even that offended by YamatoDamashii92 because if you make a thread like this you have to KNOW where it is ultimately ending up.

182

[quote]YamatoDamashii92 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]YamatoDamashii92 wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
Ode to REASON…[/quote]

This is why christians can’t talk about how science is just having faith in scientists, they have no clue what scientists teach or the facts that support it.
[/quote]
Oh? lol

Oh is that a fact? Because your mixing Inflation Theory with the Big Bang model, which doesn’t necessarily support a big bang, but an eternal mutiverse. Tiny problem with your very brief explanation is there were no ‘seconds’ in the beginning of space-time. There was no way to quantify time in the ‘beginning’ because there was nothing else to measure the expansion against.
Ah, but what do I know, I am just a dumb Christian who thinks that the world is 5000 years old, because you say it must be true.[/quote]`

Which is key to the big bang model. What are you implying? Inflation baryogenesis are now taught as part of that.[/quote]

You missed the main question. I asked if it was “a fact”. Is it?

183

[quote]doogie wrote:
Holy crapola. I was out of town for a couple of days, and I’m working really long hours on top of a 1:20 commute each way. I haven’t been able to work my way through all this yet. Just wanted to say thanks again to everyone. I’ll update on my son when I have a little longer. Short answer–it didn’t seem to take.

Anyway, thanks for the advice and the kind words. I wasn’t even that offended by YamatoDamashii92 because if you make a thread like this you have to KNOW where it is ultimately ending up.[/quote]

You right. I still commend you for supporting your son’s decision even if different from what you believe. Much respect.

184

[quote]YamatoDamashii92 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]YamatoDamashii92 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]YamatoDamashii92 wrote:
Give him a copy of the origin of species and the bible and let the young man decide for himself. Let him look at sources, let him see which side provides evidence. If he has access to science and religion and he believes in religion fair enough. Are you only helping him discover christianity? What about Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism etc? Have you explained to him all religions have an equal chance of being right?

Good luck dude.[/quote]

You didn’t even read the OP did you?

It is blatantly obvious you are young 20’s btw… it’s sad and annoying. [/quote]

How did my non aggressive response annoy you? Why are you so angry at everything? I read it, I asked something.
[/quote]

Doogie isn’t pushing his son into anything (doogie doesn’t believe per the OP) his son expressed an interest in going to church and being a good father is supporting his son’s self discovery. Yet you had to come in here with your obvious and known anti-religion bias.

That’s why it’s annoying Yamato. [/quote]

So saying a father should oblige his son’s request to investigate Christianity but also provide scientific literature which offers actual facts about life we can prove, is annoying? That seems like rational behaviour 101.

Let me ask you if the OP said his son wanted to investigate Islam would the advice to offer a counter narrative alongside teaching him about the Koran be annoying?
Why do religious people think that people being vocal about their disbelief is offensive but religious people can make grand claims without evidence and it isn’t seen as offensive or annoying?

If someone wants to learn abut christianity and make a rational decision they should be reading the counter narrative otherwise how can they make an informed decision?

One can read the bible and it condemns homosexuality. You can however read science books that clearly shows homosexual tendencies in thousands of species and acknowledges it as a healthy and natural proclivity. Should his son never be exposed to the other side?

If you read Capital you need to read wealth of nations, if you read Mein Kampf you need to read the history of modern antisemitism. Saying that to this guy isn’t annoying it is common sense. I am sure the OP is a great dad and will give his son access to all the information he needs to make a decision based on facts.

If he chooses christianity fine, great, but not exposing him to the other religions or the scientific evidence seems kinda messed up. But as we can see OP isn’t forcing anything on his son, his son wants to learn things for himself which is great. I just doubt if his son read some Hitchens and some Dawkins and then read the bible he could believe a man who was hundreds of years old rounded up two of every animal onto an ark while god ethnically cleansed the entire population including pregnant mothers and toddlers. I also think he would see the irony in this god being anti abortion.
[/quote]

Coming in late to this party. But, after studying both Hitchens AND Dawkins, no one should read either of them if they want to think rationally. They do not do philosophy, they do science and when they argue they do nothing but use emotionally charged terms and phrases to paint a negative picture of any and all religious or superstitious belief.