What astonishes me is the fact that Prudence calls a Christian child "rather devilish" and "rude, and cruel, to loving family members" for being concerned about her father's eternal destination. At the same time, the father, who believes in evolution and homosexuality is called "open-minded" and a man trying to share a "crash course in the Enlightenment."

Everyone is permitted to share whatever they believe, whenever they feel like sharing it: that is except for the Christian population. We are asked to embrace everyone's religious books of reference; however, the Bible is called a collection of stories that contains no truth.
Please prove through science that the Bible is incorrect. You can't do it. I have seven years of college behind me, and I still cannot find the science to prove the Bible to be incorrect. If anything, I believe it more now than I did before I attended IU.
The 13 year-old-daughter should be praised for her strength and ability to stand for moral decentcy. Would the father rather she be out with a bunch of drug addicts or alcoholic teenagers who have no morals? She is basing her beliefs on the truths that are taught in the Bible. Society begs everyone to "agree to disagree": that is fine. But whenever Christians are asked about their beliefs, please listen and be tolerant: that's what you ask them to do.

Also, in response to another posting--Sorry, but creationism is the belief that God created everything....So how can one say that they are a Christian and think that God created any way he wanted to: yet say that creationism--which is defined as the belief that God created everything--doesn't fly......where's the logic in that....

Maimonides, the great Jewish scholar, said famously that when Torah and Science contradict each other, we should examine our interpretation of Torah

What I think applies here is that People should stop looking down on others for their beliefs. America is a nation that was founded based on one thing: Can you say it? Probably not. It was Religious Freedom. Nothing else. That means that any one who lives in this Country is free to Worship God if they choose.

Try Josephus and his writings, you will find them more accurate as he predated Maimonides by hundreds of years.

Why do people like you feel you have the right to ridicule those who are religious? Christian people have gone from being the Majority in this Country to being the Minority. But that does not mean that we are any less of a people. Christianity is more than a belief, it is a relationship with the One Who Created this world.

So, it short, I say put up or shut up!! Unless you can prove that God does not exist, (which in my 16 years of Higher Education) have not found any one able to do, I say that you should stop attacking the beliefs of people you do not know.

No. It is you who doesn't understand. An accused man is not required to prove his innocence, rather it is the accusers who must prove his guilt. I don't have to prove that God doesn't exist, it is you who has to prove that He (She? It?) does. You can not 'prove' the non-existence of something, especially this higher power myth, because every time it is shown that what was thought to be under the control of God is not (eg Copernicus) you move the goal posts. Apart from that, in the story at hand, the girl should be respectful enough of her father to acknowledge the difference in their beliefs. They both need to avoid the subject if it causes them harm. If, with every visit, she's repeating the 'you're going to hell' argument, then she is being rude. I'm surprised you haven't mentioned this, but I guess the instruction to honour thy father and mother doesn't apply when he is an apostate, eh?

What would you like me to read of Josephus? And why would you even compare the writings of a historian with those of a Rabbi.

I have read quite a great deal of Josephus. Not sure what relevance that has to the question at hand.

Speaking for myself, I am not ridiculing Christians -- most of my friends are Christians. Most of them also do not literally believe every word of the Bible either. They agree with Maimonides that when science (or other empirical evidence) seems to contradict scripture, they may need to consider the possibility that they have misinterpreted scripture.

After all, the Church forced Galileo to recant his theory that the earth rotated around the sun because they thought that contradicted scripture. They since have come to admit that that interpretation was not correct.

Christians make up 80-85% of the US. They are certainly still a majority. What has happened is that there are enough non-Christians in the country, and religion itself has become less important, that people really are attempting to follow the seperation of church and state as the founders intended. A small percentage of vocal fanatic Christians complain about their "loss" of rights. It's simply not true.

One can not prove the nonexistance of something. Prove that the Easter bunny doesn't exist. Prove that there aren't unicorns. Prove that Tachyons don't exist. It's a meaningless challenge. Even if there is a God, there is no way to prove what type of God She may be. In fact, when you get down to it, defining God is an iffy proposition. Is Zeus a God? Is Allah a God? Your challenge is simply emotional rhetoric.

What can be proven is that the Bible can not be literally true. The flood didn't happen as described in the Bible. The creation of the universe didn't happen as described in the Bible. There is far too much evidence from the cosmic background radiation to the age of the planet, to the fossils within it. Even the quantity of H2O on this planet is evidence against it. Now if one feels these stories are metaphors that God was using to instruct, there isn't a contradiction.

When someone believes something that can be demonstrated to be false, well they open themselves up to ridicule. Is it nice? No. Does it help? No. But it's human nature. How many of the Christians who embrace victimhood turn around and mock the Muslims, or the Wiccans, or the Scientologists, or the Raelians? Heck, some of them even mock fellow Christians.

It's late enough that I've apparently lost my point, but I'll bring it back to the LW. It's not that his daughter is religous that is the problem, it's the way that she is acting about it. Really screaming and carrying on is simply rude and uncalled for. Not only that, but he has a right to be concerned if his wife is brainwashing the daughter to the point where she is actively believing things that aren't so. But as I said in my previous paragraph mocking her won't help. Dad simply needs to expose her to more viewpoints by bringing her to other churches, Christian and otherwise. Let other people do the talking. Who knows, maybe he'll learn something?

If the father wants to undo his daughter's brainwashing, he needs to start slow. Take her to a church, but make it a more progressive one, let her talk to a Unitarian pastor or something. It's gotta be a soft sell too, otherwise the kid's just going to rebel and go further down the rabbit hole, join up with some David Koresh wannabe. The important thing is to let the girl make up her own mind about things, and not to push her into any one direction, just give her all the tools she needs to decide. If that means she grows up to be a kooky Evangelical, or a coldly rational atheist, that's something dad's gotta get used to.

As long as she's not a lousy fence sitting agnostic.

To say that the argument of the inability to prove God's non-existence is worthless because we can't prove the easter bunny doesn't exist is foolishness. Nobody dedicates their lives to the directing of the "holy easter bunny". If, so called, scientists can prove the earth is hundreds of thousands of millions of billions of trillions gazillions years old then they should be able to prove the world just "happened".. there was nothing and then suddenly something. I find it strange that people try so hard to say that God is non-existent yet support a theory such as nothing to something. Yes, it's normal not to have all the answers and those who are God's children will spend all eternity getting to know more and more about God because we were created less then God and for God therefore being incapable of knowing God completely. Creation makes it plain and obvious.. we creatures were created in a world that was created all for God. Humanity chose sin from the beginning and still choses sin. That's alright. God isn't going to strike people down with a sudden bolt of lightening but don't think for one second you will be able to escape God's rightful judgment. He offers us the answer, Jesus Christ, our free ticket to a restored relationship with God. If God was physically like us, then sure we'd all believe. But then were does faith come in?

Ok quick question... Why do we have to prove there is a God? Especially when Science has been trying so hard to disprove Him?

“demonstrated to be false” PROOF?

so put up or shut up....

One of the fundamental responsibilities of a parent is to teach respect for others, and it really does have to start at home. Further, respect is not limited to those who believe exactly as Mom does.

If you will go back and read a little more scripture, you will find that is a requirement in the OT as well as the NT. Let me know if you require some specific citations, but that is the foundation of the story of the Good Smaritan and the Woman at the Well.

Hectoring, proselityzing, haranguing, and let's face it, even whining about your pathetic misperception of the persecution of so-called Christians; none of those are sharing.

I've been consigning what I've decided to call the "Hater Christians" to live under the Rock of Presumptuous Ninnies and have lost count.

I'll have to find a bigger rock for y'all to crawl under.

This was never about religion. This is about a mother training a child to live in fear and hate. It's about a father who fears for his child's sanity.

No one is particularly interested in hearing about what you believe, unless it has something to do with this child's health.

The figure you quote of 85% or so of Americans being Christian is misleading--nearly all of these the nominal ("Christmas and Easter") Christians. The "evangelical" type is far more rare. George Barna, who specializes in surveys of religious life, suggests that about 7% of Americans have a Biblical faith.

This is important because this Biblical worldview does indeed believe that the nonbeliever is destined for hell.

I would agree with most of these posters about the rude behavior, but I condemn it not for the message but because it is an inept means of evangelizing Dad. Cut the kid a break though, most teenagers are frequently wrong but never in doubt.

Proving God exists (or not) is a complex issue, but as for the "scientific" proof He does not...well, it has problems of its own and most devout atheists refuse to admit to the problems.

For example: the Big Bang is now well established (scientifically)--but what existed before the Big Bang? In order to make the Bing Band work, physicists need to twist the laws of physics we observe into a unified force, which suddenly become nonunified--but have no explanation as to how these 2 conditions occur. In other words, we need to throw out everything we know about physics, BELIEVE that something occurs that we have no evidence for, in order to explain the world as we observe it.

And the Anthropic Principle: the laws of physics are so finely tuned in terms of physics to allow our present world that such conditions are extremely improbable.

And life arising spontaneously. There is a bigger jump in complexity from the non-living to the first bacteria than there is from bacteria to Homo sapiens. The evolutionists usually skip this one, or do "scientific handwaving" and claim it occurs, but don't have an explanation.

Now, nothing in this proves there is a God...but it does make the absence of one extremely improbable. But if your belief system is closed, if you only believe in natural causation, you have excluded anything Supernatural, then you won't believe in God. But you are starting with your conclusion, and then reasoning to it.