Philo,

I have read an enormous amount of the works or Bertrand Russel and I have no memory of him praising the New Testament. No one denies that some small parts of the NT contain good thoughts, but they are just echoes of the thoughts that have existed through many millennia. Bert may have mentioned that none too astounding observation.

I must point out that Bertrand Russell had an unqualified diastase for religion and the disaster it is, and has been for humanity. He has been one of the greatest advocates for the primacy of reason that has ever existed.

I have the book by Bertrand Russell – Why I am not a Christian - and if you can direct me roughly to where such a sentiment is expressed, I will have a re-read.

David

It's beginning to sound like a cracked record Philo (if you can remember such things) but I find it necessary to keep reminding you of the simple things:

>>Be sure to mention to your child that belief in God is not about belief in a being, but belief in the ideals of character, behaviour and attitudes. These are better demonstrated by example than by teaching.<<

The point that non-religionists are making, Philo, over and over again, is that it is possible to teach children the ideals of character, behaviour and attitudes without mentioning God at all.

It is also possible to provide examples, without finding it necessary to introduce the idea that there exists some judgmental supreme being who will punish you for misbehaving. Parents are ideally placed to fulfill all those roles - the example, the judgment, the punishment and the love that goes with it - without having to introduce an imaginary third party.

>>Even the atheist Bertram Russell encouraged this, he said teach a child the principles of the New Testament to children<<

According to his daughter Katherine Tait, Bertrand Russell gave her a lousy introduction to the Bible.

"When [Russell] wanted to attack religion, he sought out its most egregious errors [in the New Testament] and held them up to ridicule, while avoiding serious discussion of the basic message" (Katharine Tait "My Father Bertrand Russell" 1975)

>>The statement is from his own writings. If I get time and can cite the passage I will give the title of his book and page.<<

I look forward to comparing the two versions.

Incidentally, "Why I'm Not a Christian" was originally a speech that was later reproduced as an essay. If you'ld like to look through it again to refresh your memory, here it is.

http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

Have a great day.

I wrote a poem quite some time ago about raising children, thought I'd share it here ... hope that's ok.

Architect of a Generation

I was given inspiration
From an unexpected source
The setting of an old wares store
Proved the unlikely resource

A woman spoke to me of children
And advice given by her mum
Passed to her many years ago
At the birth of her new born son

She proceeded to explain
Though her mum was not profound
That those words offered early
For her life she has been bound …

"A child's not property
A child you cannot own
Though you'll spend years creating
It more a kind of loan"

"A child's like a building
Your job’s to build the base
They will provide the structure
That's offered to the human race"

So as the architect of a generation
Ensure the supports are sound
For within another thirty years
Their turn will come around.

Dear Corri,

Your poem was great - and very apt.

I believe that a newborn baby is an absolutely unique person.
Various studies have shown that newborn babies are decidedly different from one another in many ways: in passivity or aggressiveness; in sensitivity to light, sound, or touch; in th zeal with which they attack the nipple or bottle; in temperament; in the tonus of their muscles; in blood chemistry; and in hormonal balance.

The pattern of hunger and crying in my two male children was notably different when they were newly born infants. My older son, woke up hungry, he announced this fact by letting out an ear-shattering cry which could be heard for blocks and which lasted until my breast was in his mouth. But, when my younger son was a baby he exhibited a completely different pattern. He woke up and played happily by himself
for a few minutes. When he began to announce his hunger, he reminded me of one of those alarm clocks that purr softly at first and finally work up to an ear-chilling blast if you don't pay attention to the first gentle warning. He would begin by crying softly, and only cry in earnest if these first gentle cries were not heeded.

Here we have two children, both males, both products of the same general genetic inheritance, who are nevertheless vastly different, even from the day of birth, in their psychological characteristics and behaviour patterns. And I believe each child is just as different.
We have to respect each child's individuality .

Each child is a unique combination of genes which has never existed before on this planet and never will again. They are also growing up in a unique psychological environment because of their position in the family. This combination of unique genes plus unique environment means that, in the strictest sense of the word, each child in the family is as unique as his/her fingerprints. And, they deserve to be treated that way. We need to respect their uniqueness.

Corri,

How kind of you to share your poem - your intimate thoughts - with us. For me it was a reminder that these forums for self-expression are opportunities for showing the very best one is capable of as well as the careless and mean-spirited sides of one's character.

Pericles,
The point that I am making is that all these attributes are essentially in every way the image of God incarnate. They are spiritual attributes that relate to moral and ethical purity found in God incarnate. They are the standard, the ideal to be found in the perfect human, and as human we all fall short. As God he is to be admired and to whom we aspire.

Quote, "The point that non-religionists are making, Philo, over and over again, is that it is possible to teach children the ideals of character, behaviour and attitudes without mentioning God at all."

I suppose on that definitive point you dismiss Buddaism as being classified a religion, because it does not mention God. Religion is the system of personal practices, Theism is belief in gods / God. Some religions are predicated upon belief in gods / God as external being/s for human behaviours direct or postponed reward or punishment. Perseverence in good character inspite of ridicule and persecution will ultimately shine as the right way - it is the eternal crown of life.

From your statement below on Bertrand Russell's education of his daughter we can well recognise a child's mind is not merely a blank page where children reproduce or believe taught lines, but are able themselves to balanced fact from fiction. Russell on facts of Christianity was obviously bitter and unbalanced. Since he believed he had lost a grandparent to some Churches lime pit never to be seen again. This unsubstantiated belief grossly coloured his emotions and emotive conclusions about Christianity.

Quote,
"According to his daughter Katherine Tait, Bertrand Russell gave her a lousy introduction to the Bible.

"When [Russell] wanted to attack religion, he sought out its most egregious errors [in the New Testament] and held them up to ridicule, while avoiding serious discussion of the basic message" (Katharine Tait "My Father Bertrand Russell" 1975)"

Note: I have uncovered several of Russell's books and are currently glancing through them. His own education certainly did not exclude reading the Bible, even though he focuses upon things he finds conflict with.