Originally posted by FMF
No. The topic you raised was your child and your belief in the afterlife. I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent. How I talk to my children is not on in play here. Suffice to say that I have no doubt that the way I deal with them is not always coherent either.
if [God] cares about us, [why] might [He] let bad things happen ecided was a "satisfactory response" struck me as being not a "satisfactory response".
I responded that I found what you claimed to be doing was not coherent.
I get that, but the part of my post you won't respond to argues that what I claimed to be doing is in fact
not incoherent.
How I talk to my children is not on in play here.
Consider it hypothetical then, it really doesn't matter:
A child of atheistic parents starts to question the atheistic account of how the universe works. Let's say he becomes convinced that the universe could not have begun on its own—that there must be a God. Would it be right to squash that moment of freethinking? Or would it be right to allow him the room to explore the idea further? If the atheist parents were interested in 'protecting the sanctity of the child's mind', they would allow him to continue in his belief. Of course, that wouldn't mean they'd have to abandon their own beliefs,
nor remain silent on the issue.
Similarly in my case.
"Bad things" in the human world, like injustice - for instance - mostly have political causes and political solutions. I don't see why children have to be encouraged to think that the causes and solutions are supernatural.
Undoubtedly, some 'bad things' are political in nature, but not all. When my daughter asks why God allows bad things to happen to us if God loves us, surely she isn't thinking of bad things of a political nature. More likely, things like tornadoes, lightning bolts and other freak accidents.
But, as I said, I have no wish to dictate to you whether you should tell your children things you know to be the truth or whether to tell them things you hope are true. None of my business, except in so far as what you revealed struck me as incoherent and what you decided was a "satisfactory response" struck me as being not a "satisfactory response".
In fact, I indicated the opposite, that the response I gave didn't strike me as satisfactory at all.
In truth, I don't know if there
is a satisfactory response to the problem of evil. The best anyone can do, I think, is show how the existence of evil doesn't
necessarily preclude the existence of a loving Creator, but that type of esoteric argument I don't think lends itself to a
satisfactory answer. It is understandable how the problem of evil might be a deal-breaker for some people.
If my daughter wants information from me regarding why God allows such things to happen to us, of course I'm going to give the best answer possible (as she does believe in God). Whether my answer is ultimately satisfactory for her remains to be seen. The point of my original post being, if it isn't ultimately satisfactory for her, I'm comfortable with her being true to her own instincts. All in all, you haven't provided me a good reason to think there is anything incoherent about my position.