>>I don't know their ages. Do you force them to pray? Do you allow or even stimulate them to make a choice of their own? Is there an implicit or explicit pressure upon them to choose for your God of the Bible? Do you discuss the Bible, or is it enough to explain the Bible? (The Jews discuss their holy book, rather than explain it.)
>
>I do not force them to pray.
>
>As far as stimulating them to make other choices, we frequently bring things up - even things you guys bring up here - and discuss them around dinner. They are made aware of these other thoughts - but - I always give them the Biblical response and make sure they understand that. They are allowed to reject it - but have not as of this time.
>
>As to the pressure issue - yes - I suppose by teaching them from the Bible and living my life in the way I do, there is some "pressure" for them to emulate that.
>
>We discuss (and explain) the Bible often. They raise questions that sometimes require me to do some research to get an answer for them.
>
>They are not being forced to believe anything.

I still don't know their ages, but at least it all sounds not too oppressing.


[snip]
>Let me ask you - in what do you place your trust? Where do you go to find answers to life's issues? How do you know that the places you go are truthful? How do you know what to trust and what not to trust?

I place trust in myself and in people who've shown to me they can be trusted. I also often begin with trust. And I place trust in the methods of science. But on the other hand, I have become increasingly aware of the vulnerability of my thinking. I know I am making errors every day. Take computer programming. Every x lines I make an error, every x designs I appear to have made a wrong assumption. The nice thing about programming/designing is that the computer tells us, sooner or later, that we're wrong (and without yelling at us) and we can't tell the computer that HE is wrong. Also nice is that we can repair things quite easilly.

For answers to life's issues I go to philosophers, psychologists, friends, relatives, books, the UT, weblogs, discussion groups, myself.

The places I go to are not always trustful. But that is not always a bad thing. For example, you are not trustful (meaning that your answers cannot be the truth, in my logical system), but nevertheless you inspire me to reconsider certain presumptions. The consequence may be that I change a presumption. In time the insights change. I dare to say that the overall quality of my opinions has improved in time. I even dare to say that some of my current opinions next year will have been replaced by contrary opinions. No dogmas for me.

What I thought of: The pleasant thing about your belief must be that it's a win-win-win-win situation. If you're right about the supposed precondition for Heaven, then you'll get in. If on the other hand everybody will go to heaven, then you'll get in also. And if hell doesn't exist, then you'll not get in hell also. And if both heaven and hell don't exist, well, then you'll not notice it also.