What psychological damage, if any, is caused by the teaching to children concepts like Hell and original sin?

The idea of "original sin" is in and of itself very sinful, because children are born perfect! I think the damage to the psyche is probably significant if the religious rants of parents and others who surround the children are sustained over a period of time. The impact would be more than say "The Boogie Man", who is supposed to jump out from under your bed and devour you, if you are not a well behaved little child. First of all, a young child can't comprehend an idea like "original sin", but they know that for some reason they are not good enough. It's terribly oppressive and negative! This idea is a crime. I'm guessing that the idea of Hell is more likely to be scary to older children, and just plain confusing to younger ones. I am an Agnostic, who had a Christian cultural background.

No psychological damage can ever be inflicted by a mere concept. The cause of psychological trauma is experiencing a situation that overwhelms a person's ability to cope with what is happening.

The ability to cope is shaped by concepts, so concepts have a role in psychological trauma, but not in the way the question implicitly assumes. The question assumes that concepts are like an object that can be used like a weapon to cause damage to a child. That is wrong.

Concepts operate like filters for experiences. Everyone has a set of filters through which they perceive the world and they have no choice about using them or not. Filters all include some information and exclude other information. The only questions are what kinds of filters to use and what information to include and exclude.

Trauma occurs when the reality of a situation is so overwhelmingly at odds with a person's filters that they malfunction. If a person is a camera then it would be like having only the regular clear glass lens and pointing the camera directly into the sun. The result is a blinding whiteness that could potentially cause damage to the film that records the scene the camera is pointed at.

If you put a dark filter in front of the lens then you will do better in the sun light but when it gets dark if do not change lenses then you will have equally dysfunctional problems.

The potential danger from concepts like "original sin" and "hell" are when they become defining aspects of a person's world view (the lens and filter they look through) and then they are put in a situation in which that world view cannot help them explain or understand what is happening to them in reality (they are in darkness with the dark filter on or in direct sun shine without it.)

Another potential danger is that a world view inherently causes a person to teach children according to that world view. A world view based on concepts of human nature primarily defined by "original sin" and "hell" probably do not have much, if any, developmental sophistication to help judge what teaching practices are age-appropriate. Therefore, they may inadvertently traumatize a child with inappropriate teaching practices while under the influence of concepts like "original sin" and "hell". Using the metaphor; the teacher has their dark filter on and then uses a flash pointed directly into the child's bare lens, the resulting image looks fine for the adult, but causes a blinding (and potentially damaging) moment in the child's experience.

Once again, it is not the concepts that cause psychological damage. When a teacher has inappropriate expectations of children based on their sincerely held beliefs about people and the world (possibly shaped by the concepts of "original sin" and "hell") then they may inadvertently chose to put a child in a situation that turns out to be traumatic.

In Unitarian Universalism, which is the type of church I attend, there is acceptance of the fact that the concepts of "original sin" and "hell" exist (although few UU's probably give them much credence.) Children are welcomed and encouraged to explore those ideas along with a great variety of other ideas along similar lines from religious traditions around the world. Those concepts are just concepts, that is, ways that we humans have formulated to help us to better understand how to create a more just and joyful world. I would encourage children to decide for themselves whether they find those concepts helpful or not in their quest for justice in the world and joy in their heart. To the degree that any concepts are helpful then they should be believed and to the degree they are hurtful they should be discarded.

Since so many people use those terms then it is impractical to try to eliminate them, and they are so limited in their applicability to everyday real life that I, personally, don't find them especially useful. So it seems best to simply understand them and help children understand them, too. As the children grow and develop they will have different understandings of the terms and how useful they are in their own lives, just as I have throughout my life.

It is the worst psychological damage that religious principles are distorted and twisted out of shape and brain-fed on children at the formative years of their life for which parents are real culprits who deserve intellectual whipping. This curse on humanity is passed from generations to generations and this link will never get severed as believers think that by believing in nonsense of this genre they are pleasing God expecting returns in blessings. If you talk against false faith you are treated as an outcaste and the community ire will fall on you. Children should be imparted with morals derived from all religions based on scientific truth and they should be able to think on their own. Then only a healthy society will develop. I am ashamed that even literates at the top succumb to false faith and practices. In Kerala, a state of high literacy in Indian standards I have seen a highly qualified Doctor donning the dress of a fashionable lady to invoke God's blessings. What a shame!

It depends on how it is taught. To force a child to believe he or she is evil is psychologically damaging. But, to teach children that they have the opportunity to be good beings is much more helpful than to focus on the dark side of religion.

nicely, i could agree. the western concept of unique sin does in fact impress rigidity problems and problems, even however that's no longer the area of the eastern church. i do no longer think of it would be something unlawful, however. we'd besides band all faith whilst we are at it. you won't be ready to exact enforce any such regulation. we'd actually ought to have government eyes in all families . that's exceptionally inane in case you think of approximately it. you won't be ready to remedy such problems via only making a regulation. that's the undertaking with american politics on the instant. we predict of we are able to alter the international via only making a regulation. the adjustments starts on the smallest ranges of society, no longer via attempting to alter the loads at as quickly as. the nice and snug button isn't implementing some regulation against a non secular coaching, the nice and snug button is figuring out the signs and indicators of rigidity, or different psychological abuse by way of college counselor, etc. and coping with it from their. no longer via breaking a persons' marvelous to prepare their faith and custom.

I don't think the CONCEPT of original sin and hell are damaging inherintly. I know the concepts, though I think them stupid.

Its what is done to teach them and to reinforce them.

IF you belong to a fundamentalist church, then likely damage is done, though perhaps subtle.

Probably none. Hell and sin are part of western civilization. It does depend, however, upon how it is taught. You could traumatize a kid if it's done improperly.

This depends on who you ask if you ask people from the religious right or if you ask someone from the far left.