[moved from C&E] Religions call people Atheists.

[MoonLancer]

No, they're not.

When a child is born, he is born saved by grace through innocence.

When he reaches the age of accountability, and has the chance to be saved by grace through faith, and rejects it, he is lost.

Later, should he say in his heart, "There is no God", he becomes an atheist.

When a child is born do they lack the belief in god? Yes or No?

 

[MoonLancer]

Are they born atheist, or are they born incapable of having a belief either way?

You might think that very cleaver but Atheism is not a belief, but instead a lack of belief. All people who are is incapable of having a belief in God are an atheist.

Although in general your thinking is flawed. A child is born an atheist and stays that way until they are taught otherwise. Sometimes they stay atheist for their entire life. Sometimes they become a theist and then go back to being an atheist when they know better. It still does not change that Humans are born atheist.

 

[Naraoia]

You might think that very cleaver but Atheism is not a belief, but instead a lack of belief. All people who are is incapable of having a belief in God are an atheist.

Technically, yes, but is there a point in talking about (a)theism when the being in question is not capable of understanding the concept of gods? Is a slime mould an atheist? Well, technically, yes, but does that fact have any significance?

Although in general your thinking is flawed. A child is born an atheist and stays that way until they are taught otherwise.

See my last point/question. You simply can't know.

Sometimes they stay atheist for their entire life. Sometimes they become a theist and then go back to being an atheist when they know better. It still does not change that Humans are born atheist.

The point I was trying to make is that talking about atheism in babies is pretty meaningless.

 

[MoonLancer]

Technically, yes, but is there a point in talking about (a)theism when the being in question is not capable of understanding the concept of gods? Is a slime mould an atheist? Well, technically, yes, but does that fact have any significance?

It shows that children are not born theistic and must acquire and learn this trait. It also shows that it is only a written book and oral tradition (and people) influence people to be christian. Its not a magical thing people suddenly become. It also goes to show that atheism is the default position where theism is the position making any given claim. Athism doesn't need to be defended or shown to be true in anyway. This will always fall on the job of the theist. If they cannot demonstrate their position... oh well.

See my last point/question. You simply can't know.

i don't understand. explain.

The point I was trying to make is that talking about atheism in babies is pretty meaningless.

i disagree

 

[wensdee]

When a child is born, he is born saved by grace through innocence.

Is that sentiment also felt by the hundreds of other religions out there? or is it just peculiar to your religion?

 

[wensdee]

A baby is a blank canvas it takes the language and if the parents have a religion it's more than likely they will also take that.

The point I was trying to make is that talking about atheism in babies is pretty meaningless.

Atheisim in babies? If you think babies are born with a religion which religion do you think that is? that was a silly question because it's got to yours hasn't it? or whoever is reading this.

 

[Naraoia]

It shows that children are not born theistic and must acquire and learn this trait. It also shows that it is only a written book and oral tradition (and people) influence people to be christian.

Oh, I totally agree that people have to be taught about specific religions.

Its not a magical thing people suddenly become. It also goes to show that atheism is the default position where theism is the position making any given claim. Athism doesn't need to be defended or shown to be true in anyway.

The thing about this... yes, logically, theism is the positive claim, so logically, they should be coming up with the evidence. But practically, the vast majority of humanity is religious, so atheism is hardly a "default" position in that respect. It may be illogical, but it's the way people are.

i don't understand. explain.

You said that children become religious because of others teaching them.

Unfortunately, you don't know how a child's beliefs would develop without outside influence, because you can't rear children without outside influence.

For all we know, becoming religious may be the normal course of development for children reared in isolation. If that were the case, you couldn't claim that others cause religiousness (only that they cause adherence to particular religions).

i disagree

Then I guess we'll have to leave it at that.

 

[Targ]

Despite being a theist, I agree with Moon Lacer that atheism is the default position and that theism is something that has to be learned. When I was 2 years old, I didn't believe in a God because I was unable to comprehend it. It wasn't until I was a few years older that my parents and others started to teach me the evidences for theism and it was then and only then that I became a theist. I use the term atheism here as it refers to a lack of belief in a God (or literally 'a-theism' = without a belief in god(s)) and is the most suitable term to describe someone who has not grown old enough to comprehend the evidences for theism. Whether you are old enough to comprehend the evidences is irrelevant to whether the child either possesses or lacks a belief in god(s).

 

[keith99]

When a child is born they are born Atheist. This persists until someone convinces them otherwise. Normally parents who force it on them or friends and peers who pressure them.

Children also are born not knowing how to talk, or do math, or much of anything else until they are taught.

That is not limited to humans, cats learn how to hunt, as do all animals we would consider higher hunting animals I am aware of.

 

[Naraoia]

Atheisim in babies? If you think babies are born with a religion which religion do you think that is? that was a silly question because it's got to yours hasn't it? or whoever is reading this.

Go back to this post, please. Then you'll understand why your question completely missed the point.

 

[wensdee]

But practically, the vast majority of humanity is religious, so atheism is hardly a "default" position in that respect. It may be illogical, but it's the way people are.

Atheism has got to be the default position because the vast majority of humanity does not raise your child, you do,
the child doesn't know humanity exists, you give your child your religion if you have one, no one else, if you don't have a religion the child will grow up without religion because you wont expose it to religion, in later years depending on how secure the child feels it might feel the need to go out and look for religion otherwise it will stay without a religion.

 

[Naraoia]

A baby is a blank canvas it takes the language and if the parents have a religion it's more than likely they will also take that.

Which doesn't answer the question you quoted.

 

[dlamberth]

If there were no religions there would be no Atheists because not believing in a god is the default state.
People bring forward their religions and when ANYONE disagrees with that religion they are branded as Atheists.
EVERYONE in this world is an Atheist to some degree.
If you don't like the word Atheist what would you call someone who doesn't believe in your religion?

If you disagree with these statements please tell us why.

Personally, I feel that for the human being the default state IS awareness of a higher conscioiusness of some sort.

Thought I'm a lover of God, there are no "beliefs" in my spiritual path. As such I have no word that describes someone who does not believe what I know and experience.

 

[Naraoia]

Atheism has got to be the default position because the vast majority of humanity does not raise your child, you do,

Non sequitur, and I think you missed my point.

you give your child your religion if you have one, no one else, if you don't have a religion the child will grow up without religion because you wont expose it to religion, in later years depending on how secure the child feels it might feel the need to go out and look for religion otherwise it will stay without a religion.

So let me translate. Without a religious upbringing, a child may or may not become religious. And that demonstrates what? There are still a bazillion different influences that can push someone one way or another. You can't remove them. You can't tell what would happen without them.

(And I would bet you also don't have any data about that insecurity thing.)

 

[Naraoia]

(Why the heck do I always end up playing dev... er, religion's advocate in these threads? )

 

[wensdee]

Personally, I feel that for the human being the default state IS awareness of a higher conscioiusness of some sort.

Children have been kept with dogs in India and they grow up thinking they are dogs, there was no awareness of a higher conscioiusness of some sort there I'm afraid, they raise dogs in Italy who think they are sheep, they even look like sheep. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maremma_Sheepdog

Thought I'm a lover of God, there are no "beliefs" in my spiritual path. As such I have no word that describes someone who does not believe what I know and experience.

Good for you.

 

[MoonLancer]

Unfortunately, you don't know how a child's beliefs would develop without outside influence, because you can't rear children without outside influence.

For all we know, becoming religious may be the normal course of development for children reared in isolation. If that were the case, you couldn't claim that others cause religiousness (only that they cause adherence to particular religions).

There have been a few cases of children being raised in the wild without parents. So from that we can in fact know what people are like without culture.

Through anthropology i think its quite possible for us to know. To add on to this, Anthropology is a science and can be used to answer these questions.

I think humans desire to explain what they dont understand and tend to fill in the gaps. I dont think this is religious but i think religion was born from this.

People also wish to be accepted into social structures because we are social animals. Again i don't think this is religion but tends to foster religion.

 

[MoonLancer]

Personally, I feel that for the human being the default state IS awareness of a higher conscioiusness of some sort.

Humans faces on things they do not understand. They are aware of our own consciousnesses and apply that to the universe in order to feel not so alone when looking up into the nights sky, or over looking a vast landscape. I do not think this means babies and children are aware of a higher consciousness. I do in fact think that they will project their conciseness on to the world though. And so is the way of religion. This explains perfectly why god in the old testament sounds and acts like a human with super powers.

 

[AV1611VET]

Is that sentiment also felt by the hundreds of other religions out there? or is it just peculiar to your religion?

You decide:

The concept of the age of accountability comes from Romans 7 in the Bible. In Romans 7, the apostle Paul states that there was a time when he "was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died." This is the idea that a period of time exists as a small child before one has the mental ability to grasp and truly understand the laws of God. During the time of innocence one is spiritually alive because God does not hold them accountable. A child who has passed the age of accountability is said to know the difference between right and wrong and to be capable of obeying the moral laws of God. Some Christian traditions believe that the age of accountability is the end of a period of early grace (prevenient grace, in Wesleyan traditions) which covers over the sins of those not capable of knowing the moral consequences of their actions (persons who, due to developmental disability, mental or emotional development, will never reach a sufficient level of abstract reason, are covered by this grace for life and are sometimes known as 'the innocents').
In Christian traditions that practice Believer's Baptism (baptism by voluntary decision, as opposed to baptism in early infancy), the ritual can be carried out after the age of accountability has arrived. Some traditions withhold the rite of Holy Communion from those not yet at the age of accountability, on the grounds that children do not understand what the sacrament means. Full membership in the Church, if not bestowed at birth, often must wait until the age of accountability and frequently is granted only after a period of preparation known as catechesis.

The time of innocence before one has the ability to understand truly the laws of God and that God sees one as innocent is also seen as applying to individuals who suffer from a mental disability which prevents them from ever reaching an time when they are capable of understanding the laws of God. These individuals are thus seen as existing in a perpetual state of innocence by the grace of God.

SOURCE

 

[wensdee]

So let me translate. Without a religious upbringing, a child may or may not become religious.

A child will not become religious unless it is pointed at religion because a child would not know what religion was or what it was for.

(And I would bet you also don't have any data about that insecurity thing.)

Why would anyone seek out religion unless they felt a need for companionship, comfort or forgiveness? all of which can be got from friends, have no friends? then they need to go find a religion.