Children are born believers in God, academic claims

[M.D. Rawlings]

The Telegraph
By Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent
2:54PM GMT 24 Nov 2008


Children are "born believers" in God and do not simply acquire religious beliefs through indoctrination, according to an academic. Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford's Centre for Anthropology and Mind, claims that young people have a predisposition to believe in a supreme being because they assume that everything in the world was created with a purpose.


Children are born believers in God, academic claims - Telegraph

_______________________

Naturally, the default position has always been theism given the atheist's logically indefensible ontology and pathological intellectual dishonesty. Atheism truly is the gravest depravity.

 

[TNHarley]

Lol

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Are born believing in Santa, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy too?

Seriously - to a child, god, santa, whatever, its all the same. They don't learn that its all a pile of silly fantasies until later. And, when they do learn that, its the result of a shit load of guilt being piled on by such intellectual giants as their Aunt Martha.

On this one (and ONLY on this one), I agree with TNharley.

 

[MaryL]

When you are a child, your parents are GOD. I think that a supreme being becomes a surrogate parental figure, and religion like a surrogate family. One day you outgrow your family and your parents no longer seem godlike. Children are true believers. They then grow up to be rational independent thinkers.

 

[TNHarley]

Are born believing in Santa, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy too?

Seriously - to a child, god, santa, whatever, its all the same. They don't learn that its all a pile of silly fantasies until later. And, when they do learn that, its the result of a shit load of guilt being piled on by such intellectual giants as their Aunt Martha.

On this one (and ONLY on this one), I agree with TNharley.

 

[Avatar4321]

Your premise completely contradicts what the Scriptures teach:

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17)

If people were born with faith, then why did Paul say it came from hearing the Word of God?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Kids also have a predisposition for liking boogers and making my iPhone sticky.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Kids also have a predisposition for liking boogers and making my iPhone sticky.

They can't help it.

Kids are born sticky.

 

[varelse]

Children also think their stuffed animals have minds of their own. It's the same reason we tend to think our computers are purposefully misbehaving- we seek explanations to events by projecting our own nature and motivations upon the outside world.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

When you are a child, your parents are GOD. I think that a supreme being becomes a surrogate parental figure, and religion like a surrogate family. One day you outgrow your family and your parents no longer seem godlike. Children are true believers. They then grow up to be rational independent thinkers.

Well, first of all, let us dispense with the sloganeering of the new atheism and get real. Atheism is sheer irrationality and spiritual suicide.

From my blog:

For those of you who believe in nothing and, therefore, are easily deceived by almost anything, atheistic scientists like Lawrence Krauss who intentionally muddle ontological distinctions, merely to get a rise out of the philosophers and theologians they detest, do a disservice to science. Whether in jest or not, it's irresponsible. They dishonor their profession and treat us all with contempt when they imply that the problem of existence is strictly a scientific matter. Atheists, whether they be accomplished scientists or not, are notoriously bad thinkers outside the comfort zone of their presumptuous metaphysics and are theologically illiterate bumpkins to boot. . . . The vacuum of quantum mechanics is not an ontological nothingness and does not resolve the problem of an infinite regress of contingent entities.

This impression comes to us immediately and all at once: either (1) the universe has always existed in some form or another, in some dimensional estate or another, or (2) it was caused to exist by a being who has always existed, a necessarily transcendent being of unlimited genius and power. In other words, the First Cause is either inanimate or sentient, immanent or transcendent.

That does not mean, however, that this objectively apparent impression constitutes a proof for either alternative. It demonstrates that it's at the base of knowledge, that it's derived from reason, not faith.

I have no interest in proving God's existence to anyone, just in demonstrating the absurdities that arise from the denial of the possibility, which, incidentally, do not plague the bald assertion that God must be whatsoever. The reason for this is self-evident: the idea of God pertains to the origin of the universe, not to its nonexistence, while the unqualified denial of God's existence detours around an inescapable imperative: the undeniable possibility. The former stems from larger considerations that do not interrupt the natural course of logic; the latter is akin to the blind devotion of religious fanaticism. —Michael David Rawlings

Except ye become as a little child, ye shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God (Mat.18:3)!

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Your premise completely contradicts what the Scriptures teach:

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17)

If people were born with faith, then why did Paul say it came from hearing the Word of God?

Be careful that you do not mishandle the word of God and become a stumbling block for those who would seek Him. That’s dangerous ground to tread on.

Now the Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the last times some will turn away from the true faith; they will follow deceptive spirits and teachings that come from demons (I Tim. 4:1).

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (II Tim. 2:15).

In the context that you site, Paul is clearly talking about the faith of the gospel of Jesus Christ unto salvation. I’m talking about that simple understanding about divinity from childhood related to the first principles of reality/apprehension, unsullied by that old depravity of worldly arrogance and pride that foolishly pretends to be above it all, but in truth spouts nothing but irrational stupidities. I am talking about that which intellectual honesty necessarily acknowledges.


In unison with Paul, I am talking about the following:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools . . . (Rom. 1:18-22).

Clearly, it is you who would make Paul out to be contradicting himself, not I. Context matters!

As Paul shows and as I demonstrate in the above excerpt from my blog, faith has nothing whatsoever to do with the recognition that God is or must be, and that we all fall short of His righteousness: these are not matters of faith; they are the stuff of reason, inherently self-evident to all. In this instance, Paul is making a simple philosophical observation regarding that which is universally understood by all prior to the saving faith of the gospel unto life everlasting. He is talking about the foundation of the hierarchy of true knowledge, which entails the apprehension of certain propositions. These are both rational and empirical impressions: recognized, processed, assimilated and integrated in obedience to the innate logical imperatives of the comprehensive expression of identity (the classical laws of logic) and the operational aspects of cognition . . . or not.

God’s existence cannot be rationally denied outright. There is nothing reasonable, rational or enlightened about atheism whatsoever!

Suffer the little children to come unto Me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. (Mk.10:14).


Except ye become as a little child, ye shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God (Mat.18:3).

Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven (Mat. 18:10).

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Are born believing in Santa, the easter bunny and the tooth fairy too?

Seriously - to a child, god, santa, whatever, its all the same. They don't learn that its all a pile of silly fantasies until later. And, when they do learn that, its the result of a shit load of guilt being piled on by such intellectual giants as their Aunt Martha.

On this one (and ONLY on this one), I agree with TNharley.

Pseudoscientific claptrap made up out of thin air. Opinion. Blather. Faith. What you think. What you say. Just whatever you want to believe and tell yourself. Humans are born believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny and the like?! Well, now, that's utter bull isn't it? In most every other sense, humans are born blank slates!

The problem of original is inescapably and universally self-evident! Talk that jive all you want. By all means, display the stupidity of the typical atheist. But only fools and the suicidal pretend that the sentient imperative of the problem of origin and morality are the mere stuff of fairy tales.

Piling on guilt? Nonsense. You are guilty. Atheists are the biggest hypocrites of all. Oh, the irony of their hypocrisy!

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23).

As it is written:

There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways, and the way of peace they do not know. There is no fear of God before their eyes (Romans 3: 10-18)

Repent. The day of salvation is now! God loves you, but hell and evil will not reside with God, the Holy angels and those made by the sinless Lamb of God. Get real with Him now!

 

[Hollie]

Your premise completely contradicts what the Scriptures teach:

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17)

If people were born with faith, then why did Paul say it came from hearing the Word of God?

Be careful that you do not mishandle the word of God and become a stumbling block for those who would seek Him. That’s dangerous ground to tread on.

Now the Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the last times some will turn away from the true faith; they will follow deceptive spirits and teachings that come from demons (I Tim. 4:1).

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (II Tim. 2:15).

In the context that you site, Paul is clearly talking about the faith of the gospel of Jesus Christ unto salvation. I’m talking about that simple understanding about divinity from childhood related to the first principles of reality/apprehension, unsullied by that old depravity of worldly arrogance and pride that foolishly pretends to be above it all, but in truth spouts nothing but irrational stupidities. I am talking about that which intellectual honesty necessarily acknowledges.


In unison with Paul, I am talking about the following:

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools . . . (Rom. 1:18-22).

Clearly, it is you who would make Paul out to be contradicting himself, not I. Context matters!

As Paul shows and as I demonstrate in the above excerpt from my blog, faith has nothing whatsoever to do with the recognition that God is or must be, and that we all fall short of His righteousness: these are not matters of faith; they are the stuff of reason, inherently self-evident to all. In this instance, Paul is making a simple philosophical observation regarding that which is universally understood by all prior to the saving faith of the gospel unto life everlasting. He is talking about the foundation of the hierarchy of true knowledge, which entails the apprehension of certain propositions. These are both rational and empirical impressions: recognized, processed, assimilated and integrated in obedience to the innate logical imperatives of the comprehensive expression of identity (the classical laws of logic) and the operational aspects of cognition . . . or not.

God’s existence cannot be rationally denied outright. There is nothing reasonable, rational or enlightened about atheism whatsoever!

Suffer the little children to come unto Me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. (Mk.10:14).


Except ye become as a little child, ye shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God (Mat.18:3).

Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven (Mat. 18:10).

How is it possible that you missed the absurdity of claiming rationality can be employed to support a fully irrational assertion, ie: gods.

If you step back and objectively observe the comparison, you will see theists will reject the natural explanations over and over in favor of the supernatural assertions (they are hardly explanations), and they will always apply special pleadings when doing so. It's done in this thread-- despite clear evidence of various religions building themselves up on fraudulent terms (think about it: every religion other than your particular religion you must consider fraudulent else why aren't you a believer in them?), despite clear examples of such chicanery with people who are alive today who are doing it and culling the gullible, people exempt their particular religion from it as "being impossible".

People do this because they desire to believe in it, and will not apply the strictures of true knowledge to the claims. So every piece of evidence that comes along that truly dismantles your belief system, you must reject and escape into the special pleading loophole. In discussions I've had with so many other atheists, there is a very common theme--not a one of us would prefer no gods, we just don't find anything to support the claim there are gods (and there is evidence powerfully to the contrary).

The mantra of the theist regarding solid evidence of a completely natural existence absent any gods seems to be: "I don't care what evidence you got, I ain't believin' in it".

 

[Glensather]

Children aren't born believing in God. They aren't born believing in anything. From infancy, their first and primary concern is survival. They haven't developed any cognitive abilities yet. That comes a few months down the road.

Things like believing in God, or the lack thereof, aren't inherent behaviors. They are learned, for good or ill depending on what you do or don't believe.

 

[Underhill]

Children believe easily. And it makes perfect sense.

They have no knowledge. They are ignorant.

Which is yet another thing I've never understood. And I like most of what the Jesus of the bible said.

But admonishing people to be like children? Really? So you should be gullible? You should be accepting?

Answer me this, oh ye of great faith. Would your advise to the average adult in India or Pakistan be, "be like the little children"? Be accepting of the faith you are presented with? Because that is what a child would do.

A child is accepting of the easter bunny, Santa, imaginary friends and the tooth fairy.

But if you want to be like the little children, I have some land in upper Siberia I'd like to sell you.

 

[Underhill]

Children aren't born believing in God. They aren't born believing in anything. From infancy, their first and primary concern is survival. They haven't developed any cognitive abilities yet. That comes a few months down the road.

Things like believing in God, or the lack thereof, aren't inherent behaviors. They are learned, for good or ill depending on what you do or don't believe.

I would agree with that. But I think it's obvious that they have a propensity for accepting whatever they are told as fact.

 

[Mr. H.]

So a child raised by orangutangs would eventually contemplate the existence of a supreme being?

 

[koshergrl]

Yes.

Children are drawn to God naturally. Jesus addressed it, and the bible references it many times.

We are made in the image of God, and we are formed to love God. It is right and natural that we gravitate towards him.

Matt 19
"Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

 

[koshergrl]

"These words show, (1) that children are not, as some have taught, totally depraved; (2) that the earlier they come to Christ the better; (3) that they should not be hindered from coming by injudicious teaching; (4) that parents should bring them to the Savior."

Matthew 19:14 Jesus said, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these."

 

[koshergrl]

Your premise completely contradicts what the Scriptures teach:

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17)

If people were born with faith, then why did Paul say it came from hearing the Word of God?

Be careful that you do not mishandle the word of God and become a stumbling block for those who would seek Him. That’s dangerous ground to tread on.



In the context that you site, Paul is clearly talking about the faith of the gospel of Jesus Christ unto salvation. I’m talking about that simple understanding about divinity from childhood related to the first principles of reality/apprehension, unsullied by that old depravity of worldly arrogance and pride that foolishly pretends to be above it all, but in truth spouts nothing but irrational stupidities. I am talking about that which intellectual honesty necessarily acknowledges.


In unison with Paul, I am talking about the following:



Clearly, it is you who would make Paul out to be contradicting himself, not I. Context matters!

As Paul shows and as I demonstrate in the above excerpt from my blog, faith has nothing whatsoever to do with the recognition that God is or must be, and that we all fall short of His righteousness: these are not matters of faith; they are the stuff of reason, inherently self-evident to all. In this instance, Paul is making a simple philosophical observation regarding that which is universally understood by all prior to the saving faith of the gospel unto life everlasting. He is talking about the foundation of the hierarchy of true knowledge, which entails the apprehension of certain propositions. These are both rational and empirical impressions: recognized, processed, assimilated and integrated in obedience to the innate logical imperatives of the comprehensive expression of identity (the classical laws of logic) and the operational aspects of cognition . . . or not.

God’s existence cannot be rationally denied outright. There is nothing reasonable, rational or enlightened about atheism whatsoever!

Suffer the little children to come unto Me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven. (Mk.10:14).


Except ye become as a little child, ye shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of God (Mat.18:3).

Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven (Mat. 18:10).

How is it possible that you missed the absurdity of claiming rationality can be employed to support a fully irrational assertion, ie: gods.

If you step back and objectively observe the comparison, you will see theists will reject the natural explanations over and over in favor of the supernatural assertions (they are hardly explanations), and they will always apply special pleadings when doing so. It's done in this thread-- despite clear evidence of various religions building themselves up on fraudulent terms (think about it: every religion other than your particular religion you must consider fraudulent else why aren't you a believer in them?), despite clear examples of such chicanery with people who are alive today who are doing it and culling the gullible, people exempt their particular religion from it as "being impossible".

People do this because they desire to believe in it, and will not apply the strictures of true knowledge to the claims. So every piece of evidence that comes along that truly dismantles your belief system, you must reject and escape into the special pleading loophole. In discussions I've had with so many other atheists, there is a very common theme--not a one of us would prefer no gods, we just don't find anything to support the claim there are gods (and there is evidence powerfully to the contrary).

The mantra of the theist regarding solid evidence of a completely natural existence absent any gods seems to be: "I don't care what evidence you got, I ain't believin' in it".

I love the position you have taken that you are more knowledgeable than anyone who believes.

So are you more knowledgeable than the Oxford academic? What are your creds?