They're all praying to the same god!

[betterman]

But thinking about babies as that was the specific point, do you believe it's even vaguely possible (let's pretend God exists for a moment) that babies are born 'believing' or does belief require some cognitive thinking processes beyond natural survival instinct that babies have?

 

Assuming that God does exist and did create everything giving people a soul, and does want worshipping, I would presume babies would be born with belief imprinted on the soul.

[Chelle-82]

I agree, that really wasn't the place for that discussion.

 

There is a distinction though between a belief and a person who holds that belief.

 

Ironically, the Catholic church does accept evolution.

 

Yeah, you try telling that to a 94yr old Irish Catholic woman!!

[Jonny5]

Assuming that God does exist and did create everything giving people a soul, and does want worshipping, I would presume babies would be born with belief imprinted on the soul.

No. Too easy.

 

God wants us to prove that we believe in him so he gives us free will. Believe in him and get beamed up to heaven. Don't and see how you like it in Hell suckers!!!

[DnAuK]

I agree, that really wasn't the place for that discussion.

 

There is a distinction though between a belief and a person who holds that belief.

 

Ironically, the Catholic church does accept evolution.

 

Talking of which...

 

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/genetics.htm

[RootsBooster]

But again we have no knowledge of this and atheism is an acquired state.

We do have knowledge of this, children are born and grow up all the time without belief in any gods. My son and I are just two examples.

In what way is atheism an acquired state?

Are you suggesting that we're born with a belief but forget about it before we reach an age of speech capability?

 

If anything, we can say we are more agnostic than atheist- if I had to pull in one direction.

Agnosticism requires at least a minimum of consideration/contemplation, so that wouldn't really work for a newborn.

Your question:

 

 

 

This is just circular- the OP did not even mention this to trigger my discussion.

 

It was more on his/her view that theuniverse had laws/somehow got there/science says God doesn't exist or something on those lines.

 

Your question is moot- I gave one strong reason on rationality, and have not had any solid and 'rational' answer.

 

This isn't even about number of gods etc. Its irrelevant.

 

YOu can say Kookiesminahadklal created the universe.

 

Call it god for all i care.

 

But point is we have to use our logic and rationality to understand the surroudings.

 

 

My religion does't interfere in that/or hinder my knowledge- its not even a discussion point.

 

In fact, it encourages me on to learn more.

 

Why do you think we have great scientists from the past who studied nature, astronomy, cosmology- because of atheism?

 

We only need basic food and shelter to survive. Not to study the cosmos etc.

 

This was done by people of religious backgrounds because many (especially the Muslim intellects like Ibn Al Haytham, Ibn Sina ) were spurred on by the intellectual basis of their religion.

 

The earliest Universities were all religious institutions that were built specifically because of religion.

 

Even the church, it was the biggest sponsor of astronomy since they needed calendars.

 

Seeking truth, knowledge, and studying nature are all religious ideas that come directly from religion- always has been.

 

Why is it that (some) theists write long responses in order to avoid answering questions?

I can't say I didn't expect it though.

Edited December 16, 2015 by RootsBooster

[Guest]

Is a human condition, it doesn't and never as needed relgion, its simply a coincidance that people were more relgiouse in the past befor they gained some truth and Knowledge.

 

 

Have you not even understood any part of my post on rationality?

 

Based on your worldview of atheism =naturalism/materialism, we are nothing but a process of random blind forces, molecules, physical particles etc.

 

So how do we account for our minds- our rationality?

 

There are hundreds if not millions of creatures/species that have survived better than us- basic survival has always been this goal (hence survival of the fittest).

 

So think about it, truth is not necessary for survival. Both truth and false beliefs can result in survival- to give you an example, its highly unlikely that the survival cockroaches has been due to them getting together and discussing quantum mechanics..

 

Whereas our survival has been due to learning, to better understand the universe and our planet.

 

To distinguish between fact and fiction/ truths and falsehoods/ reality and non reality.

 

So we have been given the ability to make rational decisions to survive- hence our knowledge is acquired through our senses and abilities to use logic and reason.

 

We would not be here otherwise and the atheism= naturalism/materialism worldview fails massively as to why this is the case.

 

In addition, we don't use science to gain knowledge on everything.

 

Some of you lean heavily towards scientism and this in itself has nothing to do with science.

Edited December 16, 2015 by Guest

[RootsBooster]

But thinking about babies as that was the specific point, do you believe it's even vaguely possible (let's pretend God exists for a moment) that babies are born 'believing' or does belief require some cognitive thinking processes beyond natural survival instinct that babies have?

 

Belief requires you to be convinced of something or accept something to be true.

[betterman]

Have you not even understood any part of my post on rationality?

 

Based on your worldview of atheism =naturalism/materialism, we are nothing but a process of random blind forces, molecules, physical particles etc.

 

So how do we account for our minds- our rationality?

 

There are hundreds if not millions of creatures/species that have survived better than us- basic survival has always been this goal (hence survival of the fittest).

 

So think about it, truth is not necessary for survival. Both truth and false beliefs can result in survival- to give you an example, its highly unlikely that the survival cockroaches has been due to them getting together and discussing quantum mechanics..

 

Whereas our survival has been due to learning, to better understand the universe and our planet.

 

To distinguish between fact and fiction/ truths and falsehoods/ reality and non reality.

 

So we have been given the ability to make rational decisions to survive- hence our knowledge is acquired through our senses and abilities to use logic and reason.

 

We would not be here otherwise and the atheism= naturalism/materialism worldview fails massively as to why this is the case.

 

In addition, we don't use science to gain knowledge on everything.

 

Some of you lean heavily towards scientism and this in itself has nothing to do with science.

 

You apear to think I haven't so maybe a better explanation is in order as well as an apolgy for calling me a liar.

[unbeliever]

Based on your worldview of atheism =naturalism/materialism, we are nothing but a process of random blind forces, molecules, physical particles etc.

 

 

Yes.

 

 

So how do we account for our minds- our rationality?

 

 

It allowed our ancestors to survive better in certain circumstances.

 

There are hundreds if not millions of creatures/species that have survived better than us- basic survival has always been this goal (hence survival of the fittest).

 

These creatures occupy a different niche to us. There are multiple legitimate survival strategies pursued in nature simultaneous. Some work, others don't. These other creatures pursued a valid, and successful survival strategy. Our ancestors pursued a different one. Both worked, hence both survived.

 

 

So think about it, truth is not necessary for survival. Both truth and false beliefs can result in survival- to give you an example, its highly unlikely that the survival cockroaches has been due to them getting together and discussing quantum mechanics..

 

Whereas our survival has been due to learning, to better understand the universe and our planet.

 

To distinguish between fact and fiction/ truths and falsehoods/ reality and non reality.

 

So we have been given the ability to make rational decisions to survive- hence our knowledge is acquired through our senses and abilities to use logic and reason.

 

We would not be here otherwise and the atheism= naturalism/materialism worldview fails massively as to why this is the case.

 

In addition, we don't use science to gain knowledge on everything.

 

Some of you lean heavily towards scientism and this in itself has nothing to do with science.

 

Yes. A lie can sometimes help you survive. That doesn't make the lie become truth.

[L00b]

How can rationality come from non rationality.

Through acquiring experiential, existential and learned knowledge, self-evidently.

 

Cognitive processes are entirely unconnected with religious beliefs.

 

Witness socio-economic evolution continuing apace throughout Western world in the face of ever dwindling religious faith and practice.

 

That's not atheism or scientism, it's just pragmatism at work: much of the religious beliefs and precepts that underpinned individual behaviour and social structuring in centuries and decades past, through ignorance and self-serving interpretation, are getting ever more redundant as that ignorance is indeed replaced by actual, practical and verifiable knowledge.

Edited December 16, 2015 by L00b