# Noone is born atheist **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 20, 2008, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049 "2008-12-20T07:03:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/61 "2008-12-20T20:18:32Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Simply because they claim to see and think more about these does not necessarily mean they’re more attuned to it, or have a greater ability to do so. If one group (children) consistently and independently arrives at the conclusion that there are supernatural beings while the other group (adults) consistently uses authority over the first group to convince them otherwise, it seems reasonable to more believe the first group and disregard the second. Think of how the world seemed far different when you were a child, and how teachings of man molded us to conform with adult group think, how when someone steps out of line they are ridiculed in a attempt to bring them back in line. There is unquestionable brainwashing of people against the supernatural. > [@](#): > > I think it’s sort of like your belief that the gods other than the Christian God who are worshipped are real, because of your belief that there are spirits and lesser god-type beings who masquerade as gods. Just because it is a possibility, does not mean it is so. For example, imagine a child who sees a large black dog out of their window at night. They might become convinced that it is actually a monster of some kind; that they from then on believe in monsters doesn’t mean that it is based on a true understanding or ability to see monsters for what they really are. To put it another way, that very well might be simply another illusion, though different from the one most of us have. Or OTOH that large black dog, which may appear like a normal animal could be demonized, the child picking up on the demon. We try to convince them otherwise showing them the dog, petting the dog, saying good dog, grounding the child to use physical senses and ignore spiritual perception. > [@](#): > > How is it you’re able to determine the difference between those children who honestly do see and know of spirits, ghosts etc. and those who have come by that conception through false means? And how do you know that children, in general, are so certainly one over the other? If a child is truly bothered by something I believe that can be detected by the true parent. If a child is acting out, for perhaps attention, that child is experiencing a form of isolation, which in itself is a issue that needs to be addressed and may be spiritual in nature. I’m not exactly sure of the meaning of your last question but children have limited ability to communicate, and it is hard to describe the spiritual in our language even for adults - just look at the book of Revelation. They use what they can to describe it. [QUOTE=Olentzero] kanicbird, you haven’t addressed the question of where that knowledge exists, prior to there being a brain for that knowledge to exist in. Where does this supposed a priori knowledge of God exist before the embryo develops into a fetus with a brain? [/QUOTE] The Word says that God forms us underground (Ps 139 v15), there are scriptures about people being away from the body (2 Cor 12:2, 2 Cor 5:9, Rev 1:10), and these people seem to be able to think and remember events. The knowledge would exist outside our physical world, the physical body just allows interaction of our soul with this world. If part of our body is damaged, we lose that ability to interact w/ the physical world in that matter. [QUOTE=Captain\_Haddock] Religion may persist for a variety of sociological and psychological predispositions in certain individuals, but an innate sense of god from birth isn’t something I experienced. [/QUOTE] I said that the innate sense of God comes from conception, not birth. ---
**Author:** ![Indistinguishable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/90ced4/32.png) [@Indistinguishable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indistinguishable)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/62 "2008-12-20T20:31:56Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > If one group (children) consistently and independently arrives at the conclusion that there are supernatural beings while the other group (adults) consistently uses authority over the first group to convince them otherwise, it seems reasonable to more believe the first group and disregard the second. Perhaps, but I am not convinced that this accurately describes the situation with children and theism. In my limited anecdotal experience, I have never observed a child to speak of a concept such as God without having first been told of such a thing by others. There is some difficulty in gathering evidence more rigorously on this matter, but we might at least note that, for most of history, the prevailing belief was in polytheism, suggesting that if man has any naturally non-atheistic tendencies, they are not necessarily headed towards monotheism either, and thus (depending on what one takes to be the truth), not necessarily all-that-reliable indicators of the truth. Expanding on this last point, we can see in other ways that the quoted proposal would not always make for an accurate litmus test: I believe children have been observed to spontaneously create belief in such things as monsters under their bed, as well as, in a different vein, in conclusions such as the flatness of the Earth, things which we by and large consider false now, though, particularly in the latter case, this is because most of us were as children led out of such original beliefs by explicit instruction. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/63 "2008-12-20T20:49:45Z")
> [@Indistinguishable](#): > > Expanding on this last point, we can see in other ways that the quoted proposal would not always make for an accurate litmus test: I believe children have been observed to spontaneously create belief in such things as monsters under their bed, as well as, in a different vein, in conclusions such as the flatness of the Earth, things which we by and large consider false now, though, particularly in the latter case, this is because most of us were as children led out of such original beliefs by explicit instruction. My contention is that we know God from **conception** , and we have mostly forgotten God by **birth**. This does not rule out other spiritual beings, which I suspect heavily influence us away from God, as that is their intention. The flatness of the earth, and for that matter earth centric theory (sun revolves around the earth), is a worldly point of view, it puts the earth first, and, in analogy putting self first. The earth around the sun puts perspective back on God (Son) and lessens our self importants. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/64 "2008-12-20T20:53:27Z")
Going a bit further, did you ever go someplace and you just felt a evil or cold feeling, you sense something bad about a area? Then you look around, and convince yourself that there is nothing wrong with that area. Adults have been trained to do this, and convince each other to do the same, reasoning away the feelings. I think most people could attest to having a evil feeling about a place or even person at some point of their lives, and by grounding ourselves in our sense we tend to ignore that feeling. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/65 "2008-12-20T20:54:24Z")
FYI, no one has a brain “at conception,” therefore there is no capacity to"know" or believe a damn thing. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/66 "2008-12-20T20:55:28Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Going a bit further, did you ever go someplace and you just felt a evil or cold feeling, you sense something bad about a area? Nope. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/67 "2008-12-20T21:02:13Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > If one group (children) consistently and independently arrives at the conclusion that there are supernatural beings while the other group (adults) consistently uses authority over the first group to convince them otherwise, it seems reasonable to more believe the first group and disregard the second. Not really. I mean, as a child I thought that if you buried toys, they’d grow into a toy tree (you can imagine the frustration of that particular one not being true). Children as a whole also quite consistently and independently come to misunderstandings and misconceptions about the world, which adults attempt to correct. I mean, put another way, i’ve independently arrived at the conclusion that God does not exist, and you’ve attempted to use the authority of the Bible and God to convince me otherwise - does that mean it is reasonable to more believe me? I wouldn’t say so. And beyond that, believing that things exist does not mean that all examples that might be of it are it. You believe that God may influence people to do his work; does that mean that each and every person who claims God has influenced them towards a certain path is correct? Something being possible doesn’t mean it is _always_ the case. > [@](#): > > Think of how the world seemed far different when you were a child, and how teachings of man molded us to conform with adult group think, how when someone steps out of line they are ridiculed in a attempt to bring them back in line. Actually, I personally as a child didn’t tend to believe in the supernatural (my fears were, and pretty much still are, more natural in nature). I’m told my reaction to being told Santa wasn’t real was to say I already had figured that one out. As well as that, both you and I hold beliefs we’ve been ridiculed for, yet continued to believe. > [@](#): > > There is unquestionable brainwashing of people against the supernatural. Out of interest, what, in your mind, is the difference between teaching and brainwashing? And is brainwashing always a wrong thing to do? > [@](#): > > Or OTOH that large black dog, which may appear like a normal animal could be demonized, the child picking up on the demon. We try to convince them otherwise showing them the dog, petting the dog, saying good dog, grounding the child to use physical senses and ignore spiritual perception. Yes, it may be so. But it may be not. That’s my point. It could be a demonically possessed dog; it could just be a dog. We can’t look at all cases of children assuming dogs are demonically influenced and conclude that they’re all correct. > [@](#): > > If a child is truly bothered by something I believe that can be detected by the true parent. If a child is acting out, for perhaps attention, that child is experiencing a form of isolation, which in itself is a issue that needs to be addressed and may be spiritual in nature. What do you mean by the “true parent”? > [@](#): > > I’m not exactly sure of the meaning of your last question but children have limited ability to communicate, and it is hard to describe the spiritual in our language even for adults - just look at the book of Revelation. They use what they can to describe it. By my last question, I mean to say, imagine if a child came up to you and said “I saw a dog outside the window last night, I think it was some kind of supernatural thing”, by what means do you determine whether the child is right or not? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/68 "2008-12-20T21:41:09Z")
> [@Cosmic Relief](#): > > We are born with minds that are configured to easily develop belief in gods and spirits, but that does not mean we are actually born with those beliefs. A child raised in a home where rational reasons are provided for all questions will, as the saying goes, have no need of the theistic hypothesis. Which creates a practical challenge: You can’t get a five-year-old to behave by appeal to enlightened self-interest. You have to place a phone call to Santa or Jesus or the Boogeyman. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/69 "2008-12-20T21:44:06Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > If one group (children) consistently and independently arrives at the conclusion that there are supernatural beings while the other group (adults) consistently uses authority over the first group to convince them otherwise, it seems reasonable to more believe the first group and disregard the second. 😕:dubious: . . . Ermm, no, **kanicbird,** that is not reasonable at **all.** ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/70 "2008-12-20T21:44:21Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > If one group (children) consistently and independently arrives at the conclusion that there are supernatural beings while the other group (adults) consistently uses authority over the first group to convince them otherwise, it seems reasonable to more believe the first group and disregard the second. By the same, uh, **logic** , I suppose you can watch [this video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtLEWVu815o) up to thirty seconds and find yourself entirely in agreement with the little girl in it\*. Most children of her age will consistently and independently arrive at the conclusion that the taller glass contains more juice. (If you continue watching, you’ll see children at older ages who have, presumably, had adults use their authority over the children to convince them otherwise). I find your lack of logic disturbing. As for the question of the soul, if it’s where knowledge resides, and it’s immaterial, I repeat my question: how does it affect the material world? I know that poisonous snakes are dangerous. Why does my material body leap back from a snake that I see when hiking, if that knowledge exists in my immaterial soul? How does my immaterial soul make that happen? As for the idea that atheism simply denotes a lack of belief in God, I’m wondering: is my chair atheist? What about my rosemary bush? After all, I’m pretty sure neither of them believes in God. Daniel - For those unwilling to watch the video, it demonstrates Piaget’s theory of conservation in the preoperational stage. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/71 "2008-12-20T21:45:14Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > My contention is that we know God from **conception** , and we have mostly forgotten God by **birth**. What exactly do you base that on? It sounds kinda like a heretical offshoot of Scientology. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/72 "2008-12-20T22:11:59Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What exactly do you base that on? > > It sounds kinda like a heretical offshoot of Scientology. For one Adam and Eve. Both at their conception knew God and walked with Him. It was only after they got involved with Satan that they lost that connectivity with God. From this point man got more and more wicked getting involved with lots of spiritual beings, till the flood (delivery) which is a sort of reset into a new world. After this point God starts leading His people to Him, till Jesus is born. This I believe is a analogy to our lives as well. We are conceived knowing God, but then get involved with other spirits, we are delivered (via birth) into a far different world, where we hear from others about God but don’t know Him personally. But God still leads us to Him till Jesus is born in our hearts. Also the Hebrew day fits this pattern. It starts as the sun goes down, this is conception and the fading glory of God (not that His glory fades, but our ability to perceive it does). We walk in darkness till the dawn, when Jesus enters our life and we walk in the light from that point on. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/73 "2008-12-20T22:22:59Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > By the same, uh, **logic** , I suppose you can watch [this video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtLEWVu815o) up to thirty seconds and find yourself entirely in agreement with the little girl in it\*. Most children of her age will consistently and independently arrive at the conclusion that the taller glass contains more juice. (If you continue watching, you’ll see children at older ages who have, presumably, had adults use their authority over the children to convince them otherwise). I did watch that, and it’s interesting as those are the same ‘tricks’ used on adults as well. Packages made to make the product look bigger or make it look like you are getting more for your money. All this proves is the ability to be deceived starts very early in life, which supports my point. > [@](#): > > I find your lack of logic disturbing. I would say that about your spiritual discernment, but I trust that God will get you though. > [@](#): > > As for the question of the soul, if it’s where knowledge resides, and it’s immaterial, I repeat my question: how does it affect the material world? I know that poisonous snakes are dangerous. Why does my material body leap back from a snake that I see when hiking, if that knowledge exists in my immaterial soul? How does my immaterial soul make that happen? Well lets look at the mars rover, which does not contain a soul, but people on earth, who have souls can make decisions that effect how it operates. If Opportunity happened to see a snake on mars, it may pause and wait for instructions, which the operator may program it to jump back. The knowledge is in the soul of the person operating the body/mind, just like the person is operating the rover. > [@](#): > > As for the idea that atheism simply denotes a lack of belief in God, I’m wondering: is my chair atheist? What about my rosemary bush? After all, I’m pretty sure neither of them believes in God. All creation, which is not in rebellion (such as Satan), testifies to the existence of God, I would even say that All creation does, but that gets hard to explain. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/74 "2008-12-20T22:32:53Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > I did watch that, and it’s interesting as those are the same ‘tricks’ used on adults as well. Packages made to make the product look bigger or make it look like you are getting more for your money. All this proves is the ability to be deceived starts very early in life, which supports my point. How was the child deceived? Her intuition is that the second glass contains more juice; nobody told her that it did; nobody did anything behind her back. What deceived her was her hardwired understanding of how the world works: all children start off having similar understandings of the world, and it takes awhile before they’re willing to reject the evidence of their eyes in favor of a more accurate understanding of the world. > [@](#): > > Well lets look at the mars rover, which does not contain a soul, but people on earth, who have souls can make decisions that effect how it operates. If Opportunity happened to see a snake on mars, it may pause and wait for instructions, which the operator may program it to jump back. The knowledge is in the soul of the person operating the body/mind, just like the person is operating the rover. I see. The Mars Rover is material, and the people on earth are–immaterial? Or are you suggesting that our souls are material entities on another planet? My question isn’t about how radio waves work: my question is what mechanism allows the soul to affect the material world. Mechanism, not analogy. > [@](#): > > All creation, which is not in rebellion (such as Satan), testifies to the existence of God, I would even say that All creation does, but that gets hard to explain. No worries; many ridiculous ideas are. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/75 "2008-12-20T22:38:29Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Not really. I mean, as a child I thought that if you buried toys, they’d grow into a toy tree (you can imagine the frustration of that particular one not being true). Children as a whole also quite consistently and independently come to misunderstandings and misconceptions about the world, which adults attempt to correct. Where did you get this idea from. It sounds like offering toys to the underworld (demons), in order to multiply them, I believe some forms of witchcraft work this way. Though it may not sprout a tree, it is suppose to have the same effect, getting more. > [@](#): > > Actually, I personally as a child didn’t tend to believe in the supernatural (my fears were, and pretty much still are, more natural in nature). I’m told my reaction to being told Santa wasn’t real was to say I already had figured that one out. As well as that, both you and I hold beliefs we’ve been ridiculed for, yet continued to believe. As a child I’ve tried to ground fears and the like in reality, it didn’t work nor did it make the situation better, it only got explained when I sought out the spiritual, and got better once I sought out the Lord Jesus. > [@](#): > > Out of interest, what, in your mind, is the difference between teaching and brainwashing? adding things vs removing thing, typically though oppressive means > [@](#): > > And is brainwashing always a wrong thing to do? I believe it is a very dangerous thing to do. > [@](#): > > What do you mean by the “true parent”? For the man, the producer of the seed, for the woman the womb that seed was implanted in, as well as a loving interactive relationship with the child. > [@](#): > > By my last question, I mean to say, imagine if a child came up to you and said “I saw a dog outside the window last night, I think it was some kind of supernatural thing”, by what means do you determine whether the child is right or not? Listening to his/her point of view, not trying to discredit it, assure the child that you are here for him/her and God is looking over them (assure them without discrediting them), and pray for direction on how to go forward with it ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/76 "2008-12-20T22:43:25Z")
duplicate post… ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/77 "2008-12-20T22:45:32Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Where did you get this idea from. It sounds like offering toys to the underworld (demons), in order to multiply them, I believe some forms of witchcraft work this way. Though it may not sprout a tree, it is suppose to have the same effect, getting more. Yeah, that seems the likeliest thinking. Surely the child wasn’t thinking that if an orange seed grows into an orange tree, a toy grows into a toy tree. Demons makes a lot more sense. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/78 "2008-12-20T23:08:51Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Where did you get this idea from. It sounds like offering toys to the underworld (demons), in order to multiply them, I believe some forms of witchcraft work this way. Though it may not sprout a tree, it is suppose to have the same effect, getting more. Like **LHod** suggests, it was from learning that some thing, when put in the ground, grow into a tree of those things. I erroneously extrapolated from that being true for some things to it being true for all things. As a child, it seemed a perfectly natural idea. > [@](#): > > As a child I’ve tried to ground fears and the like in reality, it didn’t work nor did it make the situation better, it only got explained when I sought out the spiritual, and got better once I sought out the Lord Jesus. It seems to work well enough for me. Different strokes, I guess. But my point was that both of us have beliefs that have been ridiculed, yet that we continue to hold. At the very least, one of us is ridiculed justly, perhaps both; simply being told you’re wrong and attempted to conform doesn’t mean that the original position was right, nor that the conformed position is wrong. > [@](#): > > adding things vs removing thing, typically though oppressive means I apologise, but could you be more expansive on this? > [@](#): > > I believe it is a very dangerous thing to do. Would that hold true for a brainwashing in favour of what you believe is right? Or, since children are superior arbiters of spirituality as you believe, would it be any better to allow children to determine the means and goal of brainwashing? > [@](#): > > For the man, the producer of the seed, for the woman the womb that seed was implanted in, as well as a loving interactive relationship with the child. Do you mean “as well as” to mean an alternate but still reason for being a “true parent”, or a required additional? That is to say, could an adoptive parent be a “true parent”, not being producer of either seed or egg, and could a rapist be one, not having a loving interative relationship with a resulting child? And, I feel reasonably certain guessing, the means by which being a “true parent” allows this advantage is spiritual in nature? > [@](#): > > Listening to his/her point of view, not trying to discredit it, assure the child that you are here for him/her and God is looking over them (assure them without discrediting them), and pray for direction on how to go forward with it So it isn’t a simple agreement? There is a possibility that, having done this, and your prayers answered, it becomes revealed that the dog was just a dog? A child can simply be wrong about this? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/79 "2008-12-20T23:08:59Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > My question isn’t about how radio waves work: my question is what mechanism allows the soul to affect the material world. Mechanism, not analogy. While I don’t know if it’s using subspace or alpha-hiccup waves, there is some idea in scriptures about it’s existence. Demons, which are spiritual beings, are able to enter us if we give them a foothold (a sinful opening). Here the flesh is shared between the person and the demon. Peter refers to the body as a tent, a covering. We are formed in the depths of the earth (Ps 139:15), places underground are frequently referred to as somewhere unpleasant, including hell itself. The flesh body that God is forming offers a escape from this unpleasant place, giving us the motivation to enter this flesh body, drawn by the love/warmth of the mother. I would assume, like anything else, it’s a learning experience how to use this body, how to interact with it and the surroundings. When one figures out how to operate the body they can start affecting the material world. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2008, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049/80 "2008-12-20T23:12:20Z")
> [@Vox\_Imperatoris](#): > > I agree, **but who the heck is Noone**? 😉 > > Seriously though, all the evidence points to the fact that religious thinking is natural to humans and that atheism must be arrived at by scientific thinking, not as a natural development people are indoctrinated out of. > > Valete, > Vox Imperatoris Peter Noone. Front man for Herman’s Hermits. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noone-is-born-atheist/478049.md?page=5)