Children born believing in God

Like it or not Eclectic, you have made a statement that God is a priori with no desire to flesh out or make your case.
Then fault others for not having a cause or taking a stand?
How can you be taken seriously?
Confusing the issue is just as bad as not taking the stand you accuse others of not taking. This is intellectually disingenuous.
I'm sorry you are unable to present an argument for your assertion. You simply walk into a room make a statement and are unwilling or unable to back it up.
And then to top it all off you resort to a juvenile defense like that?
Heh... We are born, which is a miracle... And our minds are so full of wonder, magic, exctiment, playful tendancies.... adventure and curiosity... With time most of us lose this... We no longer need adventure and curiosity as we know it all.... :) We no longer have faith nor belife in magic and wonders.... We grow tired of excitment and become nay saying critics with high important opinions....... Like pretty much everything we do as a child degrades when we become older, traits, habbits and so on..

Err example... Lifting... Watch a child lift something heavy... Then go to a work place and watch a man lift something heavy.... Watch a child eat solid food, then watch a man eat solid food.... (kinda like the driver who has just passed his test and the driver who has been driving for X amount of years, who has forgotten things and folded 'things' to suit him. And also picked up many bad habbits along the way.)

We trade playful behaviour for working/career behaviour, our colours like our hairs fade to grey, thin and reduce..... And before I posted this I read alot of posts here.... And they made me laugh.... On the inside.....

I would go along with Masters on this. ;)
Paladin, its ironic that you don't see something here: you're telling me I should explain something in response to me just saying prior that it can't be explained, taught or conditioned. You keep viewing this as a "thesis" when actually it is a call to end all these theses.

To explain is to apologize and I will not apologize to you. Get over it.

Everyone knows that existence isn't a real predicate. If I say "I had some good pancakes today," it would be nonsensical to reply "okay, but did they exist?" I'm not telling you about whether they "exist," I'm telling you they were F'ing good.

The fact of the matter is that no one has the right to tell these kids what they did or did not experience.
Look, you make a statement that God is not come across through teaching or conditioning. I didn't ask you to explain I asked you to make your case which you obviously are incapable of doing, next you change your tack saying something very different. Duck and dodge is all you can do, what am I to expect?
It's like I thought, you got nothin.

When are people going to get the notion out of their heads that they will only come across God by some form of conditioning?
See Ecclectic, you make a statement like this, and you got challenged on it, that is what happens in a forum. Why you think your word will go unchallenged is beyond me, why are you here, why not just blog so your ideas won't be questioned, wouldn't that be nice?

And why do you think you are being asked to apologize? Who do you think you have wronged? I for one don't feel you did or said anything wrong. I just disagree with what you said and have taken you to task for it. Obviously you are unused to this, perhaps being questioned is new for you. Well, you need to get over it.
"The experience of God is not dependent on conditioning." There is nothing to challenge here just as there is no case to make. To make a case would be along the very same lines as conditioning. Please search for the irony in your expectations of me.
Wil, my first impression of that is the possibility of some form of reincarantion, if it be real.