UNBELIEVER : Again, statistically, chances are great you believe in Jesus for no better reason than that is what u were born of Christian parents Your baby/child brain would have believed anything your parents & surrounding culture exposed you to, content is meaningless
MBOFANA : Christianity does not owe its truth to the process by which any body claims or is alleged to have been converted to Christianity. The mode by which i became a Christian does not determine the logical validity of Christianity. Thus the assertion raised by the unbeliever doesn’t amount to a valid objection against the truth of Christianity. After all the unbeliever does not even understand how one becomes a believer according to the bible and i will not even attempt to explain this.
However lets examine the claims of this unbeliever below, we have already determined that his assertion is not a valid objection against Christianity but a mere assertion.
Having asserted that the only reason why I am a Christian is simply because I was indoctrinated when I was a child, the unbeliever also added yet another assertion stating that as a baby my beliefs where born out of indoctrination by parents and society. We must never commit the mistake of assuming we know what the unbeliever means, we must also never assume the unbeliever knows what we mean by terms such as “God”
Here we must fully expose the faulty pressuposition of the unbeliever, He clearly pressuposes observation as basis for His claim, The claim is based on previous experiments and research that came up with the conclusion that children take up the beliefs of parents and society in which they are bred in.
However this is not always the case, first of all even if children are “indoctrinated”, it so often happens that they turn away or from beliefs or they will even question these beliefs, even while still under the care of parents. In fact parents teach their children that stealing, swearing and lying are habits to be avoided yet we know that children despite age, lie and steal. The unbeliever however never mentions this and doesn’t realise that, even in a strictly Muslim country a devout Muslim may become a Christian and, while in a Country that is predominantly Christian a “devout” believer may become an atheist.
Therefore whenever a believer asserts anything of such a nature as the that assertion above we must ask questions and He must answer for if he fails to, we cannot proceed, the debate must end if we cannot understand what the unbeliever is saying.
The unbeliever must be questioned as to how he came up with that assertion, As for the assertion above I have already assumed that the unbeliever’s assertion is based on previously gatherd data as to how children acquire beliefs.
This must therefore mean that this unbeliever either observed all of the brains of babies, and he must show us how. Did He take the babies/children to an operating theater in order to have a full view of each baby’s brain? and if He did what exactly did he see that proves that proves his assertion to be true in every case? Yes this sounds rediculous a question but well if the question is ridiculous what about the assertion?
The assertion must not be accepted as it is, we cannot assume we know how the unbeliever came to the conclusion that children’s brains accept whatever parents and culture expose them to.
The questioning must be intensified, Did the believer obtain basis of his assertion pertaining children’s brains from phsychologists, scientists and neurosurgeons or both, and even if got it from whatever place, what reason do we have to accept his claim, how do we know its true if other equally qualified nerosurgeons and scientits disagree? Why did He take the opinion of the particular scientists who concluded that the brains of children take in anything that parents and culture expose them to?
If its true for religion, how is this not true for science, if you are exposed to either science and religion, it might just be you will either turn to science or religion or both to come up with a position on metaphysics, ethics and epistemology. However if we go by the statement above what the unbeliever actually means is children dont think and cannot believe anything except those things the society and thier parents impose on them.