With all that in mind, we can consider a “default” position. A new-born baby will from the moment of birth (actually a little before) begin to have the experiences of the world around them and will develop conscious and subconscious beliefs and understandings (however simplistic they will be). We don’t actually know precisely how babies think but I think it’s fair to conclude that they don’t start out with any belief in any defined theological beings. In that context, they can be described as atheist and give this is the starting point for all human beings, that can be seen as the default.
I had earlier post that brought up some/most of what I'm conveying here, but seeing as that wasn't touched, and we're on open forum, I'm glad to repeat what I said earlier. Some of it will be stuff I didn't say.
I do find it interesting when we talk about them babies, and reference it as a they group. When everyone reading this was in that group (without exception). But I think we've come to understand that no one (or very very very few) remember what it was like exactly to be them. So, we go with a whole lot of projection.
I think it all begins at conception. What it is exactly like from conception to birth, is agreed upon (I think) that no one knows/remembers. We can study it (life of a fetus) from the outside in, and make some interesting conclusions, none of which deal with beliefs of the fetus. But observably, a fetus is entirely dependent on what for a fetus would be a superhuman being for their existence (as a human), which has power/great influence over their physical being. Thus the second definition of god(s) from our dictionary comes into play. Whether a fetus is aware of that in words/concepts (as words) is not known, but I think most of us think not. Yet, aware of it as experience and is all that is being experienced, is also not known, but I find it not possible to get on board with idea that they are incapable of awareness, or even incapable of beliefs (when belief means accepting something exists).
Then there's birth onward, and we're really talking about a few days to a few weeks where the alleged lack is occurring. Yet, while that alleged lack is occurring, it is plausible (I would say likely in overwhelming majority of cases) that parents are de facto gods to the newborn. Nearly same ideas as a fetus apply to new born. Acceptance of something exists is growing in awareness (of newborns). From newborn perspective, it would be plausible that all that comes into contact with them are superhuman, even including fellow babies, but that would be a tougher road to be convincing of, as baby is growing in acceptance of 'equality' with that in play. Yet, if fellow baby is able to walk, and own self is not, then wow, that is superhuman.
But all of this is filtered through what it is, if anything, the baby is receiving, both in actuality and in conceptual understanding. So baby might desire food, but chances are very good they have no verbal conception of food, don't understand all the countless things adults are doing with food (every single day) and yet, here baby is seemingly desiring that. While adults are operating under premise of if baby don't eat, baby die. So, these superhuman beings around the baby are providing literally everything for the baby to survive.
Other than existence. Which is where the discussion gets either super duper obvious in what's being discussed or is esoteric. Yet, if baby is aware of existence itself and accepting of self as existing (even if not able to verbally explain that acceptance), then from certain theistic perspectives, they are experiencing fundamental nature of God(s). Cause there is currently no superhuman entity or even physical nature itself that is known to be responsible for existence. That's 'the given,' the 'well of course that's occurring.' Yet, that's the place where at least some theists start, and go from there in considering 'Nature of God.' A non-theist type will leave off the 'of God' part and go from there. But unless one is not paying close attention, one might not realize just how much everyone/anyone is deifying, providing (conceptual understanding) supreme influence to existence itself.
And from that theistic perspective, it is challenging to understand that a baby is not experiencing Nature of God, for the moment awareness of self occurs (even if not discernible to other beings outside), then baby is accepting of something that exists, namely own Self.
