JW’s & Atheists - Great (Cultic) Minds Think Alike

by Perry 141 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Elemental

    And the above is my entire point with all atheists...

    They claim there is no God saying that he has never come to them and does not solve the world's problems. That God is dead and does not care and the idea that he exists is absurd. But then they say that the God of the Bible is a monster calling him some of the most abusive names that I would not even call my worst enemy, proceed to say that all the writings of the Bible are made up despite all of the evidence to the contrary if they would simply review them. They go on to tell me that that Clement, Ignatius and others were all part of some grand conspiracy to pluck the pigeons and all the religious suckers. They then say that any who disagree with them because they feel Christ living in them must be delusional because it does not fit with their logic. They get upset when God does nothing for them but reject every moral view that he has as un-evolved.

    Insults, rejection of evidence, and standards and calling the people whom he loves delusional.

    And you seriously wonder why he does not come to you?

    If someone treated YOU like that, would you go to them?

  • leavingwt


    Good Luck.


  • Elemental

    I never said I was an atheist; I can't speak for them. But I recognize faulty logic when I see it.

    Fair enough. But I don't think that they that is many athiests can see it because they use it all of the time.

    I fault both sides in the Crusades. They both felt that God wanted them to kill infidels. Which side was he on?

    While I cannot speak for God, I do know that he told the Christiains to love their neighbor as themselves. What they did would not be in accord with what Christ taught. While I do think that there are times where killing is warneted it was not in this case. Jesus said that his kingdom was no part of this world and as a result his followers should have listned to this.

    But I fail to see how a bad example in the name of God disproves his existance. Just becuase a child goes against what a parent wishes does not mean that the parent did not exist.

    We all have free will to use as we see fit for if we did not there would be no need for God to place laws in the Bible to begin with. How can one be blamed if they abuse that free will? I mean people cannot get upset if that freedom is misused. Besides I have a tendency to feel that there is no good or bad action.

  • Elemental


    Good Luck.


    Thanks! I not sure about what though.

  • Anti-Christ

    Elemental, first welcome to the board and second you have interesting ideas.

    I for one do not like labels, atheist, Christian, etc... What I like is reason and logic. I find that the bible does have a lot of wisdom and some things are historically accurate but to say ALL of it is accurate one must reject a lot of historic and scientific fact. Also there are a lot of questionable morals and even a lot of atrocities. Maybe god exist maybe he does not but I must question someones morals, logic and knowledge of facts if this persons is to accept the bible has 'truth'.

  • Awakened at Gilead
    Awakened at Gilead

    When Perry is willing to do the following test, I will believe in Jehovah: (changes in italics)

    (1 Kings 18:21-40) . . .Then Perry approached all the people and said: “How long will YOU be limping upon two different opinions? If Jehovah is the [true] God, go following him; but if he is not then you are doomed.” And the people did not say a word in answer to him.

    22 And Perry went on to say to the people: “I myself have been left as a prophet of Jehovah, I alone, while the atheists are four hundred and fifty men. 23 Now let them give us two young bulls, and let them choose for themselves one young bull and cut it in pieces and put it upon the wood, but they should not put fire to it. And I myself shall dress the other young bull, and I must place it upon the wood, but I shall not put fire to it. 24 And YOU must call upon the name of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and I, for my part, shall call upon the name of Jehovah; and it must occur that the [true] God that answers by fire is the [true] God.” To this all the people answered and said: “The thing is good.”

    25 Perry now said to the atheists: “Choose for yourselves one young bull and dress it first, because YOU are the majority; and call upon the name of YOUR god, but YOU must not put fire to it.” 26 Accordingly they took the young bull that he gave them. Then they dressed it, and they kept calling upon the name of the Flying Spghetti Monster from morning till noon, saying: “O FSM, answer us!” But there was no voice, and there was no one answering. And they kept limping around the altar that they had made.

    27 And it came about at noon that E·li′jah began to mock them and say: “Call at the top of YOUR voice, for he is a god; for he must be concerned with a matter, and he has excrement and has to go to the privy. Or maybe he is asleep and ought to wake up!” 28 And they began calling at the top of their voice and cutting themselves according to their custom with daggers and with lances, until they caused blood to flow out upon them. 29 And it came about that, as soon as noon was past and they continued behaving as prophets until the going up of the grain offering, there was no voice, and there was no one answering, and there was no paying of attention.

    30 At length Perry said to all the people: “Approach me.” So all the people approached him. Then he proceeded to mend the altar of Jehovah that was torn down. 31 So Perry took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom Jehovah’s word had come, saying: “Israel is what your name will become.” 32 And he went on to build the stones into an altar in the name of Jehovah and to make a trench, of about the area sowed with two seah measures of seed, all around the altar. 33 After that he put the pieces of wood in order and cut the young bull in pieces and placed it upon the pieces of wood. He now said: “FILL four large jars with water and pour it upon the burnt offering and upon the pieces of wood.” 34 Then he said: “Do it again.” So they did it again. But he said: “Do it a third time.” So they did it a third time. 35 Thus the water went all around the altar, and the trench also he filled with water.

    36 And it came about at the time that the grain offering goes up that Perry the prophet began to approach and say: “O Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that you are God in Israel and I am your servant and it is by your word that I have done all these things. 37 Answer me, O Jehovah, answer me, that this people may know that you, Jehovah, are the [true] God and you yourself have turned their heart back.” 38 At that the fire of Jehovah came falling and went eating up the burnt offering and the pieces of wood and the stones and the dust, and the water that was in the trench it licked up. 39 When all the people saw it, they immediately fell upon their faces and said: “Jehovah is the [true] God! Jehovah is the [true] God!” 40 Then Perry said to them: “Seize the atheists! Do not let a single one of them escape!” At once they seized them, and Perry then brought them down to the torrent valley of JWN and slaughtered them there.

    Please advise when we can recreate this test. When Jehovah sends his flames down from heaven, and the FSM fails to do so, I will join in proclaiming, "Jehovah is the true God! Jehovah is the true God!". Biut if he fails to do so, I will mock, and say: “Call at the top of YOUR voice, for Jehovah is a god; for he must be concerned with a matter, and he has excrement and has to go to the privy. Or maybe he is asleep and ought to wake up!”

    So unless theists are willing to follow the Bible based proof of Godship, they are the ones suffering from CD, and their God is full of BS (as was Baal).

  • Caedes
    Caedes said:
    ...then add on a supernatural omnipotent being that created it, this addition does not reduce the complexity of the universe, it adds to it.
    I think that is game, set, and match!


    ta very much, though I suspect that the opposition may not have noticed they lost yet!

    and a rather belated welcome to the forum.

    Caedes said:
    but you then add on a supernatural omnipotent being that created it, this addition does not reduce the complexity of the universe, it adds to it.
    Only if He is a part of said universe would He add to its complexity.
    My own view is a much more simple explanation
    Great! Perhaps you can explain how life came from non-life?

    Mad Dawg

    Another welcome to the forum, have fun.

    It's funny how theists want to grant all sorts of exceptions to their own god. Is your god not a real entity? If your god is real then s/he/it (sorry, I dont know which flavour of skydaddy you prefer) must increase the complexity of the universe. Any argument that your god is not part of the universe/time is mere special pleading.

    At what point did I claim that I know the mechanism of abiogenesis? Perhaps you could point out where I stated that I know something unproven to every other scientist on the planet?

    I was, to clarify, merely pointing out that a naturalist view is a much simpler explanation of the universe than the theist view that has to explain the exact same universe but with the addition of supernatural entities rather than me claiming exclusive knowledge of some new theory of abiogenesis.

  • Mad Dawg
    Mad Dawg

    JWS said:

    If God did create Eve from a rib of Adam, wouldn't she have the same DNA?

    Probably, except that she would have had two x chromosomes.

    Inbreeding causes problems in the human species. As it was, it would have been messy enough for a species to populate from 2 pair.

    If man was created, we would expect that his DNA would be perfect at the start and degrade over time. At the beginning, inbreeding would not be an issue. Degradation of the genome (as pointed out by you) runs contrary to evolutionary thought.

    Chimps learned to talk? Sure.

    Umm, no.

    Animals do talk. They do have communication.

    There is a huge difference between mere "communication" and "talking."

    Obviously as brain sizes increased communication became more complex.

    Again, no. The best example of a talking animal is Alex, Dr. Pepperidge's parrot. A parrot's brain is about the size of a marble - much smaller than a chimp's

    Things are evolving all of the time.

    Begging the question.

    DNA is like a blueprint. More like a computer programming array if you're familiar with programming.

    You have this one 100% correct. Both contain information that was imparted by a designer. Without a designer imparting information, all there would be is a blank sheet, random electrons, or a pile of goo. Certainly nothing to build from.

    Each slot in the array holds a value which control aspects of your being. The fact that you might have blond hair and other people have red is a difference between your DNA vs. theirs. If DNA can change, why just on hair color? Why not in the amount of hair and where it grows, the length of our legs, the number of fingers and toes? As you want to believe, Adam and Eve had the same DNA, yet we don't all look alike today. We all have distinct DNA.

    You tacitly acknowledged that the human - and by extension, animal – genomes are in a downward spiral. The addition of body parts would require the addition of information. The difference in hair color and such is the loss of information. Look it up. Man originally had dark hair and eyes. As the ability to produce certain pigments was lost, other colors became apparent. Albinos are a prime example of this.

    Our DNA obviously mutated (evolved).

    Seems that the Watchtower is fond using the word "obviously" to quash discussion.

    Also look at the way species developed. Why does Australia, separated from the rest of the world, have unique animals? Some are very close to animals elsewhere, but different. The logical conclusion I would have is that they had common ancestors. When Australia was separated, they each evolved in different directions. Yet you think God just decided Australia should have different animals? Why put Kangaroos only in Australia? And how'd they get there after the flood?

    Or we could conclude that they had a common designer. As for Australia having unique animals, During the ice age the water levels would be lower and the critters could go where ever they want. Keep in mind that platypus fossils have been found in South America and camels in North America. Go ahead, Google it.

  • undercover

    Personally I lean towards "apatheism":


    So you guys can argue about whether God exists or not...the rest of us are heading to the pub...

  • snowbird
    Man originally had dark hair and eyes.

    Uh huh. Straight out of Africa!

    Mad Dawg, you are a breath of fresh air.

    Thank you.


Share this