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

by Perry 141 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Perry


    I reject the notion that athiests are without belief.

    This is my argument. Atheists are the ones who try and stop the discussion by claiming atheism is non-belief. You should re-read the first post and then the rest of the thread.

    I don't get the whole numbers argument.

    You should re-read the chart and the description as well as the scientists comments I posted.

    I don't see athiests saying "Because I exist, there is no God".

    This is the distillation of Nicolau's comments. It is a common athiest view, one they are eventually forced into if you chase them long enough. Others have made similar statements on this thread. This IS THE BASIS of atheism. It is the reason for the infinite universes dung that is trotted out for the gullible to consume. Since there are infinitely small probabilities that the universe would be as finely tuned such as it is, it is reasoned that there must be infinite universes to support this infinitely small probability. How do I know this? Easy, I'm here typing this...so it must be true.

    Pure cognitive dissonance and brain stem lobotomy.

  • Perry

    The question of the odds and such musings,....An argument commonly used by theists for the existence of god is that the odds are astronomical that life spontaneously started on it's own. I propose that we leave the messy word "evidence" out of the picture for the moment.


    This one got me laughing. The question of the odds isn't a Theist argument. IT IS THE ATHEIST ARGUMENT.

    It is the one argument that they try to avoid with the definition bait and switch game that I carefully described in my opening post. You really should read it.

    Atheist unveil the claim that atheism is about non belief at every possible chance in an argument. I have absolutely demonstrated the falsity of this statement. After that has been established, which it has whether some want to think about the terror of that profundity or not is their own business, the only thing that atheists are left with are the astroniomical (impossible) odds of such a universe such as ours. They are forced to accept this impossibility because there is no other.

    Do you get it now. This is why atheists come out like hornets when you reveal to them just exactly what it is that they believe in.

    It is a fairy tale for adults, that's all.

  • Perry

    Enjoyed it Guys! Signing off for now. Goodnight.

    Here's an old gospel song that describes life with God in the re-birth:


  • neverendingjourney

    A major theme in atheist thought is that the general population (99.3%) simply misunderstands them, being not educated or enlightened enough.

    This is a prime example of the cognitive dissonance you accuse atheists of displaying. The same exact argument you're using to "prove" that atheists are wrong can also be made to "prove" that Christians are wrong. How so? Because 66% of the world's population is not Christian. Does that mean that Christians feel that the rest of the world simply misunderstands them or that the rest of the world is not as educated or enlightened as they are?


  • Twitch

    Cover the entire North American continent in dimes all the way up to the moon, a height of about 239,000 miles (In comparison, the money to pay for the U.S. federal government debt would cover one square mile less than two feet deep with dimes.). Next, pile dimes from here to the moon on a billion other continents the same size as North America. Paint one dime red and mix it into the billions of piles of dimes. Blindfold a friend and ask him to pick out one dime.

    The odds that he will pick the red dime are one in 10 to the 37th power. The rest of the allowable deviations are far less tolerable than this one in order for the universe to exist as it does.

    Of course the liklihood of all these dozens of precise laws coming from nothing, non intelligence, and randomness is impossible. Yet, this is what the atheist is forced to believe.

    The atheist has said in his heart, "there is no God" and he'll be damned before he'll let a little thing like facts change his mind. Like the JW that believes that he has some kind of a deal (he just can't explain it very well) with God to avoid judgment outside of the New Covenant and without Jesus as his mediator; the atheist also believes he has an accurate understanding of reality.

    Perry, page 1 of this thread.


    You say the odds are high and you say it's impossible. Which is it? Or perhaps it's which better supports your argument?

    You make some interesting assertions, that's for sure. Conviction is not a trait you lack.

    I just toyed with the idea you presented. Don't really care to get into what you're about actually.

    And it is a theist argument. You're just spinning it, like a few other things,...

    whatever, preach on brother ;)

  • OnTheWayOut

    On The Way Out,
    Would you mind telling me how you make the quote boxes. When I highlight and hit the quote buton, it just centers the text without a highlight box.

    Some might know better than me. Anyway, I cut and paste what they say and then highlight it by holding the left mouse button and dragging over it, then you go to the box at the top of the reply that says Styles and use the drop-down to go to Quote.

    Anyway, your definition centers on feelings. While that might be true of some C.D. it leaves open the possibility that if one's feelings can be stuffed down far enough the problem will go away. Not comfortable with that at all.

    That's the whole point. JW's have dissonance. Dissonance is a feeling. Some do stuff it down and hope it goes away. I don't think that too many JW's have dissonance over stuff they really don't understand about their organization. The uncomfortable feeling comes from confronting evidence that WTS is wrong or that Science disproves religion, or maybe from feeling that God is love but will destroy billions.

  • Spook

    Isn't anyone going to defend the wonderful virtues of atheism? I mean it cost you your whole brain to believe in this stuff. That's a pretty big price. The least you could do is explain how it would be good for me and others.

    Won't anyone please describe the goodness of it?

    Beliefs are not virtuous unless they are connected to affirmative "ought" statements. A belief can be virtuous or vicencious if and only if it is a necessary condition of a further positive action framework.

    Theism can be a belief set as part of a system which produces philanthropy or pogroms. Atheism can function in the same way. Most world views which include theism do have "ought" attached to them. Many world views which include atheism have no "ought's" at all.

    Atheism is a necessary condition of a humanistic world view in some definitions (though I'm not making this an incredible strong stance). It is not the sufficient characteristic, however, since not all atheists are humanists. The virtues of humanism are many.

    Now, if by "good" Perry means fecund, or posessing utility, then atheism stands in good solid ground on that extent. So Perry can clarify whether he means virtue (or morally good, since virtue in philosophy is a little bit different. Virtue ethics are not moral ethics, it's a very specific thing linguistically) or utility.

    In a larger way I would say the following: If, by some chance, neither atheism nor theism were true and both were equally dilusional, AND these views could be freely chosen, whether or not one view was "better" or "worse" for an individual would depend other external factors. If atheism is true, theism may still have some advantages for some people. If theism is true, atheism could have some advantages for some people. However, since it's not possible to choose one's beliefs the whole point is moot, even though it is logically possible for both atheism and theism to be false. (i.e. deism)

  • Homerovah the Almighty
    Homerovah the Almighty

    The evidence for God, as a supreme designer is everywhere. The more science progresses, the more of God is revealed. The atheist looks at the same observable facts that the other 99% of the population does and draws a conclusion from Hell...... literally.

    Getting a bit pompous and arrogant aren't we Perry, why didn't you mention that an overwhelming amount of the most highly educated scientists

    geneticists, astrophysicists around the world are atheists or agnostics, was that something you purposely missed ?

    Yes the world we live in is certainly a wonderment of diversity with all the intricacies here on earth and throughout the universe but through

    discovery and evaluation the things we once assumed were gods were found not to be gods at all, but factual elements of the known.

    The sun for example was one of the prime objects that was considered in many ancient cultures to be a god or The god .

    In contrary the only evidence of a god or spirit was only to be found in the imagination of ignorant men.

    I think even in the bible there was mention that it would be imposable for a mere man to look at god because he is so brilliant. ie. ( Sun )

    Another way to look at the situation why would a god expect us today to believe in him only , from thousands of years ago from ancient stories of

    out of primitive men, when there many stories of gods in those times ?

    And does the holding on to a belief in a god like the JWS for example really beneficial for humanity or any other supernatural being for that matter,

    I don't think so, mankind has progressed so far now that entwining are self with this idealogical theory is progressively putting are social

    psychology back-wards, back to even archaic ancient times and cultures.

  • Spook

    I'm going to step out on a limb and make a statement that hopefully brings some ground to Perry's misapplied dissonance meanderings. I think it is fair and balanced and would like him to respond to it:

    In some way, both theists and atheists have a philosophically tough position regarding the universe. There is either a beginning of sorts with no cause-as-we-know-it, or there is something infinite and beyond space/time-as-we-know-it. I don't think either theists or atheists who claim this is possible to comprehend are being fully honest.

    I think that is reasonable and I've heard some of the most prominent Phd holding philosophers on both the atheist and theist side of this issue agree to it, though I can't provide references for that at this time. This is one reason I like to begin in the present and work backwards in debating the God question, rather than starting with the distant, dynamically unknown past.

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    I suppose your imaginary invisible friends is happy to have you speaking up for him, since his own voice is so tiny.

Share this