You atheist really annoyed me

by confusedandalone 226 Replies latest jw friends

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    seraphim...that was a good post. Except I'm not sure an atheist could deny another atheist, because neither believe in a god. And that is what atheism is. What else they may or may not believe in is besides the point.

    There are atheists that believe in astrology, homeopathy, natural medicine etc. and others that don't. Both are still atheists if they don't believe in a god.

    I hear what you are saying about some atheists being much broader in their non belief of anything without scientific evidence. But that is in addition to being an atheist. Not a varying degree of atheism....otherwise we could call christians atheists if it was by degree...because they don't believe in the other 30,000 possible gods, they only believe in one. They would predominantly be atheists by that definition.

  • bohm


    Many believers don’t have blind faith but faith based on non-scientific evidence. This is where ideology comes in with atheism because some atheists would vehemently argue that evidence that is not scientific, or amenable to scientific methodology, is not evidence as all.

    Thats not how science works, science does not begin with a list of what is scientific evidence and what is not and go from there.

    How we should trust different types of evidence is and should be subject to rational inquiry. The basic observation is the type of non-scientific evidence believers propose is worthless: as the believers themselves are aware, the non-scientific evidence has little or no normative power when applied to other ideas, for instance ufos, big foot and other religions.

    The only way to salvage the claim is (in an obfuscated manner) to say we shouldnt be rational about what we consider evidence, that double standards are okay and so on.

  • LisaRose

    At this point no middle ground between this type of atheistic world view and `rational` believers, who do see the need for evidence, albeit non-scientific, is possible.

    Yes, I believe this is where discussions break down, it's like we are discussing two different things. But what non scientific evidence could there be to prove an invisible presence? Some seem to feel the beauty and complexity of nature proves an intelligent creator, but there is too much evidence of evolution for me to believe that. Some feel God started life, then guided evolution, but then how did God come to be? And if there is some invisible being who guided evolution, why is he sitting around doing nothing while his creation proceeds to torture and kill each other for centuries? If believers are going to claim non scientific evidence, then they have to explain these things.

  • Phizzy

    If He/She is "guiding Evolution" the Guide is not doing a very good job, 90% of what was (supposedly) created is now extinct.

    Don't get those poor believers on to the Problem of Evil Lisa Rose, we are still waiting on another thread from about a year ago for the answer to that one !

    I wonder of what quality this evidence that is "Non-scientific" is ? Something of the level of "Well, I can't believe it all just happened" I suspect.

  • slimboyfat

    Phizzy are you a moderator now?

    I think Simon underestimated how much work Lady Lee did.

  • Phizzy

    What makes you think I am a Mod Slimboy ? I am only posting my opinions, people can do what they like on here ,within the posting guidelines, which I have stretched from time to time !

    I think sometimes it is difficult to "hear" the tone that something is said in, my advice to Lisarose was simply meant as "for goodness sake please don't get them on tothe problem of evil, the poor believers have no answer", it wasn't mean't as a direction to her.

    Earlier on I was simply trying to stop the silly Ad Hominem attacks on Cofty as they added nothing to the thread, and were somewhat childish.

    What I say to such posters is, if what the man says is wrong, attack his argument, if not, shut up.

  • slimboyfat

    Cofty seems to enjoy, as in get actual pleasure, from implying other people are stupid for holding the views they do. He should not be surprised by the reaction. I bet he was exactly the same when he was a JW and when he was an Evangelical. Different causes, same self-righteous justification, and incomprehension at how anyone else could possibly disagree with himself.

  • slimboyfat

    You would be an alright moderator. Simon is probably looking for one.

  • Phizzy

    You could be right Slimboy, I have never met Cofty, so could not judge his demeanor or attitude. On the other hand you could be wrong, he may just come over that way, by the way he writes on here.

    As I said above, it is difficult to determine the nuances of "tone" from the written word, easy face to face. I remember one poster left in huff because I made what I thought was a funny, and she took it literally, I really should be more careful to express and even signpost what I actually mean.

    Enough about Cofty, lets get back to annoying the believers !

  • EdenOne

    The problem isn't Cofty.

    It's coftism.


Share this