Posts by C0ntr013r

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Correction. They start as atheist vs theist. The theist is quickly devoured and the atheists and agnostics turn on one another in a philosophical debate about debating and words that by their very nature a varied and founded in a theological world.
The problem is the word GOD. As soon as it is used, a huge leap is made, this is undeniable. Atheist say they don't know and don't believe because historically the role filled by "God" known or unknown, has been explained away through knowledge, and this is likely to continue on. The that word in of itself if inflammatory and should have no place. If you don't say god no one has to say atheist.

Quite humorous summary

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

If they lack a belief in god, then yes.

Then your definition is redundant, Theist are mostly Atheists except the conscious part of there brains. There feet are atheists, arms, legs etc...

(Not in the sense that they reject all but one God)

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

It exactly means that. You can't know whether or not you know something unless you've thought about it. Babies can't do that and they lack a belief in god(s), therefore they are atheists. Try again.

Wrong.

Did you know there is a blue star called: "Alcyone"? (if you do, insert something else you don't know, how many teeth a Tyrannosaurus have etc.)

Now, how can you not know this, if you have not thought about it? (have to be something you have not thought about until now as well, of course)

Hence, your logic is flawed. Try again.

449

Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

by LAWHFol in

i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

"atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

C0ntr013r

Facts are relevant, whether you like it or not. The fact is, there was strong reason to believe the CMBR existed prior to it's discovery. You not know knowing or mentioning that is irrelevant to whether or not it matters.

Funny play with words. Facts are relevant in contexts and in this one, that fact where not.

Oh, and by the way. Blue is a color....

So then it IS testable and discoverable. You've managed to render your own argument moot. Congratulations.

No, even if it is testable and discoverable. We can not know if humans will ever be able to test or discover it. Which was the point I argued, not this straw man you built. I get the feeling you are purposefully "misunderstanding" me...

Why wouldn't they be? Why would god be any different?

And again you play with words and build straw men... You know my point is that the discussion in this thread is about God, not fairies

So far, not very much and no on the specific issue.

You proved me correct in the very next sentence... If you don't understand that, I don't think explaining it to you will make any difference.

From your own words, specifically, "I did not have..." If you don't have something, you are lacking it. Thanks for proving my point. Babies are atheists.

I said "did" as in past tense, not don't. Please don't misquote me.

I've enough cock for both of us.

That sentence does not even make any sense.

23

... and keep fighting

by nevaagain in

jw
friends

last week we had the cos visit and i wanted to share my experiences with you.

some background info on me, i knowttatt and am fully awake, my wife also knows my doubts and read a few things on the internet but she is still 100% commited to the truth, saying everything on the apostate sites are lies.

so right now i am in just to keep the status quo.

C0ntr013r

No sure your wife would corroborate that thou ;)

But she have not ratted you out yet, so why not

65

[Day 4 - 31/7]The Royal Commissions investigation of child sexual abuse within Jehovah’s Witnesses. + VIDEO

by C0ntr013r in

by popular demand i give you day 4, and i will finally get a couple of days to sleep .

part 1 has been uploaded and part 2,3 and 4 will soon be available.. part 1:.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lmlcdqesa0&list=plpq6kz-aghvqbadlzmqn26dvmpzddxlui&index=11.

C0ntr013r

Yeah, they would not have any doctrines left after Stewart was done with them

Would proabably have to reevaluate their understadnng of the Bible... lol

23

... and keep fighting

by nevaagain in

jw
friends

last week we had the cos visit and i wanted to share my experiences with you.

some background info on me, i knowttatt and am fully awake, my wife also knows my doubts and read a few things on the internet but she is still 100% commited to the truth, saying everything on the apostate sites are lies.

so right now i am in just to keep the status quo.

C0ntr013r

Or, two "Apostates" where having a meal without even knowing it :P

Doubtful a undercover person who knows TTATT would bring up such matters under those circumstances thou. Such a person is usually more concerned with staying under the radar.

Still, one can speculate...

28

[Day 5 - 3/8]The Royal Commissions investigation of child sexual abuse within Jehovah’s Witnesses. + VIDEO

by C0ntr013r in

so, i am back at it.

i give you day 5 of the royal commissions proceedings:.

part 1 has been uploaded and part 2,3 and 4 will soon be available.. part 1:.

C0ntr013r

I must say I was a bit disappointing by the "Apostate", he did his best thou. And he was honest and had "better" memory then the other elders.

28

[Day 5 - 3/8]The Royal Commissions investigation of child sexual abuse within Jehovah’s Witnesses. + VIDEO

by C0ntr013r in

so, i am back at it.

i give you day 5 of the royal commissions proceedings:.

part 1 has been uploaded and part 2,3 and 4 will soon be available.. part 1:.

C0ntr013r

Part 4 uploaded, it will take a little while before 1080p becomes available as YouTube processes the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K17oiD0pVMA&list=PLPQ6KZ-AGhVQbadlzMQN26dvMPzddxlui&index=18

24

AUSTRALIA - All large JW Regional Conventions cancelled for 2015

by jwleaks in

now we know why the governing body of jehovah's witnesses cancelled all the major regional conventions of jehovah's witnesses for 2015 and are only holding smaller conventions at the jw assembly halls.

"imitate jesus" convention series australia schedule .

interestingly the first round of regional conventions are due this weekend in the jw assembly halls in sydney (new south wales), melbourne (victoria), and brisbane (queensland).

C0ntr013r

There's been no real legitimate explanation. Just a decision made last year. Could be money, health and safety, first aid non-compliance, whatever. But the timing couldn't be more poignant.

You misunderstand me.

Is there any way to validate that bigger conventions where indeed canceled? I don't doubt your word but I would like to look it up myself and I could also bring it up with JWs if I have a reference.