From hard core JW Christian to Atheist within 5 months?

by cyberjesus 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  PSacramento

  Hmmm, see, you are looking at this part :The process of going from believing in something to not believing is not an symptomatic of an addictive personality, and I am looking at this part of what I wrote:

  conviction that he was right and everyone else that had a different view was wrong.

  It is THAT view that cause one to have an extremist view on things.

  I am a christian and I believe in God and I can put forth many reason why I do so, nevertheless I do NOT beleive that those that are not christians and do not believe in God are wrong, period, end of discussion.

  Nor do I hold fast to the undeniable FACT that I will always be a christian or a believer, I don't KNOW that, I don't know what the future hold for me, for believers or for atheists for that matter.

  I have a convction in what I know, but I KNOW that I DON'T knwo everything so I CAN'T be of the mind that I am right and all that DON'T beleive as I do are wrong, that is why, for me, ANY extreme view point that says "THIS IS IT, PERIOD" is unappealing and totally illogical for me.

  Hence I can never be an atheist NOR can I be a fundamentalist.
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  I think you're making a hasty generalization, PSac. If an atheist is such because he is first and foremost a scientist, then his adherence to critical thinking and the scientific method would REQUIRE him to have an open mind. That simply means if real evidence for god is presented, the critical thinker will accept it.

  Again, even a "hard core" extremist atheist like Dawkins leaves a minimal possibility for a god based on what he doesn't know. In The God Delusion, he has a chapter entitled "Why There Almost Certainly Is No God."

  Atheism doesn't require a person to preclude himself of ever changing his mind. Take the two hypothetical scenarios below:

  a. Science discovers a mountain of evidence FOR the existence of a personal god.

  b. Religion discovers a mountain of evidence AGAINST the existence of a personal god.

  I'd have FAR more hope for an atheist converting to religion after scenario [a] than a fundy to deconvert after scenario [b].

  The great trouble with religion — any religion — is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence. - Heinlein
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  PSac, is it "extreme" for you to say that you don't believe in the LochNess Monster?

  Suppose you said, "Hey, I don't have any verifiable evidence that Nessie exists, so until some becomes available, I can't simply buy into tabloid and anecdotal claims." Is that extreme?

  Maybe you took it a bit further, though, because Nessie-Worshipers were trying to have Nessie put in science books and they were influencing the government with Nessie-based agendas... maybe the more aggressive Nessie-Worshipers became, the more vocal you became that we shouldn't lose our heads about Nessie when we still don't have more than a fuzzy picture and personal experiences. Is that extreme?

  Like I said, I think it's all about perspective.

  Psac: I am a christian and I believe in God...nevertheless I do NOT beleive that those that are not christians and do not believe in God are wrong, period, end of discussion.

  You are unique, my friend. I take it you don't believe in the flood and hundreds of other bible accounts then?
• 

  PSacramento

  I see what you are sying SBJ and I agree and yes I am being a bit harsh perhaps but look at it this way:

  JW: I am in the truth, I am right, there is a God and THAT God is Jehovah and everyone else is wrong, it is plain to see, it is obvious as the nose on my face, anyone that truly understand the bible can see that !

  Same JW as an atheist: I am in the right, there is no God and everyone that believes in God is wrong, ignorant really, its plain to see that there is no God, it is obvious for those that see the facts, anyone that truly understand science can see that !

  See the issue?
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Psac, we're both going to be biased towards our own viewpoints, right? I think you're still generalizing atheists (unless you're basing your comment on a specific person whom you know well). I know many who are more like this...

  I don't have enough evidence for a personal god and I now realize that my old perspective was based on presupposition that [insert holy book] was from a personal god. Now that I've abandoned my presuppositions in a search for unbiased truth, I see that the traditional gods worshiped by modern organized religion are as unsubstantiated as Thor and Baal. It's crazy that I once accepted [holy book] at face value but I realize it's due to my environment as a child. It's the same reason that radical [insert faith-based terrorist group] blow themselves up. Why do others fail to consider that? Why do otherwise rational adults still believe in a talking snake and a global flood and a virgin birth without question?

  These are two distinctly different statements:

  "There is no god."

  "I do not personally see sufficient evidence to believe in god."

  Either statement can indicate an atheistic perspective (and atheist views are not limited to these two statements). Don't assume all take the stance of the first statement any more than you assume all Muslims are terrorists.

  At any rate, I feel like extremes are defined by actions not words. I don't hear about many atheist extremists blowing themselves up in open air markets. So if atheism in iteself is an extreme, what would you call radical [insert religious group] terrorists? Are they equal? More extreme? Most extreme? I thought extreme was on the farthest ends of the spectrum. How do you go beyond extreme?

  I realize you're saying that a hardcore JW is extreme by saying his religion is right and everyone else is wrong. I honestly wouldn't consider that extreme in itself. That seems to be par for the course with most religions today, does it not? Southern Baptists traditionally believe that those who don't accept Jesus into their hearts are going to hell. Is that extreme?
• 

  PSacramento

  I think we are viewing two different types of extremissims, that of religious view points and that of ways of thinking, perhaps, LOL !

  An extremisst is someone that takes a viewpoint to its most extreme point, at the expense of other points that can hold equal merit.

  EX: A christian extremsist believes that all but christian will burn in hell, while a moderate will believe that is up t God to decide but thinks that there is more to it than just being a christian and that there is a chance for all people.

  Both based their views on the same thing, but one takes it to it fullest extreme.

  Then there is extremissim in BELIEF with belief in God at one point, for example, and NON-belief at the other end and that is what I am talking about since this thead is about a someone that believed in God 100% and then went to believing in NO god at all ( 0% or 100% the other way, pick one).

  My point isn't really about that though, its about WHAT makes a person more apt to adopt an extermisst viewpoint.

  I am saying that the very thing that leads one to be a part of a group like the JW's and be a zelaous JW, preaching to the world and strangers about the WT propoganda, is the very thing that is the problem, not the belief per say but the "extremisst personality" that leads one to be a "zealot" ( for God or against God), know what I mean?
• 

  darth frosty

  This has been my theory on why most ex-dubs are atheist. I felt that the one thing JW's do well is tear down other religous belifs and structures. You go door to door to engage people and basically tell them what they were led to believe is wrong.

  Now when you are faced with your crises of concious and find that the dubs are wrong that ever loving question comes up: Where will you go? For me the critique that I used to tear down others religion was turn on to the bible, what I found left the bible story and its god lacking.

  Like was mentioned earlier atheism is merely a non-belief in god or religion as commonly practiced.
• 

  cyberjesus

  SBC: I like all your statements.

  PSAC:

  conviction that he was right and everyone else that had a different view was wrong

  1.- Where did you get that statement? I am really curious. This is a complete assumption my friend.

  I have a convction in what I know, but I KNOW that I DON'T knwo everything so I CAN'T be of the mind that I am right and all that DON'T beleive as I do are wrong, that is why, for me, ANY extreme view point that says "THIS IS IT, PERIOD" is unappealing and totally illogical for me.

  2.See this is the main problem my friend. That is not the posture of an Atheist. An Atheist is willing to change his point of view many times, as many times as evidence presents. you are confusing the position of a christian with an atheist. The Atheist is open minded but look at what you wrote

  "Hence I can never be an atheist NOR can I be a fundamentalist"

  See who NEVER change his point of view?

  Same JW as an atheist: I am in the right, there is no God and everyone that believes in God is wrong, ignorant really, its plain to see that there is no God, it is obvious for those that see the facts, anyone that truly understand science can see that !

  Here is another one. The only people who says I am in the right is the people that think they are certain. Atheism (I dont know how many times we atheists repeats this) is the abscense of that certainty. The Believer think is right about the existance of a God. The Atheist is right about his reasoning not about the existance of a God. That is a strawmen my friend.

  EX: A christian extremsist believes that all but christian will burn in hell, while a moderate will believe that is up t God to decide but thinks that there is more to it than just being a christian and that there is a chance for all people.

  So what if someone doesnt believe any of that? You call that extremist? I seems to me you like to use that word more to suit your need than to describe reality. I dont have a problem with you believing in God or Christ or whatever you want to believe. I have a problem with changing reality to what is not.

  Then there is extremissim in BELIEF with belief in God at one point, for example, and NON-belief at the other end and that is what I am talking about since this thead is about a someone that believed in God 100% and then went to believing in NO god at all ( 0% or 100% the other way, pick one).

  with that reasoning I am gonna call you an extremist Non-Santa Clause believer. See what you are doing? this statement is another fallacy. IF you are saying that someone who believes is in 100 and someone who doesnt is in th 0 and both are extreme then:

  1-You are an extremist too. because you believe in God.

  2.Who is in the middle? someone who half believes?

  3. This assumes that the moderate is to be in the middle, therefore having some belief..... equivocation my friend.

  The moderation is not believing. The extremes are believing in one god or another. Someone who doesnt believe any is in the middle.

  SBC:

  Again, even a "hard core" extremist atheist like Dawkins

  There is no extremist atheist. The same way you can not be an extremist Santa-Claus non believer. you either believe he exist, or are not sure, or just dont.

  lets say you eat a chile. if we are going to quantify the level of hotness in your mouth. you can be alittle hot, or very hot, or extremely hot. but if you dont eat the chile, you are just not hot at all. you can never be Extremely not hot. Anything below zero hot is the same.
• 

  PSacramento

  1.- Where did you get that statement? I am really curious. This is a complete assumption my friend.

  Yes, a total assumption on my part.

  I was just projecting the JW's that I know personally that have that attitude, we ( SBJ and I) have kind of gone beyond a specific person in that discussion, sorry.

  I agree with most of what you said and see your point.

  This part, however, is still what I am trying to get at:

  I am saying that the very thing that leads one to be a part of a group like the JW's and be a zelaous JW, preaching to the world and strangers about the WT propoganda, is the very thing that is the problem, not the belief per say but the "extremisst personality" that leads one to be a "zealot" ( for God or against God), know what I mean?
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  SBC: Again, even a "hard core" extremist atheist like Dawkins

  CJ: There is no extremist atheist. The same way you can not be an extremist Santa-Claus non believer. you either believe he exist, or are not sure, or just dont.

  Just to clarify, my use of "hard core extremist" was mainly to reflect some Christians' perspective of Dawkins being a "militant atheist" and whatnot, I just failed to include "extremist" in my quotation marks. That's my bad.

  Having said that, while I don't agree with hasty generalization, I do agree with PSac that there are varying degrees of assertiveness in most ,if not all, belief systems. For atheists, some are more reserved while others are dogmatic and outspoken. That goes for religionists as well, obviously.

  Still, to me these are two very different statements:

  "God does NOT exist."

  VS

  "I do not personally see sufficient evidence to believe in god."

  My point is that not all atheists are equally dogmatic and not all Christians condemn all nonbelievers to hell... so generalization should be avoided.

  But, like CJ said, there are many misconceptions about atheists. This is, in part, due to religious propaganda regarding science, evolution, and atheism. It reminds me of the old days when a householder insisted that we (JWs) didn't believe in Jesus AT ALL. That was a misconception. JWs believed in Jesus, just not in the sense that the householder did.

  CJ: lets say you eat a chile. if we are going to quantify the level of hotness in your mouth. you can be alittle hot, or very hot, or extremely hot. but if you dont eat the chile, you are just not hot at all. you can never be Extremely not hot. Anything below zero hot is the same.

  CJ, I get what you're saying but I might use a different illustration. Temperature is an analog signal with degrees vary from the hottest to the coldest. Eat a popsicle and your mouth will be cold.

  With temperature, you have to define some kind of setpoint value before you can quantify extreme deviations. That's why I say extremes are relative to our own personal belief. We see our own belief as the setpoint and other beliefs as x degrees deviation from normal, and when we change our beliefs, we thereby change our perceived normal/setpoint. It's all perspective.

  This is such an abstract measurement, is it really possible to nail down an absolute means of quantification?

  Belief in a god = 100%

  Unsure = 50%

  No belief in a god = 0%

  or

  Belief in Yahweh = far left

  No belief in god(s) = middle

  Belief in Allah = far right

  I don't know. Ultimately, I feel that an absence of belief in god is neutral "worldview" ground but I also acknowledge the varying degrees of assertiveness within that group.