Have You Ever Deconverted Anybody?
qquito
I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
conversations or even years of discussions.
Or are there such stories somewhere?
Thank you for reading and replying!
--Roland
Robibnikoff
"qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> Dear Everyone:
>
> I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> conversations or even years of discussions.
Not me. I couldn't be bothered. I don't give a crap what other people
believe as long as they don't try to force it on me.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
If you can't be a good example....
You'll just have to be a horrible warning.
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
We've had a few here who got deconverted.
qquito
> "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Dear Everyone:
>
> > I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> > a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> > conversations or even years of discussions.
>
> Not me. I couldn't be bothered. I don't give a crap what other people
> believe as long as they don't try to force it on me.
I can understand your approach. But one may want to do it for mere
intellectual purpose or out of concern for its negative effect on the
society.
--Roland
Hypatia
news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> conversations or even years of discussions.
>
> Or are there such stories somewhere?
>
Cultural change doesn't work that way. The best we can hope to do is produce
gradual modifications in the social and intellectual climate that will
result, over time, in there gradually being fewer new faith-heads, less
dogmatic-faith-heads, less influential faith-heads, more easily embarrassed
faith-heads, quieter faith-heads... All of this in a gathering spiral, until
eventually nothing of any detectable supernaturalistic significance remains.
Just as in the case of the Greek gods: no-one had to 'deconvert' anyone for
those silly beliefs to go the way that Christianity, Islam and the other
idiocies will also go. All that happened was that incremental cultural
change finally meant that one day the sun rose on a world in which no-one
actually gave a crap any more about Zeus & Co...
H.
Hypatia
>>I don't give a crap what other people
>> believe as long as they don't try to force it on me.
>
> I can understand your approach. But one may want to do it for mere
> intellectual purpose or out of concern for its negative effect on the
> society.
Indeed. But it's well-nigh impossible to 'reason' someone out of a
conviction which they adopted in pre-rational circumstances and which they
cling to for irrational reasons... Nice as it would be to be able to
'deconvert' such people, all that really happens in practise is that we make
them a bit less confident about spouting or acting upon their bullshit,
until such time as they die off and, hopefully, are not replaced. A
precisely equivalent situation obtains with the visceral anti-black or
anti-Semite racist, and for precisely the same reasons.
H.
Robibnikoff
Well, maybe that works for "one", but like I said, I couldn't be bothered.
I have real life stuff to deal with.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
Enkidu
c66b29...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
I don't know . . . I've never tried.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
Appraise the Lord: Tax church property.
-- bumper sticker
raven1
wrote:
>Dear Everyone:
Actually, at least 56 people have been deconverted by participating in
discussion on alt.atheism. The list has not been updated since October
2004, so one would think that the number has risen since then. As I am
no longer an active participant in alt.atheism (I'm reading this on
talk.atheism) due to the unacceptable signal to noise ratio there, I'd
appreciate it if someone would take over the keeping of the list for
me. Thanks.
alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
1. Peter Kirby (aa # 16) (theist to atheist)
2. Richard Trice (aa # 543)
3. Natalie Ramsey (aa # 222) (pagan theist to pagan atheist)
4. David 'Fish' Trout (aa # 623) (theist to strong atheist)
5. Avender (aa # 88) (deistic theist to atheist)
6. Mike Day
7. Peruru (aa # 512)
8. Douglas Nelson (aa # 1119) (theist to atheist)
9. Austin Cline (aa # 32)
10. Krisha (aa # 1200)
11. Tigger (aa # 1109)
12. Vaibhavgoel (aa # 1221)
13. Barbed Wire & Thumbtacks (aa # 1138)
14. Dark Angel (aa # 1172)
15. Laura Leon (aa # 298) (agnostic to atheist)
16. Randomseed (aa # 1366)
17. Curt van den Heuvel (Baptist Fundy -> Atheist).
18. Dave Holloway (aa # 1184) (weak theist to atheist)
19. Jan Mancini
20. Lorelei (aa # 1049) (theist to atheist)
21. Nicholas Buenk (aa # 1414)
22. Nemo (aa # 1431)
23. Ole I. Hougaard (aa # 1393) (agnostic to atheist)
24. Derek Pomery (aa # 1394) (agnostic to atheist)
25. Tony Livernois (aa # 1440) (agnostic to atheist)
26. Paul Willing (aa # 1462) (deist to atheist)
27. Danny Mac (aa # 1516) (theist to atheist)
28. Tiggs (aa # 1558) (agnostic to atheist)
29. Cyberia (agnostic to atheist)
30. Nilone (aa #1470) (pagan to atheist)
31. Shadow Wraith (agnostic to atheist)
32. Michael Painter (agnostic to atheist)
33. Than Henderson (Fundamentalist Christian to atheist)
34. John Collins (aa # 1639) (Fundamentalist to atheist)
35. Electric Messiah
36. Mr. P.B. & J. (Mark) (Christian (almost fundamentalist) to strong
atheist)
37. Michael J. Nash (aa # 1651) (agnostic to atheist)
38. JT IceFire (aa # 1569) (agnostic to atheist)
39. Richard Harlos (aa # 1698) (theist to atheist) [editor's note:
Richard changed positions several times, and most recently manifested
as an agnostic theist. - raven1]
40. Paul Smith (aa # 1353) (agnostic to atheist)
41. Jabar Abdullah Al-Karim (Moslem to atheist)
42. Mike Colby (aa # 1375) (Undefined denomination Christian to
atheist)
43. Wily (aa # 1729) (Christian to atheist)
44. Cyclone Ambiguous (Buddhist/Agnostic to atheist)
45. Mikey (Fundamentalist Christian to strong atheist WRT personal
"Gods"/Agnostic Humanist)
46. John Andrew Shepard (Agnostic w/residual Xian sympathies -> weak
atheist).
47. XF-11 (Pantheist to weak atheist)
48. Zachary Haddenham (Der Senfmeister) (aa # 1732) (Mormon->
agnostic-> strong atheist)
49. Jowysiren (aa # 1755)
50. Flannel (aa # 1777) (agnostic -> atheist)
51. Karl E. Taylor (aa # 1143) (Fundie -> Quaker -> in your face
atheist)
52. Rian Jensen (aa # 317) (pantheist to weak atheist later to strong
atheist)
53. Jason Dorman (Electrcbld) (Christian to strong atheist)
54. David Moisan (aa # 1902) (Recovering Catholic -> agnostic ->
atheist)
55. Gorgo (aa # 1914) (christian->theist->deist->agnostic
theist->agnostic atheist->atheist).
56. Evil Atheist (aa # 1917) (Theist -> Agnostic -> Atheist)
panam...@hotmail.com
> Dear Everyone:
>
> I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> conversations or even years of discussions.
Nah. You can't reason sombody out of a viewpoint they hold for
emotional reasons. I *have* had a few people tell me they only started
the journey after hearing me stand up for myself in public, but they
all traveled that road on their own.
> Or are there such stories somewhere?
Oh, plenty...but I'll bet you ten Euros they all bear me out. <g>
http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml8453.htm
http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/
(about 3/4th the way down)
The Internet Infidels once had a great list of deconversion stories,
but they are realigning their forums, and I can't find it.
http://infidels.org/
> Thank you for reading and replying!
>
> --Roland
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian
> Or are there such stories somewhere?
One possible source of such stories would be the forum site where I hang out
often: The forums of www.exchristian.net
The topic is discussed there every now and then. You might want to drop in
and ask (sadly that's not normally a topic of specific interest to me so I
currently don't have any examples at hand).
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
My personal judgment of monotheism:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus
Ian Smith
> "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> Dear Everyone:
>>
>> I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
>> a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
>> conversations or even years of discussions.
>>
>> Or are there such stories somewhere?
Yes. I have one.
A close family member has had a few troubles over the years and has
even resorted to discussing the issues with monks - he was seeking
some spiritual enlightenment.
He has attacked me for expressing atheistic views, the usual things
like "You can't logically prove that there isn't a god" etc. I've
repeatedly spoken about Richard Dawkin's work to him, but there is
no way he would have read anything I gave him, as I'm seen as the
outspoken atheist in a quite religious family.
However, following our discussions, he obtained a copy of "The God
Delusion" from somewhere and now rates it highly. He is now critical
of his own family and points out where their (catholic) beliefs are
nonsensical.
So, it took time and patience, but it certainly worked.
regards, Ian
Vipera berus
pba...@worldonline.nl
Not as far as I know. But then I never really tried. People seem happy
believing what hey belief, and as long as they do not hurt anyone with
their beliefs, why not let them be happy? Of course I will not hide
the fact that I am an atheist. And I might have contributed in
someones change of mind. But if I did, They didn't let me know:-)
Somehow it seems it's mostly Chiristians who help people become
atheists:-)
Love,
Peter van Velzen
November 2008
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
duke
wrote:
Name one.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Christopher A. Lee
A Christian lurker on alt.atheism credited me with deconverting him
even though I hadn't meant to.
There had been a Muslim cross posting between Islamic, Christian and
atheist groups.
The Muslim was doing the usual crap, presuming Allah and the Koran,
etc.
And we were saying things like "So what. Christians use the Bible as
proof of Christianity, what makes their exact equivalent wrong and
yours right?", etc.
Over time he was mentally cheering us and eventually realised that
what we said applied to Christian "Arguments" as well.
It was one of posters calling himself Mr. something - possibly Mr.
Douglas or maybe Mr. Peebles.
>regards, Ian
duke
>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>> Name one.
>You need to read these threads a little better.
I did. You need to.
>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist converted to
theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
Pink Freud
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>
>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>> Name one.
>
>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>
> I did. You need to.
>
>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>
> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> converted to
> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>
> Name one.
>
All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
----------------------------------------------------------
"I used to hate myself, until I found you."
The Wildhearts
Bill M
>
>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>> Name one.
>
>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>
> I did. You need to.
>
>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>
> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> converted to
> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>
> Name one.
You apparently coudn't read the list posted by Mark. Learn to read.
John Smith
"qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
"deconvert"?
unconvert?
anti-convert?
no, it's convert - plain and simple.
You cannot "convert" people - you can only offer thinking as an alternative
to blind belief or faith.
The rest, including the direction they take, is up to them.
IlBe...@gmail.com
> "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Dear Everyone:
IlBe...@gmail.com
>
> news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Dear Everyone:
>
> > I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a
> > conversations or even years of discussions.
>
> > Or are there such stories somewhere?
>
> Cultural change doesn't work that way. The best we can hope to do is produce
> gradual modifications in the social and intellectual climate that will
> result, over time, in there gradually being fewer new faith-heads, less
> dogmatic-faith-heads, less influential faith-heads, more easily embarrassed
> faith-heads, quieter faith-heads... All of this in a gathering spiral, until
> eventually nothing of any detectable supernaturalistic significance remains.
>
> Just as in the case of the Greek gods: no-one had to 'deconvert' anyone for
> those silly beliefs to go the way that Christianity, Islam and the other
> idiocies will also go. All that happened was that incremental cultural
> change finally meant that one day the sun rose on a world in which no-one
> actually gave a crap any more about Zeus & Co...
>
> H.
by themselves for the expressed motive of living life THEIR way which
is essentially , god-less. I suppose such a person can be 'helped
along' in this regard...but....all it really takes is just to listen
and act on whatever the present culture is advocating in conjunction
with ones own desire to be prideful and rebellious. It isnt based on
objectivity such as lack of evidence for the theistic personal Creator
nor the vast evidences for Christ and his historical ressurection from
the dead eyewitnessed by over 500 people at the time of which some
carefully documented in books which were preserved from corruption and
embellishment. By and large, very very few people who have
experienced a personal relationship with the Creator of this
Universe, return to the vomit of our cultures philosophies and
forcing oneself to believe that a universe like ours occured by
natural chance (from non intelligent Molecules and raw Chemicals of
all things...)
Vipera berus
This should keep you going for a bit...
from http://richarddawkins.net/convertsCorner
Greetings,
This is the story of how I escaped religion.
I was raised catholic. Mass was a wondrous experience to me. The music, the
vestments, the ritual, the stained glass, my Sunday classes with the nuns,
were all things I looked forward to every Sunday morning. Even as I grew
older, I was always bitterly disappointed when I was unable to go. When I
finally made my first confession and first communion, I was ecstatic. I
loved reading tales about the saints and the Virgin Mary. My
great-grandmother (even though I only saw her rarely) was the only relative
who was able to keep me indoors on a gorgeous summer afternoon with her
stories about the saints, miracles, and the time she saw the pope in person.
She predicted that I was destined to become a nun. When she passed away, she
left me her rosary that had been blessed by the pope-her most treasured
possession.
However, when I was 12, my parents split up and within a year were divorced.
We stopped going to mass. I missed it terribly. On Sunday mornings, I would
stay in my room, finding solace in my rosary and prayer books. This lasted
for about two years.
At the age of 15, a friend of mine invited me to her church just down the
street from my house. It was a small baptist church. I asked my dad if it
was okay and he told me to go ahead. That next Sunday, my friend and her
family picked me up and we drove past the seven houses that separated my
house from that small church.
It was quite different from what I knew. The Sunday school lesson, the songs
before the sermon, the sermon itself all pointed to a direct, open
relationship with Jesus and the god of the universe. By the end of the
service, I was hooked. The people there talked about god like they had just
seen him at the breakfast table. They welcomed me graciously and urged me to
stay for the dinner-on-the-grounds. How could I refuse? I was drawn like a
moth to the flame. I left there that afternoon determined to go back that
evening.
Within a month, I had been saved and baptized. Within six months, I was
going to church Sunday morning, Sunday evening, and Wednesday evenings,
singing in the choir, heavily involved in the youth group, volunteering for
anything they would let me do, and sitting in the front row with my bible
taking notes of the sermons.
Before a year had gone by, I was well versed in creationism; knew abortion
was an abomination before god; was convinced that homosexuality was going to
be the downfall of America; could tell you why a woman's role in the body of
christ was so limited; was certain that even thinking about sex before
marriage was the path to hell. I soaked it in like a sponge and believed
every word that came from the Sunday school teacher and the pastor. I spent
hours studying the bible, praying, and reading books on apologetics and
theology. I attended revival meetings, went witnessing, memorized scripture,
stayed away from any TV show, book, or movie deemed sinful by my pastor.
Nearly every friend I had was a member of that church.
I never went through a rebellious phase, because good little christian girls
always did what there parents said to do even if they didn't like it. Even
at the ages of 15, 16, 17, it was "ma'am" and "sir" to my parents, never
complaining about whatever chores I was given to do, never talking back,
taking care of my younger sister and two younger brothers, never getting
into trouble in school, showing the utmost respect for all my teachers...it
was certainly weird. I remember overhearing my mother commenting to my aunt
that she was glad I never went through "that awful teenage stage." All
because I loved Jesus with every fiber of my being. There was not a doubt in
my mind that I was heaven-bound.
When I graduated from high school and went to collage, things did not change
much. Although I never found a church that I really liked, I found a home in
the methodist student center. The director was a great big bear of a man
with a heart of gold and he welcomed all comers. He even forgave me for
being baptist. It wasn't long before I was as involved in activities there
as I had been in my little baptist church back home. I made a new group of
friends who prayed together, studied scripture together, and kept each other
on the straight and narrow. I was a fine example of how a good christian
girl should behave even though I was away from home for the first time. I
never partied or even drank; was never late for class; never skipped class;
turned in all my assignments on time; never stayed up past midnight, except
during finals week; and never, ever went anywhere alone with a boy. The
closest I came to dating was when I went places with a group of my friends
from the methodist student center. I kept myself pure in mind and body
because to do anything else would have disappointed Jesus. When after two
years, by dad told me I could not go back to college, the methodist student
center and the friends I had there were the only things I truly, missed.
I settled back into my little baptist church and was happy there until I was
21 or 22, when the pastor I had grown to love left. In his place, the search
committee put a slightly bitter, slightly liberal man with none of the
charisma of Pastor Tommy. I began praying about finding another church.
For the next couple of years I joined and left two or three churches-each
more conservative that the last. I would join, get active, discover that I
wasn't comfortable there, decide that I had not heard god correctly about
joining this particular church. (It certainly couldn't be god's fault that I
couldn't find a new church home.) At this point I would start praying about
finding another church. All the time, my world was growing more and more
narrow as I learned more about being a good christian woman. I was becoming
more and more subdued in my mannerisms, speech patterns, and dress. Always
an introvert, I found it easy to fade further and further in to the
wallpaper and accept my destiny as a humble servant of christ.
My next real church home was a medium-sized baptist church. I was about 24.
It was the same pattern all over again. I joined and became active in
everything I could. Most of the young adults at this church were unofficial
youth group chaperones, so it was not long before I was one also. Soon, in
addition to everything else I was doing, I was helping to teach teenage
girls (being a woman, I could not teach the teenage boys). My entire life
revolved around god, Jesus, and this church. I gained a reputation as an
outstanding example of what a single christian woman should be. I was the
perfect, humble, obedient, unquestioning christian woman. My life was an
open book and no one could find fault.
It was while I was at this church that I felt led to go back to college.
After much prayer and counsel, I decided that god wanted me to be teacher. I
studied hard. After all this is what god wanted me to do with my life, I
couldn't let him down by getting bad grades.
About a semester into my new college career, I made a new group of friends.
They all attended a non-denominational church in a rundown section of town.
Soon I was attending also. These were people who experienced god in every
moment of their lives. God was part of the air that they breathed. Doctrine
was strict and extremely conservative. Worship included raising hands in the
air, speaking in tongues, dancing in the aisles all done to a background of
bass guitar and drums. Roles for men and women, single and married were
heavily delineated. Rules about how to run your life were made clear and
elders reserved to right to examine any aspect of your life from finances to
dress to how you raised you children. Every member of the church was
assigned to
an elder who was seen as being personally responsible for your spiritual
growth. The church was growing by leaps and bounds as word got out about how
god was transforming people. I ate it up with a spoon.
It didn't take me long to fall into line and become a respected part of this
church-or as respected as a single woman could be in such a patriarchal
system. Soon I was being held up again as an example of how a single
christian woman behaved. I baby-sat the children of elders, helped their
wives with house cleaning, they would call me if they were having trouble
getting their children ready for church, I went out with groups to witness
(but only to other women-I had no business revealing the word of god to a
man). The amount of time I spent studying the bible and praying increased.
The largest topics of conversation with my friends were what god was doing
in our lives, things we were struggling to surrender to god, what we had
learned in our personal bible studies, and asking each other to point out
areas where we were not living up to the standards set forth by god. My
friends and I even went clothes shopping together so we could make sure we
would not offend god with our clothing and jewelry. What little ability I
had left to think for myself, to reach my own decisions was soon gone. God's
rules were strict and he demanded absolute obedience. My life had totally
been taken over. I had become a right-wing evangelical, fundamentalist,
homophobic, anti-choice, creationist, misogynous, bible-thumping, anti-sex,
see-the-world-in-black-and-white, smug, arrogant, holier-than-thou christian
woman. I was a living, breathing two-dimensional stereotype. There was
hardly a thought in my head or a word that passed my lips that did not have
its origin in something either the pastor or my church elder said.
As for school, I did very well until it came time for my student teaching. I
had never failed so badly at anything in my life. I was devastated,
shattered, broken. I had let down all those people who had prayed for me and
had given me emotional support while I was in school. But the most
heart-rending of all to me was I knew that god was disappointed with me. I
spent hours flat on my face in prayer crying out to him for forgiveness,
telling him over and over how sorry I was that I had failed him. Months of
depression followed. I expected god to strike me with a suitable punishment
at any second and at that point I would have suffered anything if I thought
that it would bring god's forgiveness. I was 28 years old.
At this point, my church elder approached me. He told me he and his wife had
been praying about my situation. He said to me that god had told him that I
had not failed god, but had been undergoing a test. A test I had passed
because I had never cursed god or abandoned the path he had set for me.
Right then and there, I was ready to fall to the ground and kiss this man's
feet, but that would have been unseemly. So I stood there with my head bowed
and listened quietly as a good christian woman should when being addressed
by her elder. He continued. I was to rededicate myself to the service of god
by serving the least of his children-the unborn. The word had come down from
on high, so that is exactly what I did.
That next Saturday, I was one of those people holding one of those gruesome
signs in front an abortion clinic. I was there that Saturday and every
Saturday thereafter for almost two years. I held signs, sang songs, prayed,
protested. When it was hot I handed out ice water to my fellow
antiabortionists. When it was cold, I served coffee and hot chocolate. I was
only a lowly handmaiden of the lord, doing as he commanded. But I knew
beyond a shadow of a doubt that I was going to heaven, and also knew beyond
a shadow of a doubt that it I had anything more than a tent in heaven, it
was going to be only by god's grace. I was nothing. Yet if you had asked me,
I would have sworn to heaven that I was blissfully happy.
It was March 1993. I was 29, fast approaching 30. It was a week or so after
the murder of Dr. David Gunn in Florida. I was standing at the street
holding one of those horrible signs when I felt led to go pray. It was early
afternoon and things were winding down. I handed off my sign to another
woman and walked down the parking lot. (On one side of the parking lot was
the clinic, one the other a row of six or seven offices-one of which the
antiabortion group I was part of rented. We couldn't have asked for a better
set up.) I knelt down on the blacktop and began to pray. I asked god for an
end to the horror of abortion. I asked god to touch the hearts of the people
who worked in the clinic so they could see what an awful thing they were
doing and become his servants. Then I prayed that if god could not turn the
hearts of the abortionist and his accomplices, that he strike them down in
such a way as to be a lesson for others who would dare abort or conspire to
abort a baby. Then I told god that I was willing to be the vessel for the
destruction of these people if that was his will. At that moment, if that
clinic had blown up I wouldn't have just been glad, I would have reveled,
gloried, basked in the deaths of those murderers; rejoiced in the fact that
they were burning in hell. And if someone had been able to look into my mind
at that instant they would have seen that I was ready to personally destroy
these people whose only crime was to think that women deserved to the right
to have abortions. That is all I knew about those people who worked in that
clinic. I didn't know their names, whether or not they had children of their
own, or what they did when they weren't at the clinic. The sole reason I was
ready to see these people dead; ready kill them myself; was the fact that I
thought they were defying the god of the universe by providing abortions. At
the time, it was just the next logical step on the path I was walking.
It was summer of 1993. I was 30 years old. Operation Rescue had come to
Jackson, Mississippi in a big way. Daily protests, rallies at night. And I
was in the middle of it all, there for every minute of it. I slept maybe six
hours the whole week. I became the right hand of the people Operation Rescue
had sent to run the show. I set up and ran the registration tables, gave
people their assignments, enlisted prayer warriors, made sure we had enough
signs and other supplies, faced down news crews who wanted to film inside
the nightly rallies, I was on a mission for god. When it was all over, I was
offered a scholarship to Operation Rescue's school in Florida where they
taught you how to put on a show like this. I declined. I did not feel that
god wanted me to leave where I was.
But something inside me was changing. My grandmother, a born feminist, was
appalled by my involvement in the antiabortion movement. We argued bitterly
over this issue. She told me horror stories of the days before women had
access to contraception and abortions-things I had been told were just urban
myths made up by the pro-abortion movement to drum up support for their
cause. But my grandmother was the most honest person I knew. Someone had to
be lying. I started asking questions about what I had been told. The only
answers I got were silence or being told that I had been misled by the
person who told me about those things. My grandmother challenged me in other
ways. She remembered what life was like for women in the days prior to the
women's rights movement.
Every so slowly, my eyes opened. I knew that I had been lied to by the very
people I trusted to guide me to the truth. It wasn't long before I was
questioning everything I had been taught about god, myself and my place it
the universe. When I asked my pastor and elder about these things I was told
to pray more, study my bible more, find out what sin in my life was causing
me to act this way. By the end of 1993, I had left this church. I left the
antiabortion movement. I couldn't live that way any more.
But I wasn't finished with god yet. In spite of my burgeoning doubts about
religion and god, I ran straight back into the arms of the catholic church
of my childhood. I was no longer sure about anything. I was spending hours
and hours praying to god for a sign to restore my ebbing faith. I could not
imagine life without god. I returned to the catholic church, even as I
confessed to the priest that I was growing less and less sure about the very
existence of god. On easter Sunday of 1994, I was confirmed and became a
full fledged member of the catholic church, ignoring the screaming voice in
my head.
During this time, I rediscovered another childhood love, astronomy. Yes,
this does tie in to the story. As was my habit, when I became interested in
something, I would seek out magazines and books about it. During one of my
trips to look for astronomy magazines, I noticed a magazine I had not seen
before, Free Inquiry. The cover made it clear where this publication stood
on the issues of god and religion. I bought it. It was the first time I had
ever seen anything that said it was possible to live a moral life without
god. From there, I discovered other publications like The Humanist,
Skeptical Inquiry, Skeptic. These in turn led me to books. Richard Dawkins
taught me that everything I had been taught in church about evolution was a
lie. Michael Shermer helped me to figure out how to think for myself again.
Paul Kurtz showed me that life without god was possible. But I still
couldn't let go of god.
As I vocalized my growing lack of faith, the priest told me to read the
church fathers, pray the rosary more, pray to Mary for more faith, go to
daily mass and eucharistic adoration. In other word, the catholic version of
what I had been told at my previous church.
In 1996, I quit going to mass, but I renewed my subscriptions to two
catholic apologetics magazines and kept buying the afore mentioned skeptical
magazines. So there I was, a foot in both camps. The cognitive dissonance
should have caused my brain to explode, yet I managed to live with it until
early 1998. Most of that time was spent going over every religious
experience I had ever had, looking for something to hold on to, but they all
turned to ashes in my hands-there was nothing real there.
Finally, in early 1998 my brain cried "Uncle." I couldn't stand to think
about any of it anymore. The books were shelved, the magazines tucked away
in a drawer. I was slowly losing my sanity and had to just stop and give my
mind a rest.
Then in June of 1998, shortly after my 35th birthday, I was home alone. I
opened the drawer where I had been hiding the magazines from myself (I had
still been buy the freethinker ones and putting them in there with the
catholic ones). I pulled out one of the catholic magazines and started
reading. This stuff was loony tunes. I pulled out the other-same thing. Not
a bit of sense between the two of them. Then I pulled out the Free Inquiry
and started reading an article by Richard Dawkins about religion-finally
something that made sense.
About that time, the dryer buzzer went off and I got up to get my clothes. I
walked through the kitchen, and a third of the way through the living room
then came to a dead stop. "There is no god," I said. Of course my next
thought was, "Oh my god, I'm going to hell." Then I started laughing so hard
I had to sit down. "No, I'm not. There is no heaven. There is no hell. There
is no god." The last of the chains fell off, a huge weight lifted.
Of course, this declaration was a much a beginning as it was an end. I had a
lot of rebuilding to do of myself. Rethink my entire worldview. Reintroduce
me to myself. Therapy, tears, rages, a lot of thought, and one very good
atheist friend got me through the next eight difficult years while I
recovered from religion. So here I am today-a completely different person
that I was all those years ago. I now think for myself, make my own choices,
and live my life as I see fit. It is here, now, as an atheist that I have
found the peace, joy, and contentment so long promised me by religion. I am
truly free.
Robin C.
Mississippi, USA
raven1
Actually, in most cases, that is exactly what prompts people to turn
away from religion: the realization that there's no supporting
evidence for what they've been taught to believe. Feel free to post
any evidence if you have it.
>nor the vast evidences for Christ and his historical ressurection from
>the dead eyewitnessed by over 500 people at the time
There are no eyewitness accounts of Christ. The Gospels are of unknown
authorship, written decades after the events they purportedly recount,
and the claim of 500 witnesses to the resurrection comes from Paul,
who never met Christ, and whose claim is unsupported.
>of which some
>carefully documented in books which were preserved from corruption and
>embellishment.
Then why are the accounts of the Resurrection wildly contradictory?
John Baker
wrote:
>Dear Everyone:
>
>I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
>a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
>conversations or even years of discussions.
>
>Or are there such stories somewhere?
>
>Thank you for reading and replying!
I don't try. I despise theists who try to force their beliefs onto
everyone they meet, and have no desire to become their atheistic
counterpart.
If someone asks me why I don't believe in any gods, I'll tell them,
but I don't volunteer. I figure if they're smart enough, and
intellectually honest enough, there's a good chance they'll
"deconvert" on their own eventually. If they aren't, nothing I could
say would make a difference anyway.
>
>--Roland
Uncle Vic
> Dear Everyone:
>
> I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> conversations or even years of discussions.
>
> Or are there such stories somewhere?
>
> Thank you for reading and replying!
>
> --Roland
>
I'm not in the preaching business. When someone unloads their delusion on
my, I'll point out the error of their ways. But in my experience,
deconversion has to be a personal voyage.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Separator of Church and Reason.
Convicted by Earthquack.
thisi...@nowhere.com
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>
>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>> Name one.
>
>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>
>I did. You need to.
>
>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>
>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist converted to
>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
Correct.
Well done you show signs of intelligence.
>
>Name one.
There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
grew up.
--
Les Hellawell
Greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
John Locke
wrote:
>Dear Everyone:
>
>I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
>a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
>conversations or even years of discussions.
>
No. That is something I wouldn't want to do. In most cases
it would probably be futile. If a religious person were to ask me
about atheism I would be glad to explain but I would not attempt
conversion. It is my opinion that the religiously deluded must
bite the bullet and use what's left of their brains to find the way
out of their shells for themselves.
___________________________________________________
"I don't think we're here for anything, we're
just products of evolution. You can say 'Gee,
your life must be pretty bleak if you don't think
there's a purpose' but I'm anticipating a good lunch."
-Dr. James Watson, American biologist, (Discoverer of DNA.)
duke
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>
>> I did. You need to.
>>
>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>> converted to
>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>
>> Name one.
>
>You apparently coudn't read the list posted by Mark. Learn to read.
I corrected him.
duke
>
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>
>> I did. You need to.
>>
>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>> converted to
>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>
>> Name one.
>>
>
>All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
concept of God.
duke
>X-No-Archive: yes
>
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>
>> I did. You need to.
>>
>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion.
>No it doesn't.
>Worse, it has a colloquial meaning also......
>Thus:
>Define deconvert:
>To undergo a deconversion from a religion, faith or belief or ( transitive)
>to induce (someone) to reject a particular religion, faith, or belief.
To deconvert is to reverse a conversion. It's really very simple.
>See any mention of reverse in there...??
>You are, of course, as per usual, arguing pedantically....
To deconvert is to reverse a conversion.
>> That means atheist converted to
>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>
>It would be a truism if one accepts that EVERYONE is born atheist,
NOONE is born atheist. An atheist rejects the existence of God by decision.
>> Name one.
>
>re-read the list.
>All deconverted from religion to atheism.
No conversion in the first place.
duke
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>
>>I did. You need to.
>>
>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist converted to
>>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>
>Correct.
>Well done you show signs of intelligence.
I contain a heavy dose of intelligence.
>>Name one.
>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>grew up.
Name one.
Pink Freud
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:gr81i415bd64r983l...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:45:01 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>> Name one.
>>>
>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>
>>> I did. You need to.
>>>
>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>
>>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>> converted to
>>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>>
>>> Name one.
>>>
>>
>>All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has
> no
> concept of God.
>
Your definition is wrong. As are you.
Pink Freud
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:i191i4hh84dsdcaqn...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:04:17 +0000, thisi...@nowhere.com wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>> Name one.
>>>
>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>
>>>I did. You need to.
>>>
>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>
>>>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>>converted to
>>>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>
>>Correct.
>>Well done you show signs of intelligence.
>
> I contain a heavy dose of intelligence.
>
>>>Name one.
>
>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>grew up.
>
> Name one.
>
>
You really can't possibly even contemplate of a person who might have once
been as dumb as you, but who has had the intelligence to question their
beliefs, can you?
What is the point of giving you examples? Your mind is already made up and
nothing will change it. If examples are provided all you will do is attempt
to weasel out of the argument by being pedantic and juvenile. Totally
pathetic. I don't know why you think atheists on this ng should want to
waste their time on you. Here's a hint, though: people leave their belief in
a god behind them every single day, and many of them are much happier for
it.
Just because this makes your tiny little head explode, doesn't make it
untrue.
Bill M
>
>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>> Name one.
>>>
>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>
>>>I did. You need to.
>>>
>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>
>>>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>>converted to
>>>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>
>>Correct.
>>Well done you show signs of intelligence.
>
> I contain a heavy dose of intelligence.
>
>>>Name one.
>
>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>grew up.
>
> Name one
Me and many others!
Bill M
Dr.Hal0nf1r£$
How long have you spare to wait? If you're waiting for Dimwit to present
solid concrete evidence you'll be waiting a very long time: We've been
waiting what appears to be forever for one single shred of concrete proof
from him; but he either won't share it or has none.
>
>> nor the vast evidences for Christ and his historical ressurection
>> from the dead eyewitnessed by over 500 people at the time
>
> There are no eyewitness accounts of Christ. The Gospels are of unknown
> authorship, written decades after the events they purportedly recount,
> and the claim of 500 witnesses to the resurrection comes from Paul,
> who never met Christ, and whose claim is unsupported.
>
>> of which some
>> carefully documented in books which were preserved from corruption
>> and embellishment.
>
> Then why are the accounts of the Resurrection wildly contradictory?
Could they be lies by any chance? Judging by their advocate, DiLV, I'd say
that is a foregone conclusion.
John Baker
wrote:
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:i191i4hh84dsdcaqn...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:04:17 +0000, thisi...@nowhere.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>>
>>>>I did. You need to.
>>>>
>>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>>
>>>>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>>>converted to
>>>>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>>
>>>Correct.
>>>Well done you show signs of intelligence.
<PIGGYBACKING>
>>
>> I contain a heavy dose of intelligence.
I must say, Earl, if that's the case, you certainly hide it well. One
might be forgiven for assuming, based on the general content of your
posts, that you'd find wiping your own arse a formidable intellectual
challenge.
Free Lunch
alt.atheism:
Oh, nonsense. You know you have no evidence to support your silly claim.
You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
commands the majority of believers. If there is a god, he is totally
incompetent at getting his message across. Given that no evidence backs
up any claims about any gods, the only rational conclusion is that no
gods exist. You, of course, being in a war against rationality, conclude
otherwise.
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 16:52:23 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>alt.atheism:
>>NOONE is born atheist. An atheist rejects the existence of God by decision.
Puke knows he is lying.
>Oh, nonsense. You know you have no evidence to support your silly claim.
>You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
>commands the majority of believers. If there is a god, he is totally
>incompetent at getting his message across. Given that no evidence backs
>up any claims about any gods, the only rational conclusion is that no
>gods exist. You, of course, being in a war against rationality, conclude
>otherwise.
The very fact that many of the atheists here were never taught to be
theist, gives the lie to Puke
Free Lunch
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote in alt.atheism:
It's the full-length version of "Waiting for Godot".
>>> nor the vast evidences for Christ and his historical ressurection
>>> from the dead eyewitnessed by over 500 people at the time
>>
>> There are no eyewitness accounts of Christ. The Gospels are of unknown
>> authorship, written decades after the events they purportedly recount,
>> and the claim of 500 witnesses to the resurrection comes from Paul,
>> who never met Christ, and whose claim is unsupported.
>>
>>> of which some
>>> carefully documented in books which were preserved from corruption
>>> and embellishment.
>>
>> Then why are the accounts of the Resurrection wildly contradictory?
>
>Could they be lies by any chance? Judging by their advocate, DiLV, I'd say
>that is a foregone conclusion.
Stories written long after the supposed fact. As we all know, and that
included the ignorance-worshippers who call themselves Christian here,
these stories were not news reports.
qquito
--Roland
On Nov 16, 1:00 pm, "Vipera berus" <l...@v.n> wrote:
> qquito wrote:
>
> This should keep you going for a bit...
>
> fromhttp://richarddawkins.net/convertsCorner
>
> Greetings,
>
> This is the story of how I escaped religion.
>
> I was raised catholic. Mass was a wondrous experience to me. The music, the
> vestments, the ritual, the stained glass, my Sunday classes with the nuns,
> .........
bob young
Hypatia wrote:
> "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:85424009-b6e8
>
> >>I don't give a crap what other people
> >> believe as long as they don't try to force it on me.
> >
> > I can understand your approach. But one may want to do it for mere
> > intellectual purpose or out of concern for its negative effect on the
> > society.
>
> Indeed. But it's well-nigh impossible to 'reason' someone out of a
> conviction which they adopted in pre-rational circumstances and which they
> cling to for irrational reasons... Nice as it would be to be able to
> 'deconvert' such people, all that really happens in practise is that we make
> them a bit less confident about spouting or acting upon their bullshit,
> until such time as they die off and, hopefully, are not replaced. A
> precisely equivalent situation obtains with the visceral anti-black or
> anti-Semite racist, and for precisely the same reasons.
>
> H.
I fully agree H. All we can do at best is start them thinking along different
lines
and then trust that basic intelligence might take over.
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image;
and then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
bob young
Robibnikoff wrote:
> "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:85424009-b6e8-41f5...@k24g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 15, 7:19 pm, "Robibnikoff" <witchy...@broomstick.com> wrote:
> > "qquito" <qqu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >
> > news:41cb8899-eb72-4db3...@z28g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > > Dear Everyone:
> >
> > > I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> > > a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> > > conversations or even years of discussions.
> >
> > Not me. I couldn't be bothered. I don't give a crap what other people
> > believe as long as they don't try to force it on me.
>
> >I can understand your approach. But one may want to do it for mere
> >intellectual purpose or out of concern for its negative effect on the
> >society.
>
> Well, maybe that works for "one", but like I said, I couldn't be bothered.
> I have real life stuff to deal with.
But it WILL effect you Robyn when Muslims start hurling atomic weapons at what
they consider to be Christian states, who will then hurl some more back at
them. The Muslims won't concern themselves about the millions of dead, their
Allah says it is OK to kill infidels. . . . . . so that's all right then'
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image;
and then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
>
> --
> Robyn
> Resident Witchypoo
> BAAWA Knight!
> #1557
> If you can't be a good example....
> You'll just have to be a horrible warning.
bob young
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:31:42 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:09:34 -0800 (PST), qquito <qqu...@hotmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>Dear Everyone:
> >>
> >>I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
> >>a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
> >>conversations or even years of discussions.
> >>
> >>Or are there such stories somewhere?
> >>
> >>Thank you for reading and replying!
> >>
> >>--Roland
> >
> >We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>
> Name one.
I cannot - but I can name one who will never be converted,
he has been lead too far down the road of ancient superstition. . . . . .
You Dook
Or as Gibbon put it - ultimately what we know as "Christianity" is
- "The triumph of superstition over reason"
Prove Gibbon and I wrong Dook, can you . . . ?
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image;
and then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
>
>
bob young
duke wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>
> >>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
> >> Name one.
>
> >You need to read these threads a little better.
>
> I did. You need to.
>
> >alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>
> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist converted to
> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
So now we are going to have to debate what we mean by a 'Wriggler' and whether such
a homo sapien can be converted back to a normal person.
anyone have an answer ?
>
>
> Name one.
bob young
Bill M wrote:
> "duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
> >>> Name one.
> >
> >>You need to read these threads a little better.
> >
> > I did. You need to.
> >
> >>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
> >
> > To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> > converted to
> > theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
> >
> > Name one.
>
> You apparently coudn't read the list posted by Mark. Learn to read.
Dook only reads intelligent stuff that he agrees with,
like an ancient mythological fella feeding a multitude with five loaves and
five fishes
bob young
duke wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:45:01 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
> >>>> Name one.
> >>
> >>>You need to read these threads a little better.
> >>
> >> I did. You need to.
> >>
> >>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
> >>
> >> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> >> converted to
> >> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
> >>
> >> Name one.
> >>
> >
> >All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
> concept of God.
So who taught you Dook and did he prove his points along the way
or did you swallow them without thinking and then carry on 'not thinking' for
the rest of your days. ?
bob young
Pink Freud wrote:
> "duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:gr81i415bd64r983l...@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:45:01 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
> >>>>> Name one.
> >>>
> >>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
> >>>
> >>> I did. You need to.
> >>>
> >>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
> >>>
> >>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> >>> converted to
> >>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
> >>>
> >>> Name one.
> >>>
> >>
> >>All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
> >
> > No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has
> > no
> > concept of God.
> >
>
> Your definition is wrong. As are you.
I have to agree with Dook, much as it goes against the grain. Newborns are
innocent. They become brainwashed and then the smart ones see thru the con and
become atheists, usually fourteen years an onwards. In my case age 24.
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image;
and then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
>
>
Vipera berus
Not mine.. I never fell for the religion thing. I read it and thought it was
just what you were after.
Vb
thisi...@nowhere.com
Just like all believers they are long on assertion and absent of
justification for anything they write.
We are undoubtedly a thorn in their side which irritates them
no end as they know we are on strong ground and fully justified
in not accepting their claims there are such things as gods.
They know they cannot provide any evidence of any kind and
that really really irritates them no end as it cast genuine doubt
on their belief. The likes of anonymous whose current EMail
address is 'IBebaulked' desperately thrash about trying to
get round this basic fact but since they have to rely on even
more unjustified assertion for their ludicrous illogical arguments
they can only fail.
Thus, like moths to a flame, they cannot stop coming here only
to get burned everytime. These people must be in real
turmoil with themselves and desperatly unhappy that they
might realise that their precious faith is worthless and,
horror of horrors, loose it
In actuality they are empty with nothing to say of any
consequence or worth. None of their posts are worth
a moment of my time but they do badly need our help.
--
Les Hellawell
Greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
John Smith
"Vipera berus" <l.c@v.n> wrote in message
news:6ocmd2F...@mid.individual.net...
I wasn't introduced to religion until it was time for my first communion
(Orthodox Catholicism).
Even at that young age, every time I went to Sunday school - from the very
first day - my reaction was "This makes absolutely NO sense!"
John Smith
<thisi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:lob2i4pc4b762ci2l...@4ax.com...
Atheism and Humanism are NOT the same things.
Huminism, at best, is a philosophical creed.
is something one
>>>> does by themselves for the expressed motive of living life THEIR way
>>>> which is essentially , god-less.
Why should I live my life according to something that doesn't exist?
That's atheism!
Therefore, the rational conclusion, is to use the brains I have, and the
society I live in, to make my way as best as possible.
It has nothing to do with YOUR strawman "motive".
I suppose such a person can be
>>>> 'helped along' in this regard...but....all it really takes is just
>>>> to listen and act on whatever the present culture is advocating in
>>>> conjunction with ones own desire to be prideful and rebellious.
It is not prideful or rebelious to ask for evidence for something that has
no evidence.
It
>>>> isnt based on objectivity such as lack of evidence for the theistic
>>>> personal Creator
There is no reason to "believe in a god", because there is absolutely NO
evidence that any god exists - is not objective?
Pink Freud
"bob young" <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:4920F304...@netvigator.com...
Innocent or not, the answer to the question "Do newborn children believe in
god(s)?" is "No". Therefore, they are atheists.
You are using the definition of atheism as "belief there is no god", where
the more common definition nowadays is "no belief in god", which babies have
in spades.
Vipera berus
>> Not mine.. I never fell for the religion thing. I read it and
>> thought it was just what you were after.
>>
>> Vb
>
> I wasn't introduced to religion until it was time for my first
> communion (Orthodox Catholicism).
> Even at that young age, every time I went to Sunday school - from the
> very first day - my reaction was "This makes absolutely NO sense!"
I did go to Sunday school a few times... Cute girl there! Seems to be
common...
Vb
duke
>X-No-Archive: yes
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:hq81i41c4hhcl1vsg...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:47:31 -0000, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>>You apparently coudn't read the list posted by Mark. Learn to read.
>
>> I corrected him.
>
>
>No you most certainly did not...
>You asserted some pedantic minutae, involving your own interpretation of
>language.
Yep, de-convert is a very simple term to understand.
duke
>X-No-Archive: yes
>
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:gr81i415bd64r983l...@4ax.com...
>
>> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has
>> no
>> concept of God.
>
>or, put another (equally correct) way,
>an atheist is someone who does not believe in god(s)...
>....which make them atheist!
No, an atheist is one that sees the evidence but denies and or/rejects the
existence of God. A person who sees the evidence as you do but finds it
uncertain/unclear is an agnostic.
There is no such thing as an atheist. No one could possibly be that stupid.
duke
>
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:gr81i415bd64r983l...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:45:01 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>>
>>>> I did. You need to.
>>>>
>>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>>
>>>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>>> converted to
>>>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>>>
>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>
>>>All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>>
>> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has
>> no
>> concept of God.
>>
>
>Your definition is wrong. As are you.
Not a chance.
duke
>> >All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
>> concept of God.
>So who taught you Dook and did he prove his points along the way
>or did you swallow them without thinking and then carry on 'not thinking' for
>the rest of your days. ?
I was taught early, and then as I grew up, there was no doubt of the existence
of almighty God. The evidence is overwhelming.
duke
>X-No-Archive: yes
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:os81i4hc0gusv511s...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:47:37 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>>>X-No-Archive: yes
>>>
>>>
>>>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>>>news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>>
>>>> I did. You need to.
>>>>
>>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>>
>>>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion.
>
>No. that would be (if the word existed..) a de-deconstruction!
That's 3 actions which would make one a theist again. Welcome back.
duke
>>>It would be a truism if one accepts that EVERYONE is born atheist,
>>NOONE is born atheist. An atheist rejects the existence of God by decision.
>Oh, nonsense. You know you have no evidence to support your silly claim.
Sorry, but an atheist denies/reject the existence of God. An infant can't do
that.
>You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
>commands the majority of believers.
But the one God almighty commands all believers and non believers alike, and
that includes you, who denies Him.
duke
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:i191i4hh84dsdcaqn...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:04:17 +0000, thisi...@nowhere.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 09:22:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>>>You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>>
>>>>I did. You need to.
>>>>
>>>>>alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>>
>>>>To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>>>converted to
>>>>theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>>
>>>Correct.
>>>Well done you show signs of intelligence.
>>
>> I contain a heavy dose of intelligence.
>>
>>>>Name one.
>>
>>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>>grew up.
>>
>> Name one
>
>Me and many others!
So you converted to Christianity from another faith/atheism, then converted to
atheism?
duke
>X-No-Archive: yes
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:i191i4hh84dsdcaqn...@4ax.com...
>
>>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>>grew up.
>
>
>> Name one.
>
>You behave like a child in the playground.
>You are an absolute fool methinks.
That you couldn't name one is a given.
duke
>>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>>grew up.
>>
>> Name one.
>You really can't possibly even contemplate of a person who might have once
>been as dumb as you, but who has had the intelligence to question their
>beliefs, can you?
I easily question an atheist's beliefs, laugh out at him, and then tell him how
wrong he is.
>What is the point of giving you examples? Your mind is already made up and
>nothing will change it.
I have the facts on my side.
duke
>duke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>>We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>> >> Name one.
>>
>> >You need to read these threads a little better.
>>
>> I did. You need to.
>>
>> >alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist converted to
>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>
>So now we are going to have to debate what we mean by a 'Wriggler' and whether such
>a homo sapien can be converted back to a normal person.
>anyone have an answer ?
What is a w(r)iggler anyway?
duke
>
>
>duke wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 19:31:42 -0500, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 16:09:34 -0800 (PST), qquito <qqu...@hotmail.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>Dear Everyone:
>> >>
>> >>I am wondering if anyone here has successfully deconverted a friend or
>> >>a family member of Christian or other faith through a series of
>> >>conversations or even years of discussions.
>> >>
>> >>Or are there such stories somewhere?
>> >>
>> >>Thank you for reading and replying!
>> >>
>> >>--Roland
>> >
>> >We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>
>> Name one.
>
>I cannot - but I can name one who will never be converted,
>he has been lead too far down the road of ancient superstition. . . . . .
>You Dook
I am rock solid Roman Catholic, and will be the day I die.
I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to be a protest_er, or worst yet,
an atheist wannabe.
Anthony Williams
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>
>> I did. You need to.
>>
>>> alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>
>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>> converted to
>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>
>>
>
> All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
>
Exactly. It's "reconvert" there is no such word as "deconvert."
--
Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother,
and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life
also, he cannot be my disciple." JESUS CHRIST
The Chief Instigator
> On 16 Nov 2008 22:33:01 -0600, bob young <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>
>>> >All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
>>> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
>>> concept of God.
>
>>So who taught you Dook and did he prove his points along the way
>>or did you swallow them without thinking and then carry on 'not thinking' for
>>the rest of your days. ?
>
> I was taught early, and then as I grew up, there was no doubt of the existence
> of almighty God. The evidence is overwhelming.
So shut up and deal with the consequences of your personal choice to ignore
reality, all those years ago.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (pat...@io.com) Houston, Texas
www.io.com/~patrick/aeros.php (TCI's 2008-09 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Bridgeport 3, Houston 2 (SO) (November 16)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, November 22 vs. Worcester, 7:35
James Beck
@cox.net says...
>
> No, an atheist is one that sees the evidence but denies and or/rejects the
> existence of God. A person who sees the evidence as you do but finds it
> uncertain/unclear is an agnostic.
You keep referring to this 'evidence' and yet you can never seem to
provide it.
James Beck
@cox.net says...
>
> I was taught early, and then as I grew up, there was no doubt of the existence
> of almighty God. The evidence is overwhelming.
I have yet to be whelmed by any of your 'evidence', especially since you
never provide any. Let work on that and then we can go on to
overwhelmed.
James Beck
@cox.net says...
>
> Sorry, but an atheist denies/reject the existence of God. An infant can't do
> that.
I do not deny your deity and more than I deny Santa Clause.
>
> >You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
> >commands the majority of believers.
>
> But the one God almighty commands all believers and non believers alike, and
> that includes you, who denies Him.
Then let it show itself and COMMAND me.
How is 'it' a 'him', to attribute a sexual gender to your deity is just
further proof of it being a man made construct.
James Beck
@cox.net says...
>
> I am rock solid Roman Catholic, and will be the day I die.
Good for you, love to see those that revel in their ignorance.
It just helps to sway more over to the side of reason.
Ken
The infant mind has no concept of God.
> The Pukester, AmeriKKKan-AmeriKKKan
Puke has proven himself time and time again to be the owner of an
infant mind
Free Lunch
alt.atheism:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:58:34 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>>>>It would be a truism if one accepts that EVERYONE is born atheist,
>
>>>NOONE is born atheist. An atheist rejects the existence of God by decision.
>
>>Oh, nonsense. You know you have no evidence to support your silly claim.
>
>Sorry, but an atheist denies/reject the existence of God. An infant can't do
>that.
>
>>You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
>>commands the majority of believers.
>
>But the one God almighty commands all believers and non believers alike, and
>that includes you, who denies Him.
Duke, you are such a liar. Why do you waste your time here when everyone
who has read your nonsense knows that you are not to be trusted and
appear to be constitutionally incapable of telling the truth?
Free Lunch
alt.atheism:
>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:48:39 -0000, "Bill M" <wm...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
No one is a Christian at birth, you fool.
bob young
Pink Freud wrote:
The question yuo propose asking them is impossible, they cannot talk let alone
underestand what is meant by a god.
They are not therefore athiets, just simple children
bob young
duke wrote:
> On 16 Nov 2008 22:33:01 -0600, bob young <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>
> >> >All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
> >> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
> >> concept of God.
>
> >So who taught you Dook and did he prove his points along the way
> >or did you swallow them without thinking and then carry on 'not thinking' for
> >the rest of your days. ?
>
> I was taught early, and then as I grew up, there was no doubt of the existence
> of almighty God. The evidence is overwhelming.
Yes . . . . . . . . I am overwhelmed by it's absence !
bob young
James Beck wrote:
At the same time it is terribly sad to see the extent to which the
human brain can be infected by primitive superstitions.
It is the same fear and insecurity that drives nations to go to war
with other nations, as indeed happened in 1939. The German troops even
had 'god is with us' stuck onto their uniforms and duke's Pope of the
day was a favorite of Hitler and vise versa.
bob young
James Beck wrote:
Wouldn't you think Jim that any person of intellect would come to realise how
painfully stupid he looks posting all banal comments about proof yet unable to
provide one jot of it.
Now I suppose we are going to be treated to another inane 'Dook comment'
Bob
Humanist, atheist, realist, sentimentalist Brit.
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
(Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor)
Man creates his gods in his own image;
and then spends the rest of his life
manipulating them to his heart's content
James Beck
alasp...@netvigator.com says...
Yep, not much of a trade up in anything but the tools used from the
shivering primitive clutching his club in the dark hoping the monster in
the sky would soon be sated and the bright flashes and the noises would
stop.
James Beck
alasp...@netvigator.com says...
>
>
> James Beck wrote:
>
> > In article <6ad3i4pqq03sd5qtf...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
> > @cox.net says...
> > >
> > > No, an atheist is one that sees the evidence but denies and or/rejects the
> > > existence of God. A person who sees the evidence as you do but finds it
> > > uncertain/unclear is an agnostic.
> >
> > You keep referring to this 'evidence' and yet you can never seem to
> > provide it.
>
> Wouldn't you think Jim that any person of intellect would come to realise how
> painfully stupid he looks posting all banal comments about proof yet unable to
> provide one jot of it.
>
> Now I suppose we are going to be treated to another inane 'Dook comment'
>
Well, remember that half the population have to be on the lower side of
that bell curve. Some just further than others.
Pink Freud
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:opd3i4pl5s25l70lk...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:30:39 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
>
>>>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>>>grew up.
>>>
>>> Name one.
>
>>You really can't possibly even contemplate of a person who might have once
>>been as dumb as you, but who has had the intelligence to question their
>>beliefs, can you?
>
> I easily question an atheist's beliefs, laugh out at him, and then tell
> him how
> wrong he is.
>
>>What is the point of giving you examples? Your mind is already made up and
>>nothing will change it.
>
> I have the facts on my side.
>
I rest my case.
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
----------------------------------------------------------
"I used to hate myself, until I found you."
The Wildhearts
duke
wrote:
Creation of the universe.
duke
>On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:21:00 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On 16 Nov 2008 22:33:01 -0600, bob young <alasp...@netvigator.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> >All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>>
>>>> No, they're not. Atheists deny the existence of God. The infant mind has no
>>>> concept of God.
>>
>>>So who taught you Dook and did he prove his points along the way
>>>or did you swallow them without thinking and then carry on 'not thinking' for
>>>the rest of your days. ?
>>
>> I was taught early, and then as I grew up, there was no doubt of the existence
>> of almighty God. The evidence is overwhelming.
>
>So shut up and deal with the consequences of your personal choice to ignore
>reality, all those years ago.
No, west loop, I am the one dealing with reality.
duke
wrote:
>Pink Freud wrote:
>>
>>
>> "duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> We've had a few here who got deconverted.
>>>>> Name one.
>>>
>>>> You need to read these threads a little better.
>>>
>>> I did. You need to.
>>>
>>>> alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
>>>
>>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
>>> converted to
>>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
>>>
>>> Name one.
>>>
>>
>> All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>Exactly. It's "reconvert" there is no such word as "deconvert."
Atheism is a decision, one beyond the ability of an infant to make.
duke
wrote:
>In article <vid3i4d2am4nottqi...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
>@cox.net says...
>>
>> Sorry, but an atheist denies/reject the existence of God. An infant can't do
>> that.
>Can't deny that which does not exist.
>I do not deny your deity and more than I deny Santa Clause.
Good. God is.
>> >You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
>> >commands the majority of believers.
>> But the one God almighty commands all believers and non believers alike, and
>> that includes you, who denies Him.
>Then let it show itself and COMMAND me.
He did, and you still tell him "no".
>How is 'it' a 'him', to attribute a sexual gender to your deity is just
>further proof of it being a man made construct.
Traditional view.
duke
>On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:24:05 -0600, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>alt.atheism:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 19:58:34 -0600, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>
>>>>>It would be a truism if one accepts that EVERYONE is born atheist,
>>
>>>>NOONE is born atheist. An atheist rejects the existence of God by decision.
>>
>>>Oh, nonsense. You know you have no evidence to support your silly claim.
>>
>>Sorry, but an atheist denies/reject the existence of God. An infant can't do
>>that.
>>
>>>You also know that you have the very serious problem that no religion
>>>commands the majority of believers.
>>
>>But the one God almighty commands all believers and non believers alike, and
>>that includes you, who denies Him.
>
>Duke, you are such a liar.
Oh, come on, free. Your God has commanded us to a life style. It's time you
get on board.
>Why do you waste your time here when everyone
>who has read your nonsense knows that you are not to be trusted and
>appear to be constitutionally incapable of telling the truth?
Lurkers disagree with you big time.
duke
>>So you converted to Christianity from another faith/atheism, then converted to
>>atheism?
>No one is a Christian at birth, you fool.
I didn't use the word "birth", you fool.
duke
>
>
>"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:opd3i4pl5s25l70lk...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:30:39 GMT, "Pink Freud" <some...@here.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>There are several atheists on this newsgroup who were converted to
>>>>>Christianity when young only to realise it was nonesense when they
>>>>>grew up.
>>>>
>>>> Name one.
>>
>>>You really can't possibly even contemplate of a person who might have once
>>>been as dumb as you, but who has had the intelligence to question their
>>>beliefs, can you?
>>
>> I easily question an atheist's beliefs, laugh out at him, and then tell
>> him how
>> wrong he is.
>>
>>>What is the point of giving you examples? Your mind is already made up and
>>>nothing will change it.
>>
>> I have the facts on my side.
>I rest my case.
Yep, facts do you in every time.
duke
wrote:
>In article <ktd3i4prhmohjt14s...@4ax.com>, duckgumbo32
But why would anyone believe you?
Cary Kittrell
>
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:32:04 -0600, Anthony Williams <Truth...@swbell.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Pink Freud wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> "duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >> news:oee0i4l16vusmo4it...@4ax.com...
> >>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 14:37:12 -0000, "mark" <no-on...@noads.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>> We've had a few here who got deconverted.
> >>>>> Name one.
> >>>
> >>>> You need to read these threads a little better.
> >>>
> >>> I did. You need to.
> >>>
> >>>> alt.atheism Deconversion List (Current as of 10/5/04):
> >>>
> >>> To **deconvert** means to reverse a conversion. That means atheist
> >>> converted to
> >>> theist and then deconverted back to atheist, or something similar.
> >>>
> >>> Name one.
> >>>
> >>
> >> All newborn babies are atheists, dolt.
>
> >Exactly. It's "reconvert" there is no such word as "deconvert."
>
> Atheism is a decision, one beyond the ability of an infant to make.
So you would argue that infants believe in the Loch Ness monster,
Homeopathy, and the Face on Mars, and it's only when they
become older they become able to make the decision not to
belive in these things?
-- cary