No.

and it's a facebook friend, they have always been christian as far as I have known them, though they say they were like me once.

That's one of the most common lies we've gotten around here in the last decade.

Taking a detour: why does the username Twiggy seem familiar?

(June 14, 2026 at 11:07 pm)Paraselene Wrote: Taking a detour: why does the username Twiggy seem familiar?

I am pretty sure I had another account on here a bit ago, with Twiggy, something like Twiggy95 or Twigy1995 or so.

When I logged on today, I could not log in, so I went with the "I forgot" link, and put my main e-mail in, and that got me to be able to recover "Twiggy", which apparently existed and I created but haven't used until today.

I also use Twiggy on other forums and sites as well, so it can be a coincidence that you know me from elsewhere as well.

(June 14, 2026 at 9:56 pm)Angrboda Wrote: What exactly is an illegitimate atheist?

One whose parents never married.

Boru

(June 14, 2026 at 7:00 pm)Twiggy Wrote: So every now and then I come across people, usually christians, who claim to have at one point been "Atheists".

My theory is that many of these people were never truly atheists and are instead confusing being mad at god, or disappointed, sad with god, with atheism.

As for the one's who were actually atheists under the "lack of belief in a god(s)", from what I have seen, including a recent conversation I have had, their standard of evidence seems to have dropped, or someone somehow managed to talk them into accepting something on poor evidence.

The recent conversation I had, with a christian, former atheists friend, let me know that he became christian because "people witnessed the resurrection", "people wouldn't die for a lie" like somehow people claiming something, is enough evidence of a literal supernatural miraculous event. It's an extraordinary claim, which needs extraordinary evidence, yet somehow he accepts it based on flimsy weak, "evidence". He tried saying "you accept the existence of Ceaser based on documentation" - sure, but Ceaser was just another man, like all other men, it's not comparable to a claim of a resurrection.

So I guess the real question is, for those who actually were atheists at one point, what causes their standard of evidence, and ability to different claims from each other, to slip?

To borrow a phrase from Poe, surcease of sorrow.

Boru

I know of two cases where I personally knew the person to be an atheist who understood the definition and everything. In both cases a religious significant other seemed to be the key to their conversion. I've given up hoping for a great argument I've never heard before or evidence I've never been presented.

They were at least a refreshing change of pace from the 'I used to be an atheist so I could avoid church, drink beer and fornicate' Christians claiming to have been atheists.

(June 15, 2026 at 3:08 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I know of two cases where I personally knew the person to be an atheist who understood the definition and everything. In both cases a religious significant other seemed to be the key to their conversion. I've given up hoping for a great argument I've never heard before or evidence I've never been presented.

They were at least a refreshing change of pace from the 'I used to be an atheist so I could avoid church, drink beer and fornicate' Christians claiming to have been atheists.

Avoiding church, drinking beer, and fornicating is at least as common among Christians as it is among atheists.  

Boru

(June 15, 2026 at 3:08 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I know of two cases where I personally knew the person to be an atheist who understood the definition and everything. In both cases a religious significant other seemed to be the key to their conversion. I've given up hoping for a great argument I've never heard before or evidence I've never been presented.

They were at least a refreshing change of pace from the 'I used to be an atheist so I could avoid church, drink beer and fornicate' Christians claiming to have been atheists.

I find Blackwell's Natural Theology has the best arguments, but even there, there is a lot of equivocation and moved goalposts.

The reason some atheists convert (back) to religion is the same as why people are religious at all.

The usual reasons are: they are misinformed or have some opportunistic benefits or they get addicted to dopamine hits from the hate towards certain groups of people that their religion provides them with or they lie and were never atheists or they don't know how to deal with stress.

Now when someone was an atheist, the reasons are probably less likely that he's misinformed, but people are not always informed on religion and even of critical thinking.

Opportunistic seems to be a more plausible explanation. As we see now, some billionaires are returning to God because they recognize religion as a useful tool for controlling people. Or someone wants to sell books because religious people love conversion stories and will buy these books en masse. Or they want some job but need to be part of a certain religion. Or they want to be married to a religious person so they need to convert.

And then lies. I've heard even Kent Hovind claim how he was once an atheist—if you can believe that; I certainly can't.

Dealing with stress. In many societies people are practically taught to deal with stress with either pills or alcohol or smoking or believing in fairy tales. Which is to say that they are not taught to deal with stress at all. So they turn to religion after some trauma in life because when people are emotional they just don't think and do reckless things, like gamble or buy things they don't need or start believing in god.