(Advertisement)

Fayetteville Freethinker

Doug Krueger Speaks Out For Atheists

Posted: January 10, 2013 at 2:08 a.m.

FAST FACTS Glossary Of Terms Atheist — One who believes there are no gods. Agnostic — One who withholds judgment about the existence of gods. The term was coined by Thomas Huxley in 1869. Prior to this, uncertainty was included in the definition of atheism. Some modern atheists are reclaiming this older, broader understanding of the term. Secular humanist — One who ascribes to a world view that emphasizes human rather than religious values. Secular humanists stress reason, scientific inquiry, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, and the need for tolerance and cooperation. Freethinker — One who forms beliefs about religion and the supernatural through conscientious reflection and rational inquiry and not based upon authority and tradition.

This story is only available from our archives.

Style, Pages 27 on 01/10/2013

(Advertisement)



« Previous Story

A tale of two turkeys

NWA Media/DAVID GOTTSCHALK

11/13/12

Jeff Lindsey with Double L Farm displays a turkey.

Turkey's at the Double L grow out farm in Elkins Tuesday morning. These hens and toms are less than 24 hours away from transport to the Cargill Processing Plant in Springdale.

For Our Town cover story. 

With Plus Video.

Thomas Turkey, aged 140 days, could be inside an oven right now. It’s more likely, however, that his sister, H... Read »

Next Story »

Bella Vista Animal Shelter, Loving Choices, A...

As we do every year, NWA Media invited the nonprofit organizations that help our community all year to ask for help in return. This is the final installment of their wish l... Read »

If I have understood it correctly, to be a "Free Thinker," you can't believe in anything that you can't see or touch unless it is related to evolution. I guess I am "embarassing" to some, but I graduated from the UA and promote a young earth and have plenty of evidence to back it up, but it is a completely different way of thinking about the scientific evidence. We all have the same scientific evidence, but what you believe shapes how you interpret that evidence. For instance, someone who believes that everything came from a primordial soup sees the common shape of embryos as proof of their belief but someone who believes God created everthing sees the common embryo shapes as proof that just like all Civil Engineers use the same equipment in starting to build a bridge so does God in his design. Just my thoughts.

Posted by: rflow

January 10, 2013 at 3:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Perhaps I can help a bit, rflow:

Rflow: "...to be a "Free Thinker," you can't believe in anything that you can't see or touch unless it is related to evolution.">>

No, there is nothing about seeing, touching or evolution in the definition of "freethinker" (it's one word). This first definition was provided in the article, here is another one:

free-think-er n.
A person who forms opinions about religion on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief. -- Webster's New World -- Third College Edition

free-think-er n.
One who has rejected authority and dogma, especially in religious thinking, in favor of rational inquiry and speculation. –American Heritage

R: "I graduated from the UA and promote a young earth and have plenty of evidence to back it up,">>

Young earth creationism *is* embarrassing and a parody of human thought. Can't put more sugar on it than that. There are no young earth arguments that can withstand even the slightest scrutiny. Try one and see. Here is a basic tract the Fayetteville Freethinkers have outlining 20 lines of evidence for an old earth:

"How We Know the Earth is Old: Twenty old-Earth indicators"

http://fayfreethinkers.com/tracts/age...

Young earth creationists need to address each of those and of course a great many more.

Dave Matson carefully addresses most of the most popular young earth arguments in the following book which I helped proof read for him back in 1994. It's now available online for free and nicely organized here:

"How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments?
A Close Look at Dr. Hovind's List of Young-Earth Arguments and Other Claims"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovin...

Hope this helps. If you have a young earth argument not addressed in the above, perhaps post it here or in our freethinker forum where we have trained experts standing by to help with detailed answers.

http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/ind...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 10, 2013 at 6:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Since FreeSmoker can't prove there is a God, and rflow can't prove there is, then the whole argument is an exercise in futility. Have any luck finding that UFO down in Roswell, Freebie. He has as much evidence to back up a young earth as you do to back up any of your made-up facts, Freebe.

Free thinking is allright as long as you freethink the same way the freethinkers think and if you don't they will set up for you a correct path to thinking. Just go the freethinker forum where there are trained dope smokers with expanded minds to set you free from your bondage of old age thinking.

Go there to their forun, cause I'll be lurking around here and they can't handle me.

Nice to have you back FreeThought hope you found a logical thought somewhere out there.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 10, 2013 at 8:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

moneymyst, I love the way you rattle cages!

The problem is that "freethinkers" are anything but...

Posted by: patrioteer

January 10, 2013 at 8:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "The problem is that "freethinkers" are anything but..."
Kind of like the way a patrioteer isn't a patriot?

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 10, 2013 at 9:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kudos to NWA media for publishing this article.

Another perspective on defining freethinkers: those who respect reason and the scientific method; those who require evidence in support of one's understanding; those who don't run up against anxiety and fear when thinking about the likelihood that fundamentalist dogma is mostly hogwash; those who intuitively recognize absurdity even when it seems to represent a majority opinion.

Posted by: FrankLloydLeft

January 10, 2013 at 9:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

You know how to get a freethinker rattled. Just mention the name of Jesus Christ. Must be a reason for that animosity.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 10, 2013 at 10:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Must be a reason for that animosity."
I would guess it's the unpleasant personalities of many of His followers. Judgmental, overbearing, petty, inconsistent, meddling, insincere-- everything you'd not want in a neighbor, in some glowing combination. (That is not directed toward mycentworth, who seems to be a decent person despite her religious affiliation.)

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 10, 2013 at 10:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hats off to the columnist, Bettina Lehovec for a great revealing column. I came to understand Doug after learning more facts about him, influences and his ideas and practices.

Always the same old, same old. When we lack wits for waging debate we hurl names. Sure sign one has lost before they begin.

Posted by: cdawg

January 11, 2013 at 1:40 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I would like to hear a larger group of learned clergy voice their thoughts on this.

Posted by: Tankersley101

January 11, 2013 at 2:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "I would guess it's the unpleasant personalies of many of his followers."

Hit that one out of the park, AlphaCat, I would think that their meetings would be like unto a wake. St. Peter jokes certainly would be banned. No need for a weapon, they are already zombies.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 11, 2013 at 4:41 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I hope the FreeThinker is denied any paid Holidays for Christmas and Christmas Eve, Easter and Good Friday. If you are not a believer in the birth of Jesus Christ you shouldn't be paid for the celebration. In a court of law when you have to swear to tell the whole truth so help you GOD doesn't apply to athiest so they should be hooked up to lie detectors and given truth surum also. I bet the 10 commandments and the laws we live by don't mean squat to most of these people. Without Christ and religion people will kill others , steal, cheat on their spouses and the list goes on without the concern for burning in Hell for their sins. The morals are only guided by not getting caught at whatever they do and sentenced behind steel bars for life.

Posted by: oldrustynut

January 11, 2013 at 6:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

For me it isn't religion, it is a the way of life the one and only God has revealed to us in the Bible,His word. There is plenty of proof for me to accept this.
I believe most on this post enjoy the fiesty debate even though they get carried away at times on both sides. Good post, oldrustynut.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 11, 2013 at 8:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent: "You know how to get a freethinker rattled. Just mention the name of Jesus Christ.">>

Good point. The Fayetteville Freethinkers are careful to never to "mention the name Jesus Christ" at meetings. Nothing worse than a room full of... rattled freethinkers.

----------
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 11, 2013 at 10:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

loved the letter about Doug know as Fayfreethinker.
What an intelligent , independent and rational thinkier indeed. He has added depth and dimensions to the blog posts on this paper. Thanks for being so brave to stand up to some of these idiots and cowards. A true believer would not be rattled by a freethinker, but would relish the opportunity to further expand your own horizons.

Posted by: ladyLiberty

January 11, 2013 at 1:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

ladyliberty, I would not assume that the "FreeThinker" who comments on these threads is Doug Kreuger. There is more than one FreeThinker. In fact about 50 or so people come to their monthly meetings.

Posted by: Coralie

January 11, 2013 at 1:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Oldrustynut says " I bet the 10 commandments and the laws we live by don't mean squat to most of these people. Without Christ and religion people will kill others , steal, cheat on their spouses and the list goes on without the concern for burning in Hell for their sins. The morals are only guided by not getting caught at whatever they do and sentenced behind steel bars for life."
You have a very degraded view of your fellow man if you think that people only act decently for fear of prison or hell-fire.
That is not true of most people at all, whether Christian, some other religion, or non-believer.

Posted by: Coralie

January 11, 2013 at 1:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

oldrustynut assumes that nobody in the world had any morals before the Bible was written down, and that people of other religions murder and steal without compunction.
In fact this view of morality is very narrow and childish.

Posted by: Coralie

January 11, 2013 at 1:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

thanks Coralie,
i see that Doug was just writing about the entire
group not a specific person, and may not even be
a member himself.
in fact it must be ":Fay" that posts on this blog?
so my complimens are to you Fay, as you have
opened many minds with your research, ideas, and challenging questions to us all.
altho Coralie is not a member, i think logic must be a guiding light in your life? as you have the most logical brain as you approach the topics with a rationale that is so sensible and direct, but also with a compassion that may be missing from the freethinkers?
i agree tho that looking backwards, most of the mistakes or wrong turns i made were made out of FEAR. If we are only motivated by fear, we are doomed to fail. we all need a bit more enlightment from the greek logic researchers sometimes and not act solely on emotional fears, such as hell, or other consequences.

Posted by: ladyLiberty

January 11, 2013 at 2:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Without Christ and religion people will kill others,..."
"A born-again Christian who believes abortion is a sin failed yesterday to ­convince a judge that he need not stand trial for murder after he admitted shooting dead an ­abortion doctor...."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/...

"And I think honesty, people will say I’m not a Christian, but I believe I am. …" --Dennis Rader
http://home.conservativebabylon.com/2...
"Dennis Rader has been described as having a tight Christian control over his family"
"Dennis was a Cub Scout Leader, and the president of the congregation of Christ Lutheran Church."
http://marriage.about.com/od/infamous...

"Christian nationalists, like confessed Norway mass-murderer Anders Breivik, insist that a violent defense of Christendom is needed to shield Western Christianity"
http://consortiumnews.com/2011/08/01/...

RE "steal,..."
"St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Roman Catholic Church members learned Sunday that their pastor -- who admitted stealing $650,000 from the parish -- will not be back."
http://www.lvrj.com/news/pastor-s-the...

"Former Pastor Found Guilty of Embezzlement"
http://www.newsplex.com/home/headline...

RE "cheat on their spouses..."
"Unfaithful pastors I’ve counseled have said things like, 'The affair was like a run-away-train,' or 'It’s like I was temporarily insane.'”
http://www.crosswalk.com/church/pasto...

"Adrift After an Affair, Pastor Went From Rock Bottom to Redemption"
http://www.davidtrotter.tv/affairs/ad...

RE "and the list goes on"
"Dearborn Sacred Heart pastor suspended after allegedly driving drunk and naked"
http://www.freep.com/article/20120807...

"A Pulaski County jury on Wednesday decided that what a Little Rock pastor called an honest mistake was actually the molestation of a 12-year-old girl...."
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/au...
At least it wasn't a boy. But wait!
"...Montgomery admits to oral sex and fondling the teenager, but denies any other allegations."
http://www.fox16.com/news/local/story...

Oh, I know. They aren't "real" Christians. Whatever you say.

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 11, 2013 at 2:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "I would not assume that the 'FreeThinker' who comments on these threads is Doug Kreuger."

Phillip1955/Moneymyst once insisted that I am Doug Krueger, and even insulted Mr. Krueger's children while he was at it. I can assure you all that neither I nor fayfreethinker is Doug Krueger.

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 11, 2013 at 2:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

To you AlphaCat, I would say:

"Insufficient facts always invite danger."---Spock

To you Coralie and PaleLady, I would say:

"I have never understood the female capacity to avoid a direct answer to any question."---Spock

To you AlphaCat, PaleLadyLiberty, and Coralie, I would say:

"Once you have eleminated the impossible, whatver remains, however improbable, must be the truth."---Spock

FFT therefore must be Mr. Krueger and not Prophet Grisham.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 11, 2013 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I know Doug and I know FFT. Very different people.
Doug is older.

Posted by: cdawg

January 11, 2013 at 4:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I used to be a Catholic. Then I tried being a Baptist. I studied Buddism briefly. I tried the Book of Mormon. I checked out some of the Kuran and read the life of Muhamad. Lots of answers everywhere when you know where to look.

Critical examination indicates they are the manderings of men over the ages trying to answer questions they didn't understand mixed with revelations and miracles to capture people in awe and wonder while dictating how their fellow men should live....all at the risky expense of divine retribution or outright excommunication or condemnation including grisly forms of execution at the hands of pontifs, church leaders, mullahs, and Kings and we haven't even mentioned the wars costing millions of innocent lives over it that continue to rage to this day.

That good and evil exist and men have choice and free will to decide between them is enough. Religious people's supporting literature is clear. In spite of the faith wonderfully blissful religious masses out there hold, in any rational terms whatever your verson of "God" simply isn't.

Like the moral majority, it is neither.

I have some simple requests for the religious people out there. Keep your God and religious books out of Government. It is offensive to many more people than you think. Less than hallf of the western worlds people are true "believers". Also please don't ring my door bell and beg me to pray with you. That's what I ask telemarketers that call my home. I ask them to pray with me and they always hang up pretty much instantly.

One final request of the aritsts and illustrators among you, can you finally get it right? A guy from Israel in "0" BC didn't look like a Scandinavian prince. If Jesus existed and was born in the Mid East around "0" BC he probably looked a lot more like Yassar Arafat or Osama Bin Laden.

He sure didn't look like Dolf Lundgren! Maybe Jessie Jackson, though, or maybe even the honorable Reverend Wright? But he sure as heck wasn't blonde haired and blue eyed! Ah, but wait, maybe he was an alien? That would explain his odd appearance for the place and time!

An no! Whatever you do please do not pray for me. Don't pray at all. Please! God gets enough of that to drive anyone crazy with all the whimpering and whining. Tell him jokes. I'm sure if he exists he would appreciate a good once once in a while.

Posted by: jeffieboy

January 11, 2013 at 4:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Adolf Hitler was a professed Christian. It means nothing.

Money is god. It's what we devote our lives toward most of our waking hours.

Posted by: cdawg

January 11, 2013 at 5:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

That little Alien fellow "Paul" got divine revelation right in the movie when he said, "Yeah, whatever dude!" He nailed evolution and the new world creation theory with, "What about me?". I hear it's one of God's favorite movies!

Posted by: jeffieboy

January 11, 2013 at 5:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Wonder if God would like to hear a good toilet joke?

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 11, 2013 at 5:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

thanks for all the links AlphaCat,
i will come back in a few days after i digest all
that! however did you find all those news clips?
very scary to see all those witnesses of Christ as hypocrates!

Moneymyst,
you may be smart and think your sarcasm is clever and funny. however i think it is just plain annoying.
sorry but NO ONE likes sarcasm. well maybe GWB
are you really George? maybe you are really a disquised compassionate sensitive person? i could be wrong.

Posted by: ladyLiberty

January 11, 2013 at 6:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hello Ladyliberty, thanks for the kind words. As others correctly noted, I'm not Doug. He is a very good friend and I talk with him regularly. We created this group 15 years ago and it's grown from three into a nice loose-knit secular community with over 400 on our notice list (there is no formal membership).

Perhaps of interest: http://fayfreethinkers.com/faq.shtml

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 11, 2013 at 8:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

COR: "a very degraded view of your fellow man if you think that people only act decently for fear of prison or hell-fire.">>

Here is a poster that makes this point nicely:

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos...

COR: "...oldrustynut assumes... that people of other religions murder and steal without compunction.">>

Typically this is projection of how he thinks he would act if he didn't have the punishment of hell hanging over him to keep him in line. Morality doesn't get more primitive than that and unfortunately this is all too commonly believed. This is how "morality" works for children too young to reason. As when training a pet, parents try methods of reward and punishment in order to get the desired result. At some point it's expected that the person should grow up, mature and figure out the good from the bad without a parent figure, real or imagined. They should learn to "be good, for goodness sake" rather than the mindless carrot and stick method. Religion sometimes retards this feature in people and allows them to delay or completely avoid emotional and intellectual maturity. Then we end up with people like Pat Robertson, or this:

http://madhominem.files.wordpress.com...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 11, 2013 at 8:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Pale Lady, do you really miss George that much. I didn't know you cared. Maybe I am George, but maybe not. I am not a disquised compassionate person, but instead I am a compassionate person that has not been discovered and you have no idea how sensitive a person I am. Sarcasm is a method of argument that hits with a power of a lighting bolt, my brother, Bob Claulde, uses sarcasm in much the same manner. I suggested to him many times that he should turn the sarcasm up to ten.

He said, "I work for someone and unlike you, I have the hide my sarcasm deep in humor to survive, you have a seperate writing income in western novels and don't need the paycheck.

I know that FFT is not Doug, I have torn FFT apart so many times, I ran him off. I don't think Doug would have rolled over that easy. FFT diasappointed me, then I knew FFT was a but a shadow to the real thing. Come on Doug, chinch up those loins, you coward and do battle with the best. Quit sending your pawns into battle with my Knights and Bishops.

No matter how much we disagree, I'm going to love ya forever, Pale Lady!

Sincerely, KJ

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 12, 2013 at 12:34 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Ok,moneymist. Who are you? I'd like to read your books - I think. I know you are very entertaining.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 12, 2013 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

The question is not who I am, but who is FFT?

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 12, 2013 at 8:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Ok, Money We'll leave it a mystery. I love mysteries.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 12, 2013 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

fayfreethinker, why have you committed a large portion of your life to the debunking of other's beliefs? It would seem that as an atheist, you would not be compelled to "evangelize" atheism. I understand exactly why so many religions around the world (all kinds, beliefs) evangelize, recruit, etc. Most truely believe that if the non-believers don't follow a particular set of beliefs, their chance of a great afterlife is impossible. But an atheist on the other hand...what does it matter? Why would it be important to dismantle other's beliefs? Hope is a powerful encourager no matter if you are an Alabama Pentacostal or a Hindu from India. I know of no data, study, or research that says otherwise. Why do you make the determined effort to disprove these beliefs?

Posted by: Oftenaghast

January 13, 2013 at 1:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Power, control over followers, feeling of being special and looked up to, inferiority complex, need for the approval of others, attention getting behavior dating back to childhood, immaturity, and no father figure.

Maybe FFT (Doug) can explain this in his own words.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 13, 2013 at 5:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Oftenaghast has some good questions. I'll get to those in a moment. Our little forum ankle biter has something that should probably get a poke:

MM: "I know that FFT is not Doug, I have torn FFT apart so many times,">>

No one believes that of course but just to underline what "torn apart" might actually look like, one need look no further than when you were so furiously squirming you were asking for restraining orders and legal action to stop the pain. This was only on April 15 of last year:

http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/vie...

That's some good roast right there. Or there was the time you were caught pants down lying in November:

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/no...

And: http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2012/no...

Good stuff.

Or, one one can look on the front page of our website where $10,000 was offered to you to perform certain psychic tasks you said you could do: http://fayfreethinkers.com/

You didn't show up. I'm so surprised.

And now we get:

MM: "I ran him off.">>

Actually, when I left for a 16 day Caribbean vacation on December 24, a little forum troll like you was the last thing on my mind.

And here's a little bit of free advice considering one of your most defining characteristics seems to be how much you hate the police... the best method of avoiding having to spend so much time with them is to not engage in behavior that causes them to come arrest and detain you. Then it is quite possible to not find oneself so regularly arrested. At least that method has always worked well for me. I recommend it for everyone, but especially you. Because when they post the mug shot online, it causes no small degree of amusement among some people I know. Personally, I would never find mirth from such an unfortunate circumstance.

D.
---------------
ps: Remember, standing offer, bring in Bigfoot, get a free house: http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/vie...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 5:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Now to Oftenaghast's questions:

Often: "fayfreethinker, why have you committed a large portion of your life to the debunking of other's beliefs?">>

Excellent question. Actually, I'm rather bored with a lot of it much of the time. I've been fighting palpable falsehoods ever since I escaped my parent's religious cult as a teenager 30+ years ago. Human superstition, ignorance and self-delusion is just the same sad story over and over, whether it's people pretending like they can communicate with the dead (like the MoneyM troll), or installing bogus hydrogen devices in local cars, or peddling absurdities like Noah and his boat or young earth creationism, or praying for children (and killing them because prayer doesn't work) instead of seeking medical attention, or flying airplanes into buildings, or teaching creationist absurdities in biology class, or spreading fear and paranoia about "chem trails," or oppressing women or gays or children or minorities because it says so in The Book... it's all variations of the same basic errors in human cognition. People too afraid to think or unequipped to think critically and get accurate answers.

Here is a good compilation of the most common traps everyone has a tendency to get tricked by:

"The 12 cognitive biases that prevent you from being rational" http://tinyurl.com/cbe86kc

If you would like to see a couple thousand specific referenced examples of the harm cause by superstitious, fear based self-deluded thinking, begin here: http://whatstheharm.net/

And those examples represent a tiny drop in the bucket. Being a freethinker (or a philosopher) is the radical notion that it actually matters whether beliefs are true or not true. See also our "What We Do" list:

http://fayfreethinkers.com/aboutus.shtml

Often: "It would seem that as an atheist, you would not be compelled to "evangelize" atheism.">>

The Fayetteville Freethinkers is not an atheist group. Never was. Doug wanted to start an atheist group but at that time, I wasn't an atheist and I wasn't interested in joining an atheist group. I'm still not. Probably most people who attend don't believe in God, but we have never polled this question because we don't care, at all. Not even a little bit. Some of those who regularly attend also regularly attend church and sit on church boards. We are a skeptics club interested in finding out whether certain things are true are not. This often touches on issues regarding theism, but most of the time, it doesn't. See our "What We Do" list at the above link.

cont...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 5:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Often: "Why would it be important to dismantle other's beliefs?">>

We don't go door to door and evangelize anything. We have no advertising budget. We offer a small loose knit community (no formal membership) via monthly meetings where those who are interested in hanging around with like minded folks and learning about topics of interest them them, can do so. If you don't want to participate, don't come to the meetings. However, everyone is welcome.
As to why I respond on the various forums that I do, when I see someone post something that is plainly false (not opinion), I think it some what of a duty to exercise the same freedom of speech as the other person did, and correct the error. Paine once put it this way:

“It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error. But nature has not given to everyone a talent for the purpose; and among those to whom such a talent is given there is often a want of disposition or of courage to do it.” --Thomas Paine

If you don't want your beliefs open to being potentially "dismantled," don't post them in a forum that allows open dissent.

Often: "Why do you make the determined effort to disprove these beliefs?">>

I only do so when they are false. And anyway, beliefs that are true have nothing whatsoever to fear from careful reasoned examination and scrutiny. As the good book says:

"Test all things; hold fast what is good." 1 Thess. 5:21

"A simple man believes every word he hears; a clever man understands the need for proof." Proverbs 14:15

Hope this helps, thanks for you questions.

D.
-----------
"When we find out that an assertion is a falsehood, a shining truth takes its place, and we need not fear the destruction of the false. The more false we destroy the more room there will be for the true..." --Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 5:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A favorite quote from Ingersoll that would be useful here:

"Now and then some one asks me why I am endeavoring to interfere with the religious faith of others, and why I try to take from the world the consolation naturally arising from a belief in eternal fire. And I answer: I want to do what little I can to make my country truly free. I want to broaden the intellectual horizon of our people. I want it so that we can differ upon all those questions, and yet grasp each other's hands in genuine friendship. . . . I want it so that every minister will be not a parrot, not an owl sitting upon a dead limb of the tree of knowledge and hooting the hoots that have been hooted for eighteen hundred years. But I want it so that each one can be an investigator, a thinker; and I want to make his congregation grand enough so that they will not only allow him to think, but will demand that he shall think, and give to them the honest truth of his thought.
...remember that our views depend largely upon the country in which we happen to live. Suppose we were born in Turkey, most of us would have been Mohammedans [Islam]; and when we read in the book that when Mohammed visited heaven he became acquainted with an angel named Gabriel, who was so broad between his eyes that it would take a smart camel three hundred days to make the journey, we probably would have believed it. If we did not, people would say: "That young man is dangerous; he is trying to tear down the fabric of our religion. What do you propose to give us instead of that angel? We cannot afford to trade off an angel of that size for nothing." Or if we had been born in India would have believed in a god with three heads. Now we believe in three gods with one head."
--Robert Ingersoll, Mistakes of Moses

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 5:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Welcome back, FFT, I missed you. If your had ponyed up for a cabin above water level, they have WiFi.

They have WiFi in jail, but not on Carnival?

I wish I could communicate with aliens and flying saucers like ole' Doug, but just the Saints will have to do for me.

I applaud your efforts to determine what is true and false for everone else when you admit to still investigating what is true for you.

As for me, I beleive in one God the Father almighty Creator of Heaven and Earth. From this fact, neither anything from this world or the next will sway my faith.

By the way, could you condense all that rambling into, maybe, three or four logical sentences. Mr. Spock would then be proud of you.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 13, 2013 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thanks, fayfreethinker for your seemingly tireless efforts in "fighting falsehoods." You admit to being bored with it much of the time, but please know that your efforts are much respected by those of us who share your truth seeking idealism, if not your skill in reasoned argument.

Moneymyst suggested this latest post could be distilled to a few pithy sentences. How's this?

(1) MoneyMyst has been publically disgraced and discredited; changing his name didn't help.
(2) Freethinkers seek and accept verifiable truth.
(3) "People too afraid to think or unequipped to think critically and get accurate answers."

I think (3) is the key to understanding the difference between the fayfreethinker and those whose find his posts so maddening.

Many people don't or can't think critically, because reason and logic may lead them to conclusions which conflict with the myths they absorbed in childhood. This conflict may result in anxiety or fear, so the scary processes of thought and logic are rejected, and the comforting myths are never allowed to be questioned.

Posted by: FrankLloydLeft

January 13, 2013 at 9:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

FFT,

RE-

"Doug wanted to start an atheist group but at that time, I wasn't an atheist and I wasn't interested in joining an atheist group. I'm still not."

Is that to say you are not an atheist or you have no interest in joining an atheist group? I am genuinely interested in knowing. You are getting enough publicity with this article, maybe you should talk about what you do believe in. I hope you enjoyed your holiday in the Caribean.

Respectfully,

Tank

Posted by: Tankersley101

January 13, 2013 at 10:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Top of the evening to you Tank, If I haven't ever told you this, I'm telling you now. Thanks for your service. Thinks for being there when I couldn't be. Thanks for watching my back. Thanks to you for being a hero when you didn't even want to be. Thanks for beliving in a Higher Power, much greater than man. And if you go before I do, I'll say an AVE' just for you. My brother in arms may the wind always be at your back.

Money

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 13, 2013 at 11:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thanks Frank. You are a master of concision. Regarding my "getting bored," it's just that so much of it's old hat. Looking for a new challenge a bit I guess. The vacation was very nice, but pretty long for a workaholic, now trying to adjust back to normal.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 11:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Tank: "Is that to say you are not an atheist...?">>

I'm not a theist, so no, I don't believe in a God. If you read my posts carefully you'll notice that of the few thousand posts I've put on the forum over the last few years, I almost never talk about atheism or the existence of God question. I don't think I've ever presented an argument against the existence of God (this is not to be confused with arguments against supposed attributes of specific God claims). It's just not that interesting to me. I am interested in the questions we have answers to, not the foggy ones we don't. There may be a God, there probably isn't, so just enjoy your life and do the best you can.

TNK: "...or you have no interest in joining an atheist group?">>

I'm not interested in joining an atheist group. I don't see the utility in joining something that defines itself by what it isn't (not theist). Some people do.

Tnk: "You are getting enough publicity with this article,">>

Indeed. Lot's of requests to get on our email list.

TNK: "maybe you should talk about what you do believe in.">>

I do that quite a bit. I'm not really interested in talking about myself, but I'll certainly respond to questions.

Tnk: "...holiday in the Caribean.">>

Thanks. Had an apartment in Negril, stones through from the water. Did lots of snorkeling and for the first time in 20 years, some scuba too.

Magic mushrooms are legal in Jamaica. One has to exercise discernment when ordering their tea.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 13, 2013 at 11:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"There may be a God, there probably isn't, so just enjoy your life and do the best you can."

While you and I disagree on much, and I would change "probably isn't" to "probably is"... we are exactly on the same page with the final part of that statement... do the best you can and enjoy life..

Posted by: proud

January 14, 2013 at 11:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

FFT, thanks for your candid answers. I'm still a little unsure as to why it is important for you to not only reveal truths, but dash the hopes of an afterlife which can neither be proven or disproven.. Again, those truth's simply can't be revealed. It is impossible for us to study, review, collect data, etc. on the subject. I believe those who adhere to the religious belief of an afterlife have faith that their is an afterlife and you seem to have a faith that their isn't. Since is is impossible to "know", from afar you seem to be more of an agnostic with atheism as a belief.

I really expected your answer to be more of an iindictment of how other's beliefs affect you. Your answer seemed void of that. If that were the case, I could understand your message a little better. It still seems as if you feel compelled to not only share your ideas with those who are like-minded but to influence those who don't believe or disbelieve as you. If an opposing view doesn't affect you, I sitll don't understand your determination.

Posted by: Oftenaghast

January 19, 2013 at 11:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I don't understand how one can see the intricacy of this world and doubt that there was a designer. To believe that this happened by chance, just try building a house without a blueprint, or better yet, blow up your house and hope your dream house will fall in place.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 19, 2013 at 4:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I would suggest you do a sincere quest of how the "the intricacy of this world" came about. It's very enlightening, requires some study but ultimately rewarding. I claim no expertise but the biological evolution I've studied was much more interesting and informative than biblical scriptures pointing to a magical creation.

Posted by: cdawg

January 19, 2013 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Often: "still... unsure as to why it is important for you to... dash the hopes of an afterlife...">>

I have no such desire. That would be a misreading my comments and intent. I am very much for the notion of an afterlife. It's a fantastic idea and if it is decided by vote, I vote yes. But reality doesn't get decided by vote or wishful thinking and I just don't know of any good reason to think there is an afterlife and a few good reasons to think there isn't. I have nothing whatsoever against those who have such a hope. If you may indulge one more Ingersoll quote, this one comes to mind:

"Neither by word nor look have I expressed any other feeling than sympathy with those who hope to live again -- for those who bend above their dead and dream of life to come. But I have denounced the selfishness and heartlessness of those who expect for themselves an eternity of joy, and for the rest of mankind predict, without a tear, a world of endless pain. Nothing can be more contemptible than such a hope -- a hope that can give satisfaction only to the hyenas of the human race." --Robert Ingersoll

Oft: "It is impossible for us to study, review, collect data, etc. on [life after death].">>

Not so. There are several lines of evidence and areas of study on the question of immortality. See a review of some of the data in this short summary:

http://www.infidels.org/library/moder...

Of: "[some] ...have faith that their is an afterlife and you seem to have a faith that their isn't.">>

We haven't talked about an afterlife for a while around here. You will want to not confuse my criticisms of specific religious claims, or believing things based upon faith, as an attack on the notion of an afterlife. Those are two very different things. I form my beliefs about that issue based upon the reasons/evidence given at the link above.

Of: "you seem to be more of an agnostic with atheism as a belief.">>

The words atheist and agnostic overlap. Neither label affirms theism. It's not too useful to get into the semantics of such labels. All labels have limited utility. I don't believe in a God but am certainly open to the idea (having spent most of my life believing in one).

Of: "...really expected... more of an iindictment of how other's beliefs affect you.">>

I can bury you in examples, here's a personal one: my mother is a Jehovah's witness and she won't talk to three of my siblings because they left her religion (in their teens). Hundreds of examples of harm caused by religion and believing things without good reasons were given at the link I gave you. Incidentally, even if it were the case that religion caused no harm and only caused good effects, it wouldn't follow from that, that religious claims are *true.* And that's the question I am most interested in. I could take a more passive approach and not respond to errors published online, but I'm a bit of a goat in that regard, not a sheep. Oh well, there it is.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 19, 2013 at 7:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Cdawg's comment about intricacy brought to mind something I'd written about the complexity of DNA.
It illustrates a point regarding "the intricacy of the world" and the idea that reading one's Bible informs one about "a designer."

There is nothing in nature more complex than DNA, life's blueprint, the famed double helix composed of a linear string of molecules existing at the center of each living cell. We know, i.e., our computers know, that the DNA contained in the chromosomes of a single human cell is three billion base pairs long. So, how long is that? To illustrate, if each nucleic acid pair were to occupy the space of one letter on a newspaper page, they'd stretch out at roughly one million letters per mile. Continuing with this illustration, the DNA coiled up in a single human cell, if uncoiled, would stretch from Seattle to Miami.

By way of comparison, stretching out all the letters in a single line printing of the Bible would reach from Dickson Street to the Mall.

Posted by: FrankLloydLeft

January 19, 2013 at 7:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent: "To believe that this happened by chance,...">>

We have no reason to believe the universe came about by a process of chance (or not) and we have very good reasons to understand that biological evolution does not proceed by chance. This is a very common misunderstanding among creationists. In this list of ten myths about evolution, see #5:

http://www.skeptic.com/downloads/top-...

Excerpt:

"Natural selection is not “random” nor does it operate by “chance.” Natural selection preserves the gains and eradicates the mistakes. To illustrate this, imagine a monkey at a typewriter. In order for the monkey to type the first 13 letters of Hamlet’s soliloquy by chance, it would take 26 [to the power of] 13 number of trials for success. This is 16 times as great as the total number of seconds that have elapsed in the lifetime of the solar system. But if each correct letter is preserved and each incorrect letter eradicated, the phrase “tobeornottobe” can be “selected for” in only 335 trials, or just seconds in a computer program. Richard Dawkins defines evolution as “random mutation plus nonrandom cumulative selection.” It is the cumulative selection that drives evolution. The eye evolved from a single, light sensitive spot in a cell into the complex eye of today not by chance, but through thousands of intermediate steps, each preserved because they made a better eye. Many of these steps still exist in nature in simpler organisms."

My: "just try building a house without a blueprint,">>

When you imagine or postulate a designer to solve the problem, you don't actually solve anything, you just move the problem one level up. The formal name is "argument from ignorance." As one fellow put it 150 years ago:

"He is perfectly certain that there can be no design without a designer, and he is, equally certain that there can be a designer who was not designed. The absurdity becomes so great that it takes the place of a demonstration. He takes it for granted that matter was created and that its creator was not."

My: "or better yet, blow up your house and hope your dream house will fall in place.">>

This is the classic disanalogy that assumes that universes or lifeforms come about and proceed by similar mundane processes we see around us in our everyday life. There is no basis for such an assumption. Reality and our understanding of science and especially quantum mechanics has taught us that reality is constantly counterintuitive and like nothing in our everyday experience. We don't know where the universe came from and it's not an answer or useful to invent an entity to pretend to solve the problem.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 19, 2013 at 7:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Good teaching, thinker.

I'll go along with a creative entity, but I'll not pretend that naming the entity conveys any knowledge or understanding.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Posted by: FrankLloydLeft

January 19, 2013 at 8:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

FFT - God doesn't use magic. He created the world with scientific knowledge that only He could understand. He is science. He is so beyond our thoughts and knowledge, that is what is going to make heaven so fasinating. I think he is preparing the world for the 1000 years of peace. All the knowledge He has opened up in these last days will enable longer life. Think how far we have come just in the last 20 years.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 20, 2013 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

cdawg - Sorry, should have addressed this mainly to you.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 20, 2013 at 7:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Ask C.S. Lewis about God's magic, a magic older than time itself. Think about a being that time has no effect on, that is The Creator. We, the creature, are controled and governed by time. Time will kill all living creatures but God is Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. He can stop time or run it backwards. Controling time is true magic. God is the only and true FreeThinker. Because God is beyond man's understanding, either worship Him or deny Him. All small thinkers deny that what they cannot understand.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 20, 2013 at 4:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

That is true, mm. God has stopped time and many other miracles, so I guess that is magical. I know God can do anything, but just never thought of it being magic, but just God doing miracles. I think of magic as trickery, so didn't like that word.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 20, 2013 at 7:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

From The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe: "Once the girls calm down, Susan asks Aslan to explain. Aslan tell her that the Witch's knowledge only goes back to the Dawn of Time, but that there is a deeper magfic from before the Dawn of Time that she didn't know about. According to this deeper magic, when an innocent willing victim was executed in the place of a traitor, the Stone Table would crack and Death would work backwards."

"The Lion of the Tribe of Judah, he's not a tame lion is he? No he is not, said the Beaver, but he's a good Lion.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 20, 2013 at 9:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

MM I love that show. No wonder they banned it for awhile You have a better memory than I do evidently. I'm going to watch it again. Better yet, I'll get the books from the library, which I just recently started using. I still don't care for the term magic when it come to God's power.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 21, 2013 at 7:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Magical children's stories are fun but so is the real world. If you ever tire of reading fancy fables with talking animals in them, you might try moving up to a book that can teach you some of the basics about how to discern fact from fiction. Dawkins has a new book out and it's aimed at the same age group as C.S. Lewis' children's books:

**
"The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True"

Richard Dawkins, bestselling author and the world’s most celebrated evolutionary biologist, has spent his career elucidating the many wonders of science. Here, he takes a broader approach and uses his unrivaled explanatory powers to illuminate the ways in which the world really works. Filled with clever thought experiments and jaw-dropping facts, The Magic of Reality explains a stunningly wide range of natural phenomena: How old is the universe? Why do the continents look like disconnected pieces of a jigsaw puzzle? What causes tsunamis? Why are there so many kinds of plants and animals? Who was the first man, or woman? Starting with the magical, mythical explanations for the wonders of nature, Dawkins reveals the exhilarating scientific truths behind these occurrences. This is a page-turning detective story that not only mines all the sciences for its clues but primes the reader to think like a scientist as well."

http://www.amazon.com/The-Magic-Reali...

Available at the Fayetteville library.

D.
---------
“I try to read and stay informed on as broad a range of subjects as I can, and to the devotees of superstition and pseudoscience, let me just say this: you don't know what you're missing. The universe is a grander, stranger, more majestic and more mysterious place than any human being has ever imagined, or can imagine. The unsubstantiated claims and inventions of people, as wondrous as you may find them, don't come close to doing justice to reality as it truly is. At what other age in human history have you been able to look on a shooting star or a volcano and know what it really is? In what other age has anyone been able to see the Earth rise in the night sky from the surface of the Moon? In what other age did we understand the molecular roots of life, the building blocks of matter, the power sources of the stars?
It was not crystals or prayer nor Tarot cards that brought us these things. It was not superstition that was responsible, nor mysticism, nor credulous acceptance of extraordinary and unverified claims. It is the scientific method — institutionalized skepticism, rigorously and comprehensively applied — that has given rise to these wonders of understanding and accomplishment. We can either stay on that path, and some day realize the full potential we've only begun to tap — or we can sink back into the darkness of unreason, and stay frightened, brutish, short-lived and ignorant. I know which path I choose to take.” --Adam Marczyk, age 21

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 21, 2013 at 7:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Skepticism, rigorously and comprehensively applied reveils nothing but skepticism. Reveiled skepticism is like the steam rising off a fresh cowpile on a cold Ozark morning. You think you see something but when you go to invisigate, its gone and then you realize you just stepped into reality. Fresh or dry, its reality on your Berkenstocks." ---Moneymyst, age doesn't matter

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 22, 2013 at 5:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Isn't wonderful how the willfully uninformed can use the products of rigorous scientific skepticism (a computer, when the FBI isn't borrowing it) to post their poo poo?

Good thing skeptics are around to use their softballs to teach them about history and science.

D.
--------------
"The arrogance of American physicians and their disrespect of the work of foreign scientists resulted in their rejection of modern surgical sterile techniques well-established in Europe. It was an early edition of the prejudice of "American exceptionalism," the idea that America was inherently superior, or even divinely exalted above all nations.

Because they couldn't see them, American doctors ridiculed belief in bacteria, comparing it to the silly, contemporary belief in fairies. Doctors even took pride in their filth, carrying blood, pus and dirt from one patient to the next. In 1881, American country doctors were still applying hot cow manure to open wounds. Doctors treating Garfield routinely performed surgery without changing their clothes or washing their hands, and held instruments in their teeth for convenience."

http://truth-out.org/news/item/11746-...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 22, 2013 at 10:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart, The great doers in histroy have always been people of faith."---Edwin Hubbel Chapin

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 22, 2013 at 12:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sounds to me like those American physicians where skeptical about what they couldn't see, touch, or feel. Kinda reminds me of you, Freebe

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 22, 2013 at 2:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Why would a designer make over 400,000 species of beetles--more species than of any other creature?

Posted by: Coralie

January 22, 2013 at 4:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Maybe the Creator only made one, and they adapted due to natural selection. I've always wondered why God made mosquitos, seems like a mistake to me.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 22, 2013 at 4:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Wisdom teeth?
Appendixes?
Are those mistakes?

Posted by: Coralie

January 22, 2013 at 4:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Yes, maybe, who knows? God only knows why He made liberials and ticks, also. (comparison intended)

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 22, 2013 at 7:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Some people are arrogant enough to think they are entitled to and able to figure everything out.

There is a big difference between scientific advancement and aetheism. Trying to put them in the same light is another anti-God prosthelytizing tactic.

Some people should give up sewing their "seeds of doubt" and go listen to some truth.

Posted by: Tankersley101

January 23, 2013 at 12:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

How do you know there is no use for wisdom teeth, appendixes and all those beetles? Are you God, Coralie? His mind and ways are uncomprehendable for us humans, and I have to throw this in, especially for liberals.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 23, 2013 at 8:37 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I asked questions--did not make pronouncements.
That's your thing.
In fact, I am not an atheist (nor a Deist). I find it all a Mystery--as you say, incomprehensible for us humans.
Finding it incomprehensible, I do not opine about some entity or entities that in any way resemble humans with human emotions.
I don't turn ancient sacred books into idols of worship.

Posted by: Coralie

January 23, 2013 at 1:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent, you are wrong to equate "atheists" and "liberals."
That's the kind of categorizing I keep complaining about.
There are more shades of belief than you recognize.
Have you never heard of liberal Christians?
There are even progressive Evangelicals, see:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8131907/n...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress...
http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2008/05/02/...

Posted by: Coralie

January 23, 2013 at 1:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Coralie, Correction noted. I agree that some liberals may be Christian; and not all conservatives are Christian.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 23, 2013 at 2:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Liberals are like a box of popcorn, an ounce of substance, a lot of noise when agitated, but mostly just hot air."---Moneymyst (Me)

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 23, 2013 at 7:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Moneymyst reminds me of the kid in the back of the class who constantly burps or drops his books or whatever to draw attention to himself.
Anything, even if it takes him to the principal's office.

Posted by: Coralie

January 25, 2013 at 11:08 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Otherwise, in their web presence, commonly known as trolls. It's best not to encourage them with recognition.

Posted by: FrankLloydLeft

January 25, 2013 at 10:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Moneymyst writes for a living and if said Moneymyst does't draw attention of others by his writings, he is out of the game. My characters must be smarter than the average dog (no pun intended FLL) to survive in the western days of indians, horse thieves, robbers, and just plain bad guys. You idealogs give me characters to write about.

Free is currently a mantic depresive newspaper owner who works at night as a serial killer. Coralie is a Carry Nation want to be who uses a calvery sword instead of a hachet, and Frank the barber cuts more than just hair. Tank is the washed up ex-military man who must overcome the memories of the war, himself, and the bottle to save a town. Elk City, Oklahoma is the place and the book, when finished, will be called, "Death of a Railroad Giant."

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 26, 2013 at 1:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I think you are more intelligent than most on this site, mm. You bring a sense of humor which adds flavor and lightness to the debate. I like ME's quotes.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 26, 2013 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must approve the homage of reason rather than of blind-folded fear. Do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of its consequences.... If it end in a belief that there is no god, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise and in the love of others it will procure for you." Thomas Jefferson

I'm an "apatheist." I don't really care if there's a sentient creator of the universe. Believing in one or not won't make a whit of difference in the quality of my life. There is no conclusive evidence of anything that can break the laws of physics which rule everything in our universe.

I really don't think that society would descend into chaos and anarchy if organized religion didn't exist. I think religion has done a good enough job of spreading anarchy and chaos already. 9/11, the Crusades, the Inquistion, the violence in the Middle East between the Jews and the Muslims, the violence in North Ireland between Catholics and Protestants. The 1700 year-old persecution of homosexuals in the West. If atheists are "evangelizing," it's because of these horrible injustices committed in the name of various religions.

Nobody has the hotline to God. No one has the inside info on what happens to us after we die. If we were meant to know, scientists would have had evidence to that effect by now. And anyone who claims to have certain knowledge of it is a liar. Belief in the supernatural can be fun, but such belief makes no one any more moral or any more special than anyone else in my opinion.

I don't need a church to tell me what's right and wrong. Deep down in my heart, I already know. It's that eternal inner witness, called conscience by some. A study at Yale University showed that kids as young as five months old are able to make moral decisions. I think that five thousand years of living together have somehow hardwired this ability into most of us.

So yes, I agree with Jefferson: one really CAN have a happy, meaningful and moral life without a god.

Posted by: BradBailey

January 26, 2013 at 9:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I like the term "apatheist." Rolls off the tongue easier than "secularist."

Posted by: Coralie

January 26, 2013 at 1:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Thanks for the good words, mycentworth, and ME is me like as in me, myself, and I. I had to start puting my quotes in quotation marks because Free & AlphaKiddy used them as theirs. And mycentworth, your posts are worth much more than a cent.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 26, 2013 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Money,

I am glad I can help with your character development. I don't even drink these days... but some would say I am washed up... meaning I am not the 18-year-old rowdy young man I used to be.

Posted by: Tankersley101

January 26, 2013 at 10:19 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Otherwise, in their web presence, commonly known as trolls."
The hell of it is, Moneymyst is more than a troll. He sometimes provides a valuable insight, and he even states it incisively or cleverly on occasion. I hate to dismiss him entirely, however counterproductive many of his comments are.

RE "I had to start puting my quotes in quotation marks because Free & AlphaKiddy used them as theirs."
When did such a thing ever happen?

RE "I am glad I can help with your character development."
In 1979, Francis Gwaltney set out to write a book in which I was a character, but he died before he could get very far along with it. I am confident in my suspicion that the two events did not share a cause-and-effect relationship.

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 27, 2013 at 12:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Tank, that is called embilshment and imagination. The best users of these were, in order of genius, Stienbeck and Hemmingway. A photographer is continually looking for a picture just as a writer is looking for a character to veave into a story. You militarty experience becomes Civil war, your strong opinions and willingness to stand for right becomes Sheriff who is fast with a gun. Now I need an interest so the reader can sympathize with you. Wife killed while Sheriff is out after bad guys, someone in town, hitting the bottle, finds little known clue in a stolen discarded letter to the editor that leads Sheriff to killer, the newspaper owner. Railroad might come through town, bribery, greed, gold, water, fast and good women, strong drink, sword weilding Coralie out to destory strong drink and women being used by pimp hotel owner, lack of bathing, too much perfume on women and men, and all other vices that makes a good story.

Morman rancher,(Mitt Romney) friend of Sheriff, writes brilliant letter to editor disclosing true reason Sheriffs wife was killed, which evil killer newspaper editor and fat cat railroad barron steal and use to their own evil devices.

Cat, I, also sincerely hope that the two events do not share a same cause-and-effect relationship. Might seem to be a Cat curse working here. If I feel a little case fo death coming on, well, I'll just have to find another railroad czar, perhaps F. L. Leftofme.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 27, 2013 at 2:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Entertaining to say the least, Money.

Posted by: Tankersley101

January 27, 2013 at 4:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Money, I did think ME was you, and thanks for the kind words. Please, keep me laughing and also giving the good advice at the same time.

Tank - I appreciate your insight and comments, also. And definitely your service to this country, whether we deserve it or not. God Bless you.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 27, 2013 at 8:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Because they couldn't see them, American doctors ridiculed belief in bacteria, comparing it to the silly, contemporary belief in fairies." That could be restated thusly: Because they (Atheists, Agnostics, etc.) couldn't see them, Atheists, Agnostics, etc., ridiculed belief inGod, comparing it to the silly contemporary belief in fairies.
Is there anyone more arrogant than one who has lived only a miniscule amount of time compared to the age of the universe, (whose true age cannot be calculated or proven) who claims to have all the answers?
Is there anyone more miserable than one who thinks his/her existence ends on the day of death?
Do law abiding citizens obey the law out of fear only, or because it may be the right thing to do?
If I believe "X" and you believe "Y" from a religious viewpoint what difference does it make to you?
Nonbelievers and Atheists work furiously to plant the seeds of doubt to espouse their own thinking which, according to their beliefs, will never be vindicated.
The conclusion one can draw is that misery loves company. Who can possibly have as much misery as they?

Posted by: kinggeorge

January 27, 2013 at 2:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Nonbelievers and Atheists work furiously to plant the seeds of doubt to espouse their own thinking which, according to their beliefs, will never be vindicated."
Evangelical Christians and other practitioners of weaponized religions work furiously to legislate the seeds of faith because their own way of thinking doesn't stand up to the scrutiny of reality.

RE "The conclusion one can draw is that misery loves company."
That explains megachurches.

RE "Who can possibly have as much misery as they?"
When "they" is religious zealots, "who" is people yoked by religious law-- willingly or otherwise.

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 27, 2013 at 3:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Money, you almost got me right--wielding a sword. But the pen is mightier.

Posted by: Coralie

January 27, 2013 at 3:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

kinggeorge, we who have serious plans to live again after death salute you, well done.

Weaponized religions?

"If a man dies, will he live again?"---Job 14:14 Simple answer, Yes or No. Whatever it is for you, live it and leave others alone.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 27, 2013 at 3:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I think most would agree that this country was much better off when most accepted Chrisian's right to believing in Christ and eternal life. What does it hurt them that it gives us peace and hope? Maybe that is the answer. They haven't experienced the peace Christ gives.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 27, 2013 at 3:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "I think most would agree that this country was much better off when most accepted Chrisian's right to believing in Christ and eternal life."
Since Christians are by far the largest segment of the American population, this condition still persists. But, just to play along, what span of years do you have in mind?

RE "What does it hurt them that it gives us peace and hope?"
Nothing, until you legislate it.

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 27, 2013 at 4:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

AlphaC, I read Mycent's comment a little differently. Mycent says:

"I think most would agree that this country was much better off when most accepted Chrisian's(sic) right to believing in Christ and eternal life."

Not only do I accept and strongly support Mycent or any other American's right to believe anything they want about religion, I don't know anyone, I've never met anyone, I've never even heard of *anyone* who doesn't accept and support, even strongly support, a Christian's right to believe anything they want about "Christ and eternal life."

It's a nonsensical assertion, ludicrous on it's face. And as has been pointed out many times, the organization most devoted to defending and supporting this religious freedom, with the established legal track record to prove it, is the ACLU. Here are 150 examples from just the last decade:

http://www.aclu.org/aclu-defense-reli...

And this group is generally opposed and constantly smeared by the conservative evangelicals that Mycent probably finds most compatible with his religious beliefs.

And a further irony is that if there ever was a time when this wasn't the case it would have been in the early days of the country when certain Christians were trying to carve out certain parts of the county for their particular interpretation of doctrines and continually persecuted Christians who didn't follow doctrines in just the right way, (and a few others who didn't believe at all).

So Mycent's suggestion is upside down, backwards and a little inside out too. That's not easy to do.

Oh, I see KingG has some questions. Good.

D.

ps. We had a very good turnout at freethinker meeting yesterday with 70 people and lots of new faces. Lot's of new interested generated. If we keep growing like this, we may have to break down and buy an abandoned church.

-------------
"At the time of its Founding, the United States seemed to be an infertile ground for religion. Many of the nation's leaders - include George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin - were not Christians, did not accept the authority of the Bible, and were hostile to organized religion. The attitude of the general public was one of apathy: in 1776, only 5 percent of the population were participating members of churches."
[Ian Robertson, _Sociology_, 3rd editions, Worth Publishing Inc.: New York, 1987, page 410]

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 27, 2013 at 10:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KingG: "Because they... couldn't see them, Atheists, Agnostics, etc., ridiculed belief in God,...">>

A common misunderstanding, completely mistaken. While there are many arguments some put forward for why certain gods can't or don't exist (I never bring them up because I'm not that interested in the topic, notice that it is the Christians here that are constantly obsessed with the topic of atheism), the fact that God is supposed to have the attribute of being invisible, is not ever used by seriously people, or anyone I have ever known, as an argument against God's existence. It just isn't. There are no end of examples of things that are known to exist, that are also invisible. So the invisibility claim, is a caricature, a canard.

KingG: "Is there anyone more arrogant than one who has lived only a miniscule amount of time... who claims to have all the answers?">>

Again, completely ridiculous. No one, *no* one claims to have all the answers. The fact that we don't have all of the answers should not dissuade us from accepting the fact that we *do* have some of the answers. And incidentally, those answers have largely been given to us by using reason, science and critical thinking. It's also revealed to us that while religion has claimed to give us answers for millennia, those answers, as they refer to the observable world, have almost always been found to be wrong. Examples upon request.

KingG: "anyone more miserable than one who thinks his/her existence ends on the day of death?">>

KingG should read his Bible more carefully. It says existence ends on the day of death.

When we die our bodies return to the dust from which they were made, and the breath of life returns to the air around us (Genesis 3:19, 22-24; Ecclesiastes 3:16-22; etc.). This is what God promised to Adam and all his descendants (Genesis 2:7; 3:19). God made it clear that he does not want us to have eternal life (Genesis 3:22-24). That explains why in the entire Hebrew scriptures, not a single person dies and goes to heaven.

Careful Bible readers will notice that when the breath of life departs from your body you are dead (1 Kings 17: 17) and you return to the dust from which you were made (Gen. 3:19). Paul had some ideas of life after death, but can anyone show us that God changed his mind about life after death?

cont...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 27, 2013 at 10:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

As the good book says:

"For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun... Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10.

"In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Gen. 3:19

"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Psalm 146:3,4

"As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more." Job 7:9

"Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble. He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not...For there is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease...But man dieth, and wasteth away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? As the waters fail from the sea, and the flood drieth up: So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep...His sons come to honour, and he knoweth it not; and they are brought low, be he perceiveth it not of them." Job 14:1-2,7,10-12, 21

Etc.

Later on some folks had some ideas about being resurrections, but that's a different matter, says nothing about the condition/existence of the dead and we are still waiting for an example of that to ever happen anyway.

D.
--------
"There is no dichotomy of body and soul in the OT. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepes, though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person..." (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIII, p. 449)

"The belief that the soul continues its existence after the dissolution of the body is a matter of philosophical or theological speculation rather than of simple faith, and is accordingly nowhere expressly taught in Holy Scripture." [Reasoning From the Scriptures, p. 377]

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 27, 2013 at 10:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

RE "Is there anyone more miserable than one who thinks his/her existence ends on the day of death?"

"Perhaps the best cure for the fear of death is to reflect that life has a beginning as well as an end. There was a time when you were not: that gives us no concern. Why then should it trouble us that a time will come when we shall cease to be? To die is only to be as we were before we were born."
--William Hazlitt

Posted by: AlphaCat

January 27, 2013 at 11:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Freeby, there you go again, just like a TV preacher, pulling Scripture out of context to make a doctrine. It is like one of these all you can eat food lines, take your tray and plate, go down the line, and pick out what suits you and ignore all the reast. That's smorgasborg Bible teaching and the masters of using this method is you, Paul Crouch, Jim Baker, Lower Grisham and the Jehovah's Witnesses. I would have expected better of you.

Man consists of two parts, dirt and spirit, no more, no less.
"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into has nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."----Genesis 2:7

Dust + Spirit of Life = Living Being or Soul
Dust - Spirit of Life = Dust

God made man from the dust and when his body dies it decomsposes, the breath of life goes back to the giver and its game over.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 1:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Hold the elevator door open! Don't stop now there is more! Because it we stopped it there man would have no hope and be most miserable, like Freeby. Now Freebi, you must believe all those Bible verses on dust that you masterfully combined, because you used them to make your point. If you don't believe them, then naturally, your point is worthless.

Since you believe your argument, you must acknowledge that there was something that formed man out of the dust of the earth. That Something, many of us call God, you may call him Time, or Evolution, who cares, it is a personal thing.

Point is that if that dust and breath of life thing you are teaching occured once in time, it certainly could occur again. Just using Time itself, odds are given enough time, a person of your exact DNA make-up will come around again. The Christian view is the God will remember us through His Son, Jesus, and resurection day is Creation day all over again. The graves will open up and you with a new body comes forth.

If you believe in a big bang, this recreation should not bother you.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 1:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Scripture out of context">>

Something was taken out of context? Oh my. We mustn't have that. If this is true, you won't have any trouble at all showing this while providing this missing context that supports your charge.

Earlier in this thread you dishonestly claimed:

"I had to start puting my quotes in quotation marks because [FFT and AlphaCat] used them as theirs."

Alphacat challenged you to back up this charge (knowing full well that like most of your claims, you cannot), but it isn't likely we'll be seeing you attempt to back that lie up either since your purpose, as usual, is not to engage in honest adult conversation but rather to troll, disrupt and lower the quality of discourse as possible. And it's always been clear you haven't the slightest interest in whether your posted comments are true, not true, plagiarized or something approaching gibberish. That's unfortunate and a missed opportunity, mostly because it's a waste of time.

D.
----------
"His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Psalm 146:3,4

That's the good book plainly saying, "it's game over." I agree with the Bible. Does KG/MrD? We'll see.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 28, 2013 at 1:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"I did not believe because I could not see
Thougth you came to me in the night
When the dawn seemed forever lost
You showed me your love in the light of the stars

Though we share this humble path, alone
How fragile is the heart
Oh give these clay wings to fly
To touch the face of the stars

Breathe life into this feeble heart
Lift this mortal veil of fear
Take these crumbled hopes, etched with tears
We'll rise above these earthly cares

Cast your eyes on the ocean
Cast your soul to the sea
When the dark night seems endless
Please remember me."---Dante's prayer by Loreena McKennitt

This is my hope, my trust, my sacred belief, that when I am cast into the darkness and endlessness of death, that someone who formed me from the dust will remember me again.

Oh, Lord, please remember me?

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 1:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

"its game over." There you go again Freebey, quoteing me again. You want me to back up the charge and you do it for me. Thanks Free, and it will be OK if you use some of my thoughts as long as you quote me correctly.

"Imitation is the sincerest from of flattery."---Charles Caleb Colton

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 2:35 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

What about the thief on the cross when he asked the Lord to remember him? Christ said 'today you will be with me in paradise'. Not his body, but his spirit. I know we will receive a new, uncorrupted body, I believe at the time Christ returns.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 28, 2013 at 7:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent: "What about the thief on the cross... Christ said 'today you will be with me in paradise'.">>

There are some problems raised by that verse and it's interesting to see how different sects try to fix them.

Those who understand that "in that very day his thoughts perish" (and the other verses that make it clear the dead are not conscious) sometimes use a unique comma placement which then reads:

"Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23:43

But almost all translations put the comma this way:

"Truly I tell you, today you will be..."

Notice how that completely changes the meaning.

One problem with this interpretation (and yours), is what about his post resurrection statement to Mary Magdalene, where he says: "...touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John. 20:17)?

Also, there is the problem of how Jesus could promise paradise to the thief on the cross "today" (friday) when Jesus was supposedly dead and in Hades until the following Monday (it was supposed to be "three days and three nights," but it turned out to be two nights).

Gleason Archer, in his Bible Difficulties Encyclopedia (pg. 367), suggests this novel solution:

"The answer lies in the location of "paradise" on Good Friday. Apparently paradise was not exalted to heaven until Easter Day.... It was not yet lifted up to heaven but it may well have been a section of hades (Heb. seol), reserved for believers who had died in the faith but who would not be admitted into the glorious presence of God in heaven until the price of redemption had been actually paid on Calvary. Doubtless it was to the infernal paradise that the souls of Jesus and the repentant thief repaired after they each died on Friday afternoon."

So apologist Gleason, just relocates paradise to an "infernal paradise" to solve the problem! It certainly calls for some creativity when trying to square all the different versions of these supernatural stories.

Mycent: "Not [Jesus] body, but his spirit.">>

They are one and the same in the Hebrew scriptures. Do "spirits" have thoughts? Because the Bible says, the day you die, your thoughts perish. That seems pretty clear.

We'll see if MoneyM (who likes to do seances on the side when he isn't telling tales here), can provide the necessary "context" he claims to have that can fix the plain text of Psalm 146 and those other verses I posted that he had never heard of.

D.
-------------
"I see dead people." --MoneyM, a few deleted screen names back, March 2012.
http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/vie...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 28, 2013 at 11:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

I have to look at this further, but I did want to say, I did not mean Jesus' body, but the thief's body and spirirt.

Commas can make a difference, so the correct interruption is most important. God might have meant that the thief would go today where Jesus would be, but a little later.

I believe the Holy Spirit leads those who love the Lord with all their hearts. It is not so much in the disecting of the word.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 28, 2013 at 1:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Excuse me, I just got back from my seance and I had fries and green beans on the side. As much as it gives me pain, sometimes you have the give the devil his due, I agree with everything fayfreethinker said about Luke 23:43. Jesus was not in paradise that day or the next day. Free, when you get it right, you get it right. There may be hope for you, after all.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 3:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

mycentworth, don't make the Bible more complicated by adding doctrine to it. Never, ever pull a verse out of context and make a doctrine out of that verse. Every organized demonation is wrong about something, some more wrong than others.

Free I don't know Psalm 146, but if you give me a chance I'll read it and give you my thoughts on it.

I have seen dead people on the battlefield and in funeral homes.

Free, against my better judgment, I followed your link and I don't know who this creep is you are debating, but I will give you my opinion. There is no bigfoot, only people pretending to be bigfoot. Space travel is not posible outside of nearby planets, there are no aliens except those who creeped across the Mexican border. And then I got bored reading it, but if you want a direct answer from me on what I beleive, all you have to do is ask.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 4:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Psalm 146 simply states a theme that runs throughout the Bible, when the spirit leaves the body, the body dies and decomposes, and the living being (soul) ceases to exist. What do you not understand about this, Free?

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 28, 2013 at 5:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

MM: "...body dies and decomposes, and the living being (soul) ceases to exist.">>

Glad you caught that. That was quite the point of quoting those verses.

The Bible says it. I believe it.*

D.
*Some exceptions apply.
----------
"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." Ecclesiastes 9

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 30, 2013 at 5:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Is there a point to this endless incoherency.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 31, 2013 at 1:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Unfortunately, anyone who has taken the time to read your material has had to say that to themselves, probably more than once. In those eight profound words, you've rather summed up your entire career here. And that's too bad.

D.
--------------
"Is there a point to this endless incoherency." --Moneym, 1/31/13, up late lonely and trolling, stumbling into something true in a rare moment of introspection.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 31, 2013 at 9:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Or, Money, is there an end to this pointless incoherency?
===
If you're going to do something tonight that you'll be sorry for tomorrow morning, sleep late.
~Henny Youngman

.

Posted by: Coralie

January 31, 2013 at 12:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

"Early to bed, early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise."---Franklin

You two better start getting up a little earlier and go to bed with the sun. Clearly lacking. Betya can't catch fish either.

Posted by: Moneymyst

January 31, 2013 at 1:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

FFT:Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." Ecclesiastes 9

What is your point? All Christians know the body decomposes, and in the grave there is no knowledge of anything. But if you are a true believer, your spirit goes to be with the Lord. If you are not a Christian, you are in the grave until judgement day.

Posted by: mycentworth

January 31, 2013 at 5:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Mycent: "...All Christians know...">>

Whenever you find yourself starting a sentence with those three words, you really just ought to stop yourself and start over. Christians, like their Bible, don't *remotely* agree on the state/condition/future of the dead. As with all other moral issues, especially the tricky confounding issues we really need (or would like) answers to, they (like their Bible) are all over the place on each of them.

You say a "spirit" does something. What's a "spirit?" Is it conscious? Does it have thoughts? The Bible isn't remotely clear. If a writer wished to convey the notion that when you are dead, you are gone, annihilated, one would be hard pressed to state it more precisely and clearly than the verses I've quoted above (and there are more). However, because we are talking about the ("inerrant") Bible, there are also many verses that flatly disagree with those verses. So you can pick which ones you like, but you can't have them all.

And this is how we get 30,000+ different divisions of Christians, all reading and trying to believe the same book.*

If "God is not the author of confusion," it's not clear would confusion look like. (1 Corinthians 14:33)

D.
----------------
"There are as many sects and beliefs as there are heads. This fellow will have nothing to do with baptism; another denies the Sacraments; ...Some say this and some say that."
--Martin Luther (1483-1546) founder of Protestantism, way back when there were fewer heads and few sects.

*Facts and stats on 33,000 denominations." http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a1...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 31, 2013 at 11:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A handful of dust
and a lot of water
God's breath of life
And Adam he became

Later Adam he died
and the breath of life
went back to God
Adam he dried
and to dust he returned

Posted by: Moneymyst

February 2, 2013 at 6:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )