@Redshirt1701“Tell us, what would it take for an atheist to
change their beliefs and admit there was a God?”Proof.
To "Karen R." but God isn't hiding. You just haven't
recognized him.Tell us, what would it take for an atheist to change
their beliefs and admit there was a God?Other than God appearing and
showing himself, and even then they would question it, the atheist already has
their mind made up that they will not believe in God.
@ PopsI guess I don't understand why a god would hide itself
from discovery when it's supposedly critically important that it be found.
Or why looking for falsifiable evidence wouldn't qualify as "real
intent." There are billions of people who have done it your way and,
according to you, found the wrong god/religion. And then there's the
knowledge that, out of sheer need/desire, we humans can make ourselves believe
things that aren't actually true. So why wouldn't we want to test our
perceptions to guard against this? It is important to get it right, yes? Or at
least more advantageous? If this is the case, then to me this makes falsifiable
evidence a necessity. A person can believe anything on faith. Anything.
It's falsifiable evidence that tells us whether or to what degree that
faith is based in reality.
Over 12,000 religions have existed. Each and every one, with few exceptions,
had "proof" that their God(s) had the Revealed Truth. Many of them had
their very own Holy Book(s) Many of them believed that only their God
was self-evident, true and correct.Every Believer is an
Atheist.....denying and rejecting those other 11,999 Gods, except for the one
God they were required to worship.
There's a certain amount of hubris in the demand that the scientific method
should be able to find God, if in fact he exists. It presumes that God is not
sufficiently powerful to hide from the probing of those making the demand. So,
what kind of God would that be if some scientific experiment could expose him?
Not likely one capable of creating the universe, nor one worthy of worship. Even
DB Cooper couldn't be found using the scientific method, why should God
be?The funny thing is that there is a variant of the scientific
method for finding God, which is to seek him with real intent - "real
intent" meaning that if you succeed in finding him, you intend to obey him.
Since he knows our hearts, he isn't fooled by fakers. The proof of God that
one acquires by this method is not a photograph or a video, but to those who
find him it's just as real, or even more so.I agree with many
that non-belief in God is not a religion, per se, but scientism is. The theory
of evolution, for example, requires tremendous faith, given there is no
compelling proof of crucial aspects of biological evolution. Extraordinary
claims require extraordinary evidence!
To "Ranch" here is the problem. To prove that there is no God, using
the scientific method would require knowledge of the entire universe. Do you
have that knowledge? If you do not have that knowledge, then you cannot prove
the existence of God.You and your ilk hid behind science to deny the
existence of God. Unless God came and stood before you, you will deny it until
the day you die.The biggest problem that your ilk has is that your
base assumption is the only assumption you are willing to make. If you use the
scientific method, but start with the assumption that there is a God, then you
can easily prove that there is a God.It all goes back to your base
assumption, and the evidences you are willing to accept. You and your ilk will
accept nothing less than God himself showing himself to you.
@Red;"You want proof, yet when the proof is given you dismiss it
because it doesn't meet your particular standard.""...what type of proof would it take for you to believe that there is a
God?"--- More proof than you'll ever be able to provide;
and as far as a standard of proof; well it's going to have to be a lot more
convincing than your word or the word of a "prophet" about it. TJ did
answer your question though (but you ignored it as per usual): "The
scientific method is the best way to examine reality."
To "Thomas Jefferson" no, you are not willing to change your beliefs. I
have see and heard from people like you for a long time. You want proof, yet
when the proof is given you dismiss it because it doesn't meet your
particular standard.Tell us, what type of proof would it take for
you to believe that there is a God?Funny that you talk about how
humans will invent religions, and you now believe in one of those made up
religions. You believe in the made up religion of atheism.
These are some of my opinions. Its hilarious to watch this
'debate' about the semantics of not playing golf as a sport and bald
as a hair color. But the fact remains that no one has ever provided any
convincing evidence of any god, let alone the god of the bible. Just the same
old 'look all around you'. Well I see nature when I look around. Amazing claims require amazing evidence. Evidence which simply hasnt
been provided. You claim that a deity exists and so far I dont
believe you. I am willing to change my beliefs. Show me the evidence or at least
make a decent philosophical argument. And quit ignoring the obvious
facts. Humans make up religions. We all know it. We have all seen it. I doubt
anyone who has posted so far on this page doesnt think Mohammad made up Islam
without any help from any god. But some of us are able to apply that truth
in an honest look at the religion we were taught as children. Some cling onto
their religion for many reasons-not wanting to die being the most common. The scientific method is the best way to examine reality. Faith is
the best way to make yourself 'believe' what you wish were true.
To "SC Matt" the problem is that you are still the same person when you
die as you were in life. So, if you did not like the LDS church here you
won't like it there either.To "RJohnson" what is wrong
with referencing the Feds? They may not be right very often, but, like a broken
clock, they are right every once in a while.
MEB says:"...and I'll do my best not to knock yours if you
can show me the courtesy of not knocking mine."-- The problem is
that your belief system is being used to denigrate and demean others.Oatmeal says:"The most dogmatic individuals I know are
militant atheists."-- I have to call you out on that one. "Jeremiah Flanksteak: You want to create a secular world where we
all live by the Golden Rule, which is a proposition first proposed and cherished
by religious persons for the last four thousand years?"---
I'll see your 4,000 years and raise you a 100,000 where the golden rule was
not religious but was a necessary means of survival.@Red:"You don't define Christianity by what they don't believe, but
by their beliefs."-- Xtians don't believe in Ra, Zeus,
Hera, etc. They don't believe in treating others as they'd be treated
themselves (hence the request to be able to discriminate). That defines Xtians
by what they *don't* believe.
@Tyler D: I sense your frustration. And religion is just the tip of the iceberg!
Why, there's hardly anything about the human experience that doesn't
contradict the principles of biological evolution, beginning with consciousness
and agency, moving on through the absurdity of human emotion, and expressed in
art, literature, poetry, dance, music, drama, and, (gasp!) religion. Look at all
the evolutionary absurdities we silly humans have created: stock car racing,
synchronized swimming, downhill skiing, stand-up comedy, corn mazes (or should
that be corn maizes, ha ha?), bad puns, roller derby, tic tac toe, sour cream,
low-riders, hairpieces, Barbie dolls, biking shorts, lawn darts, beer, fidget
spinners, bacon, twinkies, bacon-flavored twinkies (you wish), and, maybe worst
of all, opera!Seriously, though, my guess is that those who reject
the Judeo-Christian fundamentals of western civilization, including overt
religiosity, live in harmony with 99% of what it is they claim to reject. The
acknowledgment or denial of the existence of God is pretty insignificant when
stacked up against how we live our lives. If that isn't the point of
religion, then what is?
While this running debate is interesting in a way, it appears that many of us
here all agree on something. While on this earth, we should do our
best to treat others with love and kindness, avoid causing needless pain, and
live in such a way that we make the Earth a better, not worse, place to live.
And then one day, we'll die.And I will either wake
up dead (happy day) and learn to what degree I've been wrong.Or
I won't wake up dead, and I'll never know. According to
LDS beliefs, nearly everybody who has at least tried to live a good, helpful,
upstanding life, showing love to others, will have the opportunity to accept the
Savior after death, right? So, why worry about it now, other than
to help somebody avoid needless pain? I hardly think arguing about
it helps to further that goal.
-RedShirtHarvard “So, the question for is this: Do you know
something...the US Federal Government don't?”Wow. A
conservative telling us to put our faith in the U.S. Government. I just
don’t know what to believe anymore.
milquetoasty - Great points. Two thoughts in response:First - The
same argument that you make to define an Atheist can also be made for people who
believe in God. You can't tie together a common set of beliefs for
Atheists any more than you can tie a common set of beliefs for those who believe
in God. Religious beliefs cover a broad spectrum.Second - If you
take the word "religion" out of it, and you narrow it down to a belief
system, then presumably you believe in something. If you believe in God, then
your belief system either goes down some path of religion or you're
agnostic. If you don't believe in God, then your belief system goes down
some other path that consumes your consciousness. I don't know anyone who
simply doesn't believe in anything. In the end, it's
divisive to talk about whether or not one believes in God or religion.
It's more inclusive and open minded to acknowledge that everyone has a
belief system, and I'll do my best not to knock yours if you can show me
the courtesy of not knocking mine.
milquetoasty:A strong disbelief is simple a belief stated in a negative
form. Disbelief is not the absence of belief. The most dogmatic individuals I
know are militant atheists. Jeremiah Flanksteak: You want to create
a secular world where we all live by the Golden Rule, which is a proposition
first proposed and cherished by religious persons for the last four thousand
To "milquetoasty" you are only looking at what atheists DON'T
believe. That is not part of the definition of a religion. A religion is
defined on beliefs.Most any atheist believes that man evolved from
goo, and that when you die there is no more. There are other things they believe
that define the Atheism religion. Those are their beliefs.You
don't define Christianity by what they don't believe, but by their
beliefs.I know you don't want to admit it, but atheism is a
religion. You can keep trying to avoid it, but that doesn't change the fact
that it is a religion.
@MEB – “Most Atheists I know simply replace belief in God with some
other rabid, irrational belief system (like environmentalism, politics, or some
other crackpot obsession).”Yes, of course
potentially dogmatic and to varying degrees irrational. But again, what does any
of that have to do with my not believing in the existence of Zeus, Odin and
Yahweh (or his son as a god)?@RedShirtHarvard – “I get
it from the dictionary definition of religion.”Please list the
atheist beliefs - not a non-belief, but a belief.If you’re
confused, perhaps this will help: my sister believes that knowing the alignment
of the planets at a given point in time will tell you something useful about
whether so and so is your soulmate. I do not share her belief. One of us has a
belief; the other does not.If you still confused, please consult the
logical law of non-contradiction – something cannot be both A and not-A at
the same time.
@Pops:"We are compelled to take everything on faith. We have no choice
in the matter. We have no knowledge, only belief."True...
mostly.According to the Christian Bible: '...faith is the
substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.'
(Hebrews 11:1).Despite this strange definition of 'faith,'
in order to have faith you have to have some degree of irrefutable evidence...
physical evidence being the more reliable kind. Christians have the Holy Bible
to foster faith in God, since His Son reportedly walked the earth, did miracles,
and established a religion. The Mormons have their former leader, Smith, as
evidence, who claims to have been visited by God the Father and His Son, Jesus
Christ. That would seem to be fairly reliable evidence to support faith in God.
But it's not the best kind. We may have to wait for the best kind of
evidence until after we die. But, by then it might be too late... dang.
I'm an independent NON CORPORATE mormon and in my church we protect
children and don't attack members with "courts" or
For everyone insisting that atheism is a religion, please explain. Is NOT collecting stamps a hobby?What other possible categories of
your life would you be labeled for the things you DON'T believe in? I mentioned in my post that many atheists absolutely behave
dogmatically. I understand that this can create the appearance of
"religiousity." However, who here is willing to attempt to
define what the affirmative beliefs of the claimed religion of atheism are? What
do members of this religion share, other than lack of belief in God(s). This
appears to just be a semantic argument at this point. As Tyler D
pointed out, "you can be a radical right-wing atheist, a radical left-wing
atheists, and a million other variations." Some atheists believe that
crystals have magic powers. Some believe in astrology. Some believe that there
are lizard people operating at the highest levels of our government. By the claims in some of these comments, you would absolutely have to
categorize any sort of passionate opinion as a religion. Are
political parties actually religions then?
To Redshirt - USS Enterprise To "Redshirt - USS Enterprise"
then I know that there is a Santa Clause because I see evidence of him at the
mall. Again, how is your belief that there is no Santa Clause any
different than believing there is a Santa Claus?
Looks like Redshirt is right. By milquetoasty's definitions #2 and #4,
Atheism can be considered one's personal religion. Most Atheists I know
simply replace belief in God with some other rabid, irrational belief system
(like environmentalism, politics, or some other crackpot obsession).
@Pops – “We have no knowledge, only belief.”That
statement is epistemologically bankrupt.It’s true that our
knowledge of the universe is inductive and that we cannot know definitely that
we aren’t just experiencing an elaborate computer simulation, but
epistemologically speaking that is a million miles away from
“belief” as the term is commonly used by people of faith (or kids
talking about Santa Claus).Knowledge follows rules of logic,
evidence, and proof (in the inductive sense). Faith is what
you’re left with when reason fails but you want to believe anyway. They are as different as apples and 747’s.
To "Tyler D" I get it from 2 sources.First, I get it from
the dictionary definition of religion.The second source is the IRS
that has granted religious status to atheist groups.So, the question
for is this: Do you know something that the dictionary and the US Federal
Government don't?Kind of funny how you use Atheism as a label
that resembles Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, or any other religion. It
is almost like Atheism IS a religion.
Faith may be an "inferior epistemology", but unfortunately it's all
we have. The only connections our minds have with the universe are fallible
senses. We are compelled to take everything on faith. We have no choice in the
matter. We have no knowledge, only belief.
"There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only
our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and
enslaves minds. " "We are 'saved' for a higher purpose: to
reaffirm our skepticism".
@RedShirt – “atheism is a religion.....”Where do
you guys get this stuff?First of all, you do realize that all these
arguments are essentially conceding that faith/religion is an inferior
epistemology, don’t you? Second, people find all sorts of
reason to bond through community. To believe that atheism gives a community
anything other than a shared sense of what they are not, is nonsensical. It
would be like going to a weekly meeting of non-astrologers or non-alchemists.Finally, atheism as a label is just weird when you think about it
(again, like being a “non-astrologer”). Other than knowing that it
simply means instead of not believing in the 9,999 gods we’ve invented
(which btw describes all of us), they don’t believe in any 10,000 gods;
the term “atheist” tells you absolutely nothing about a
person’s views on anything. You can be a radical right-wing
atheist, a radical left-wing atheists, and a million other variations.But by all means, kept trying to say it’s a religion thereby denigrating
I am atheist and anti-theist. Atheist: I don't believe the god claims
presented. Anti-theist: I believe gods do not exist. Support for the latter:
Faith.Just kidding. The prime giveaway for me is the knowledge that
we humans have worshiped thousands of gods in our history and that their nature
tracks closely with culture, state of knowledge, and environment. So by knowing
when, where, and under what conditions an individual lived, we can predict with
great accuracy what type of god(s) s/he believed in. That alone points strongly
to "man created gods" rather than vice-versa.Evolutionary
research also provides plausible reasons for why we developed the beliefs we
did. Seeing purpose/agency, believing we're being watched and looked after
- these things have been conducive to survival in a brutal, amoral reality.
It's just that this kind of reality doesn't point to moral/just gods,
which is the kind we tend to worship. It instead points to man making gods in
We all agree that humans have simply made up over a thousand gods. And yet some (most) believe that the god(s) that their parents happen to
believe in is actually the 'real' god. Look around the world.
How are the worlds religions dispersed? The factor which most easily can predict
what religion you believe in is geography. We have seen appeals to
'faith' on this page. Faith is just the excuse people use when
they dont have good reasons to believe something. If I ask you why you believe
something and you have good reasons, then those are what you use to explain it
to me. If you dont have good reasons you claim 'faith'. Faith has
never solved a mystery or answered a question about our universe. Faith has
stood in the way of answering questions about our universe. The 9/11
bombers had more 'faith' than 99.9999% of the believers in the US. Did
any of you change your religion because of their display of faith? We have also seen Pascals wager posed here. But anyone who has studied any
philosophy knows that belief isnt a this or that. There are thousands of gods.
You could have picked the wrong one. Religion: They cant all be
right but they can (and are) all be wrong.
To "my_two_cents_worth" then I know that there is a God because I see
evidence of him everywhere. So I just believe there is 1 more God than you
do.Again, how is your belief that there is no God any different than
believing there is a God?
Went right to the comment section because there are so many takes on religion
versus non-religion. What I see by the headline is a way to categorize groups of
people, similar to “The Greatest Generation”;
“Baby-Boomers”; “Yuppies”; “Gen-X” and
“Millenials”....probably left out a few in between. But I wonder why
we are so adamant to categorize, profile, pigeon hole or choose how to LABEL
someone. We are all children of parents who’s parents bore them and
so on all the way back to whatever beginning the HUMAN Race had. Scientists have
an opinion, theologians have an opinion about when and where “life”
began.I for one believe we are Children of a Superior Being, whom I refer
to as God or Heavenly Father, and was sent here to perform certain tasks so I
could return to Him. Even if that task is just to have faith and believe there
is a hereafter. After death we will have our answer.
@Thid Barker"Faith is our spiritual currency for the here-after! Its
that simple! Go to your grave with abundant spiritual currency (faith)! The
alternative is really, really bad and it lasts for soooo long!"But which is worse, a non-believer who sincerely just doesn't believe, or
someone who is approaching faith as an insurance policy rather than sincere
@my_two_cents_worth:"We don’t 'believe' there is no
god; we see no evidence to support the existence of god to believe in."Those who don't believe there is a god are usually those who have
analytic minds.Believers have to be able to generate and live by
faith. And sometimes the faithful have to ignore what are instances relatively
hard to accept, applying logic. For example, how did Noah and his three sons
build a boat (ark) which had to be a huge vessel to accommodate all the animals
on the earth and feed them for almost a year? How did he gather the polar bears
form the Polar region and the koala bears from Australia? Did he gather
squirrels, rabbits, rats, moles, ants, butterflies, etc., etc., ad infinitum?
The whole story doesn't seem plausible but many believe it, accepting it on
faith. And that's fine with many non-believers.And, how could
Jonah live in the belly of a whale for three days and not get digested? Another
issue that has to be taken on faith.
@RedShirt“To "The Atheist" how is your belief that
there is no God any different than a belief that there is a God?”We don’t “believe” there is no god; we see no evidence to
support the existence of god to believe in. You are really no different than us:
you dismiss all the other gods mankind has worshipped over the millennia; we
just dismiss one more god than you do.
Some people believe in atheism so devoutly, it must be a religion, they never
stop trying to convert others.Some people believe in the scientific
method so devoutly they don't understand it applies to religion also, but
always becomes fuzzy at the edges of knowledge.It would be
interesting to see how this survey relates to MIchael Shermer's book,
"The Believing Brain". He believes (yes, I know) that all humans are
born with a "believing brain" and must believe in something. You can get
a little of his book from his TED talk, "The pattern behind
self-deception".So interesting to see things come together in a
circle as we learn more about ourselves.
@milquetoasty & AthiestPer the definitions supplied Religion
Definition #4, and Atheism Definition #1b are exactly the same in support of one
another. I have never met an atheist who is not ardor "passionate"
about their being atheist, as I believe The Atheist as demonstrated within in
his comments.The Atheist Said - "no wonder so many tens of
millions around the world are turning away from religion!"Studies done on this very subject do nowhere indicated that the number of
people leaving is in the tens of millions. But whatever. Ironically, did you
know that one of the Top10 reasons studies have shown people leaving religion is
(The rise of a fad called “atheism"). I thought is was funny they
called it a fad. The other interesting thing was all 10 listed were liberal
ideals of our entitled young up and comers. Just another interesting point.The Atheist Also Said - "How hard is that to wrap your inspired
religious minds around?"Are you that disgruntled, that people
take a definition that supports being atheist as a religion that it fires you up
that much. Why so angry? Is it that hard to wrap the atheist philosophical
To "The Atheist" how is your belief that there is no God any different
than a belief that there is a God?Humans do not have the ability to
see into the past to either confirm or deny that God created the Earth. Nor do
we posses to ability to know what exists much beyond what we can observe
directly. So, to say that there is no God, that takes faith because it is not
something that can be proven or disproven using any empirical evidence.You are not being categorized by "what you don't believe", but
are being categorized by what you do believe in. The basic beliefs of Atheists
include that man was created through evolution, and that once you die that you
no longer exist as a person.
As "atheist", I grow tired of the same old worn out "arguments"
trying to convince the world that atheism is "a religion".With patently absurd reasoning like that, it is no wonder so many tens of
millions around the world are turning away from religion!It is
absurd to attempt to categorize people according to what they do NOT believe.
How hard is that to wrap your inspired religious minds around?
[Continuing from my previous comment.]The fraction of 50% of members
of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that are "Sunday
Stalwarts" is roughly similar to the typical rate of "active"
Church-attending members. Without more data, it is hard to assess other
religious groups, but the next highest are our Muslim brothers and sisters with
around 40%. I'm not implying any disrespect of other religious groups who
have different theological and cultural backgrounds that help explain these
differences. Looking more at the report, I am confused how the
Sunday Stalwarts who are 91% Christian, 97% believers in heaven, and 94%
believers in the Bible can also include 19% who believe in reincarnation and 16%
who believe in astrology. As astrology and especially reincarnation (defined in
the poll as "people will be reborn again and again in this world") are
contrary to Christianity and the Bible, there must be a non-negligible fraction
of Bible-believing Christians who either do not understand their own doctrine,
are willing to believe theological tenets that are essentially contradictory,
and/or simply did not understand the questions well enough to respond
To "milquetoasty" did you read the definitions you listed for RELIGION.
You found that a religion is "a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held
to with ardor and faith." That is atheism, it meets that very definition.
Since an atheist cannot see the entire universe, they must take it on faith that
there is no God. They have no proof that God does not exist.Atheists, like Christians, may not all have the same beliefs, but there are
some core beliefs that they all share.There are even Atheist groups
that meet once a week, just like an organized religion.If that
isn't enough, even the IRS has granted Atheist groups "religious"
tax status.To "my_two_cents_worth" you make no sense, maybe
you should get a few more cents before commenting.
I was surprised that the Deseret News did not have a breakdown of members of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints into the typology categories until I
found that this breakdown is not given in the full report. The breakdown for
other religious groups is given and the Deseret News made an infographic for
that. Using weights based on the typology (Full Report, p. 5) and
the religious breakdown table (p.8), I was able to reconstruct the fraction of
every religious group in each category, which matches the data that are given on
page 32 to within 0-2% (which is the survey error anyway). In order
from most religious to least religious, the fraction of those in Non-Christian
Faiths in the 7 typologies are 16, 6, 12, 11, 16, 21, and 19 percent. The
fraction of "Mormons" is 49, 3, 6, 10, 17, 3, and 10 percent. [More in another comment.]
Interesting article indeed! It has been said that if you are an atheist, God
(faith) is not your enemy, death is your enemy! We all die, then what? Either
there is nothing beyond the grave or there is. "Jesus said unto her, I am
the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead,
yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die.
Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the
Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world" Matt 11: 25-27Either that's true or it isn't! Faith is our spiritual
currency for the here-after! Its that simple! Go to your grave with abundant
spiritual currency (faith)! The alternative is really, really bad and it lasts
for soooo long!
I'm not sure where agnostics fit into this study, since they were not
Atheists were the ‘most educated’...not surprising really. The world
in general would be a FAR better place is we ‘86’d ALL religions and
‘attempted’ to live by the Golden Rule.
I have never been happier since I left my childhood religion. If you are
thinking of trying it give it a shot. You will never know until you try it.
@RedShirt“To "The Atheist" but by the very definition
of religion, atheism is a religion”By the very definition of
shoe size, “brown” is an 11 1/2 wide.
To "RedShirt" You said:"...but by the very
definition of religion, atheism is a religion....."Merriam-Webster defines religion as:1 a : the state of a religious
a nun in her 20th year of religionb (1) : the service and worship of God
or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or
observance2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious
attitudes, beliefs, and practices3 archaic : scrupulous conformity :
conscientiousness4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with
ardor and faithAtheism is defined as:1 a : a lack of
belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any godsb : a
philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence
of a god or any gods2 archaic : godlessness especially in conduct :
ungodliness, wickedness. That is it. There is no institutionalized
system, dogma, set of beliefs, structure, or guiding text. To be
sure, there are many things which most atheists probably agree on (although
certainly not all, there are no rules to begin with), and some behave
dogmatically. However, to call it a religion is incorrect, by the very
To "The Atheist" but by the very definition of religion, atheism is a
By far the most interesting group in American society today are the
“nones” and this new survey format goes a long ways towards making
the distinctions necessary to understand who this “fastest growing”
group is.One area that I found confusing though is the difference
between the “Spiritually Awake” and the “Religion
Resisters.” The group titles suggest some real differences, but the
descriptions in the article sound almost identical – they’re both
classified as “spiritual but not religious” and both are interested
in “spiritual energy” (whatever that is) and nature.
Solidly Secular thank you, although you could call me a believer in Deism....
Huzzah for the solidly secular and the religion resisters!Go team!
Let truth and reason prevail!
@ForerunnerThey might be counted in the Catholic segment. We generally use
Catholic to refer to Roman Catholics but it's applicable to the Orthodox
Catholic churches as well.
Interesting story.Also interesting that while it has photos from the Sts.
Peter and Paul Orthodox Church, the piece had not one mention of Eastern