$5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

$5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
From the mailbag. This is a doosey, check it out.

*******
Thanks for your patience Ronnie. Now I can respond to your email.

--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Ronnie... <...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> From: Ronnie
> Subject: $5,000 award for demonstration of supernatural claims
> To: fayfreethinkers@yahoo.com
> Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 12:43 AM
> Hello,
> I met Doug Krueger at the U of A in the late 90's
> and happened upon the Fayetteville Freethinkers website
> again just recently. My question is about what you consider
> a "demonstration of supernatural claims."

DAR
Pretty straightforward really. A demonstration of a supernatural (non natural, beyond natural) event under careful observing conditions. Our award offer is based upon a similar offer by the James Randi Educational Foundation. He has a useful FAQ page here:

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m- ... e-faq.html

Excerpt:

2.2 "What is the definition of “paranormal” in regards to the Challenge?

Webster’s Online Dictionary defines “paranormal” as “not scientifically explainable; supernatural.”


RF
> Please,
> let me know what the specifications of the $5,000 reward
> are.

DAR
State, specifically, what supernatural power you believe you have, what you specifically claim to be able to do, and under what conditions you can do it. If it's natural or has a natural explanation, it doesn't qualify. If it isn't natural, or is paranormal, it probably does qualify. This is not difficult. Doing the supernatural feat, now that's difficult.

RF
> I have witnessed my wife who was in tremendous pain
> with an abscessed tooth not being able to take a single bite
> of food for the pain and laying in bed with a hot water
> bottle taking pain medication for the previous week, get up
> and eat a Mexican meal with tacos, chips, etc completely
> free from pain immediately after we prayed for her in the
> name of Jesus.

DAR
This would not qualify for several reasons:

a) It's an anecdote, a story, from the past and thus completely unverifiable and unobservable in any way to us now.

b) Tooth and sinus pain are notoriously sporadic. It can come, and go (and does all the time) without any good reason. Many people have experienced this (my son and I have) and there is no reason to suspect this involves anything to do with Jesus.

c) Someone else's subjective sensation of pain is not something open to objective verification. If we were to conduct a test it would need to have an outcome that is straightforward and observable and does not need to be interpreted or guessed at. Example: You say you can make a pencil levitate. We conduct a test with proper scientific observing conditions. The pencil levitates. You win the prize.

RF
> My dad was an alcoholic who is now free from
> alcohol for the last 6 years, and my dad was addicted to
> cigarette smoking and after prayer has not smoked for the
> last 4 years.

DAR
I am glad your dad is enjoying better health. Thousands of people give up addictions every day and they do so without appealing to any divine power. It's called will power. Some people take the credit themselves, others, for some reason, choose to give the credit for their own action, to someone else. I don't know why.


RF
> As a teenager, I prayed for a little
> neighborhood boy who said the doctor told him he had a heart
> murmur. I asked him if he believed that God could heal him
> of this, and he said yes. So, I laid my hands on his chest
> and he told me two weeks later that the doctor said the
> heart murmur had stopped.

DAR
See my response to the tooth pain anecdote given above.

RF
> I had a cousin who weighed about
> 550 pounds who fell backward under the power of God’s
> Spirit onto a girl who weighed about 95 pounds. The 95
> pound girl laid him down on the floor with ease.

DAR
See my response to the tooth pain anecdote given above. I don't believe this one. Not even close. A 550 lb person can barely stand.

I used to play in a rock and roll band and one night our bass player was pretty drunk and he had a long instrument cable so he was able to dance with some girls out on the dance floor (while playing bass). He was dancing with his back to them and leaning up against them, then they must have moved, or he lost his balance and he fell backward over them, ontop of them, completely wiping them out. It wasn't cool but it was pretty funny. Anyway, he got up and the song went on. He was full of spirits but they weren't very holy! The girl he fell on was fine and I don't think Jesus assisted.

RF
> I would
> say that all of these cases have supernatural causes.

DAR
I would say they all have very simple natural explanations. And do realize that anecdotal stories don't prove anything. People do enjoy telling them for some reason. I don't know why.

RF
> From
> my experience with talking with other atheists at the U of A
> is that they will always revert back to "evolution will
> finally find the reason for that" or "there is a
> logical explanation for that" when confronted with my
> experiences with supernatural healings or say that "our
> body heals itself because of built in processes being
> enacted in our bodies to heal itself by positive
> thoughts."

DAR
At a religious round table at the U of A several years ago a religious person ask me how a person who was sick could have gotten better. I was amazed he could ask such a question. I simply asked him if he had heard of something called the human "immune system." All living organisms are very good at healing themselves. 99% of all species that have ever lived have gone extinct. The weak ones, and unlucky ones, got weeded out a long time ago. Spontaneous remission happens all the time, and even at a consistent measurable rate. There is no reason to believe this involves something supernatural.


RF
> Therefore, unless you tell me different, I
> say that the $5,000 is just a gimmick for you to gain
> attention to yourself because I figure that any supernatural
> event which happens in front of your very eyes would just be
> dismissed because of one of your "logical"
> explanations.

DAR
Our offer is genuine, legitimate and legally binding. It's also adjustable. For instance, if you would like to perform a resurrection, I will give you a house. Two bedroom, pretty blue, on an acre in Fayetteville. Valued at about $75,000.

If you would like to participate, simply state clearly and specifically what power you claim to have, what you claim to be able to do and under what conditions. Are you going to do this Ronnie? I hope so.


RF
> My pastor at First Assembly of God in
> Bentonville, Chad Stafford, knows an evangelist who has had
> people brought back to life in his ministry

DAR
So you know someone, who claims to know someone, who claims to have conducted a resurrection. The only thing less credible than a second hand anecdotal story is a third hand anecdotal story. If I were to tell it, it would be fourth hand. Religious people like to pass these stories around and I do know why. To build up their faith. I'll make this simple: Show me a resurrection, I'll give you a house. You can sell it and give the money to the church. And I'll start going to church too. Then we can look back on this in heaven some day and laugh about the old days.


RF
> and my sister
> who is a missionary in Africa has went to a church which has
> many documented cases of people healed of HIV, AIDS, and
> many other types of diseases and problems.

DAR
Most problems the body deals with on it's own. I am doubtful of the AIDS claim. But even if someone's body did manage to fight off a verified case of AIDS, this would not mean a god had anything to do with it. Our bodies naturally eradicate virus's all the time. Maybe that persons immune system got the right combination to beat it. I know of no verified example of a person beating AIDS. As many people as have probably prayed for this, you would think if prayer had any power we would have a verified example. Instead, every time prayer has been properly tested, it has failed. No exceptions. This is probably because it doesn't work.

RF
> The cases are
> documented by at least two different methods one of which
> being a state doctor.

DAR
What cases? Where are the documents? Anyway, this suffers from the same problems as your toothache example. And apparently these people were being treated. Sometimes when people go to the doctor and get treated, they get better. And a lot of times, doctors make mistakes, and misdiagnose a disease. It happens a lot here, and I bet it happens a lot in Africa too.

RF
> In that area of Africa, the hospitals
> send the people with no way of getting well to that churche
> with many of them getting healed completely.

DAR
Or so you've heard. So what's their life expectancy over there? We use science pretty consistently here. Which do you think has the better result Ronnie? Science or witchdoctors and church elders praying? I know.

RF
> I hope you are
> not in the same boat which is described in Luke 16:31.

DAR
Oh not at all. I just need common sense evidence. Just like Thomas asked for (and received).

RF
> I
> hope you prove me wrong, but I definitely have my doubts
> after talking with a group of three Free Thinkers in
> Fayetteville one of which was Doug Krueger. I would love to
> believe that you and the Free Thinkers are truth seekers

DAR
I assure you I am. For most of my life I believed in the supernatural and for many years God and the Bible. I estimate I attended 10,000 church meetings. Then I examined the evidence and promised to be honest and follow the best evidence to the truth where ever it led. If you have any evidence for the existence of God, do pass it along.

RF
> and
> not just a bunch of atheists who are just trying to spread
> your false religion which has the main belief of “science
> will find a way to disprove the Bible.”

DAR
Disproving the Bible is really easy. You don't even need science. Watch, I'll do it in just a minute.

RF
You have my
> permission to put this email on your FAQ page so that you
> can clarify what your positions are.

DAR
Thank you. I won't put it there but I will post this in our forum, with your full name removed. You are free to join in. I'll give you the link.

RF
I don’t do debates,
> I find out what other people think and get my own answer
> which is sufficient for me in light of what I know. I think
> most Atheists do the same thing.

DAR
No, I definitely do debates. I find I can learn a lot from them. It's important to see if your beliefs can stand up to a little scrutiny. This is also why science is so powerful. Peer review. Falsehoods get discarded. This is also why religion is so full of errors. Falsehoods get preserved.


RF
I will always revert back
> to "God said it, I believe it, I repented of my sins
> and trust in Jesus as the bible says, and God gets all the
> glory for the results."

DAR
Well then I guess you have decided to not change your beliefs no matter what. A lot of people do this for some reason. I think it's intellectually cowardly.


RF
I don't agree with what
> many of the different Christian denominations believe and
> hold as "doctrinal truths." After my studies,
> there are over 100 Christian denominations that believe 5
> things.

DAR
Actually, there are thousands of Christian denominations and if you count every little division, it's about 30 thousand.


RF
So, if you want your book and your discussions to
> apply to most Christians, then you may want to just focus on
> the following items instead of all the so many things that
> divide Christians which don’t determine salvation. These
> are the 5 things in which over 100 Christian denomination
> believe: (Anyone who believes these 5 things are
> Christians. If someone claims to be a Christian and tries
> to put other rules in order to be saved or to obtain their
> salvation, then they may be simply mislead and mistaken or
> they could be a cult.)
> 1. Heaven is a free gift. No matter how "good"
> we are or how many good things we do, we can not earn or
> deserve to get into heaven.
> 2. Man is a sinner and cannot save himself. We all do
> things that are wrong (sins).
> 3. God is merciful yet just. God loves us, but cannot let
> sin go unpunished. Our sin causes a gap between us and God
> which causes our eternal separation from God.
> 4. Jesus Christ (God's only Son) was sent by God
> around 2000 years ago to bridge that gap that our sin causes
> between us and God. Jesus died on a cross with all of our
> past, present, and future sins placed upon Him which God
> punished by letting Him die a horrible death for those sins;
> therefore, punishing our sins.
> 5. Faith/trust in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior is
> the only thing that can get us to Heaven. This
> faith cannot be a temporal faith such as that when a
> student says, "Jesus help me on this test", and
> then passes the test. That faith is temporary and is not
> needed after the test. We must have the faith that says in
> every situation, good or bad, that Jesus is there with us in
> the form of the Holy Spirit leading us and guiding our
> steps. With that faith, there is nothing that can shake the
> Christian’s world because we know that no matter how bad
> things are that when we die, we will be in Heaven with God.

DAR
I am sure you sincerely believe that Ronnie. I assure you, it's complete and utter nonsense that has been drilled into your head, probably at a young age.

RF
> I have read much of your information, and am convinced, as
> you have said on your websites, that I am one of the
> Christians that there is no way that anyone will convince me
> that there is no God. I am confident from my experiences
> with God as my redeemer and friend through His son Jesus
> Christ, that He exists, and that the Holy Spirit guides me
> in my daily decisions.

DAR
Of course.

RF
> I have been praying for you and the “Free Thinkers” in
> Fayetteville ever since someone came to a Chi Alpha
> Christian Fellowship meeting where a demon was getting cast
> out of a young man.

DAR
I assure you your prayers have been exactly as effective as every other prayer ever uttered. Incidentally, "Freethinkers" is one word.
How would you verify that a person actually has a demon in them? How would you verify that the demon has been cast out?

RF
> By the way, this was another
> supernatural event which many Atheists don’t believe in
> even when they see it with their own eyes.

DAR
With good reason. I would be absolutely honored if you would invite me (and perhaps a friend) to an exorcism.


RF
I have helped
> bring Atheists to Jesus Christ as you have helped
> “educate” Theists.”

DAR
They weren't atheists that I knew. When people go through our program they don't go back to Christianity. Just kidding, we don't really have a program. We just teach people how to think clearly and have good discernment.

RF
> Let me know if I can assist you
> in anyway.

DAR
Demonstrate something.

RF
Also, I advise you to read some prayers of
> George Washington,

DAR
The prayers people pass around are bogus. Certainly the supposed "prayer books" are. These are known forgeries produced much later. I can give you the specifics on this if you like. Washington wasn't very religious and wasn't a Christian.


RF
John Quincy Adams, and John Adams. I
> would like to know how/why you think they were free thinkers
> in the form of “agnostics, atheists, and deists.”

DAR
Because they said they were. I never said they were atheists. Note:

"One of the embarrassing problems for the early nineteenth-century
champions of the Christian faith was that not one of the first six
Presidents of the United States was an orthodox Christian."
--The Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1968, p. 420.



RF
If
> they were Free Thinkers as you state on your website, then
> how could they come to totally opposite conclusions about
> God than you have?

DAR
Give an example of what you are talking about. Be specific. These were men of the enlightenment who believed in the power of reason. Some of them believed loosely in some kind of deistic god that may have started things off and then left the scene. This was before Darwin so we can forgive them. Darwin provided a lot of answers and changed it all.


RF
You use the argument that since all
> Christians can’t agree on what the Bible says and means,
> then Christianity must be false.

DAR
Where did you get this idea? I have never used that argument. What are you referring to? Be specific.


RF
However, I could use the
> same argument that since all Atheists can’t decide on what
> is true and what is not, then Atheism must be false.

DAR
You need to learn that atheists only agree on one thing: they don't believe in God. Period. That's it. And they all completely, by definition, agree on this. No exceptions. Think about it.

RF
> Furthermore, there has been a great number of scientists
> that have made discoveries that have proven that the Bible
> is correct and always have been, but because of their
> unbelief in God more and more people kept on dying.

DAR
The Bible is correct about a lot of things. It's a very old book so we should not be surprised that it gets some basic facts and claims correct.

RF
An
> example of this was about treating patients in hospitals.
> For hundreds of years from the beginning of hospitals,
> doctors did not wash up before surgeries and did not
> disinfect instruments used for surgeries because they
> didn’t know anything about germs.

DAR
You're exactly right. There were some early guesses but it wasn't until about 150 years ago that modern science started to figure this out.

RF
> However, the Bible gave
> us the exact way of treating sickness was to keep them
> separate until being well and then washing and cleansing
> themselves before going to see healthy people again.

DAR
And this is so clearly spelled out in the Bible that Christians, who faithfully studied and believed this book for 1800 hundreds years, just could see it until the scientists came along and figured it out for them without the book. This is a good clue that what you are claiming, is not in your book.

I notice you don't cite a verse.

Ronnie, at Leviticus chapter 14 you can read how to cure leprosy. I'll just quote a couple verses:

25 And he shall kill the lamb of the trespass offering, and the priest shall take some of the blood of the trespass offering, and put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot:
26 And the priest shall pour of the oil into the palm of his own left hand:
27 And the priest shall sprinkle with his right finger some of the oil that is in his left hand seven times before the LORD:

etc. It goes on and on with this.

Ronnie, do you think this is a good way to cure leprosy? Do you wonder why no one uses this method? I don't wonder because I know why. Because putting a splotch of lamb blood on your right toe is superstitious nonsense that doesn't cure anything.


RF
How
> come scientists can’t agree on what is true and what is
> not?

DAR
Because we are still figuring a lot of things out. There is a whole lot scientists do agree on. Interestingly, as time goes on, these is less and less that religious people agree on about religion. We get more sects, and more division. This is because people who believe things by faith, with out good reasons, are susceptible to believing all sorts of falsehoods. They don't have the tools or knowledge to know the difference between truth and pure fiction. Their thinking process has been hijacked by their fear of death and they make an agreement to believe all sorts of absurdities as long as, in the bargain, they get to escape death. Unfortunately, it's a fools bargain and the joke is on you. No one escapes death (which is what the Hebrew scriptures teach anyway).


RF
> There are just as many scientists who say there is a
> God as that say there is not and use scientific
> laws/theories to back up both sides.
> Why is this?

DAR
No. There are no "scientific laws/theories" that "back up" a belief in god. Not one. And consider this:

***
Leading Scientists Reject God Belief
The July 1998 "Nature" reports its new survey this year finding that
93% of what it categorizes as "great" scientists do not believe in a god.
The 1998 study follows up on the landmark 1914 survey by U.S.
psychologist James H. Leuba, who found that 58% of 1,000 randomly
selected U.S. scientists expressed disbelief or doubt in the existence
of a god, and that this figure rose to nearly 70% among the 400 "greater" scientists within his sample. When Leuba repeated his survey some twenty years later, he found that these percentages had increased to 67% and 85%, respectively.
Nature replicated Leuba's initial 1914 study in 1996, reporting little
change, with 60.7% of American scientists generally expressing disbelief or doubt. This year, it replicated the second prong of Leuba's study, studying "greater" scientists (criterion: membership in the National Academy of Sciences). Its survey found "near universal rejection of the transcendent by NAS natural scientists. . . We found the highest percentage of belief among NAS mathematicians (14.3% in God, 15.0% in immortality). Biological scientists had the lowest rate of belief (5.5% in God, 7.1% in immortality)."
Specifically Nature found only 7% of greater" scientists expressed
belief in a personal god, compared to 27.7% in 1914 and 15% in 1933,
while 72.2% expressed a "personal disbelief" and 20.8% a "doubt or
agnosticism." Similar numbers disbelieved in immortality.
***

DAR
Interesting that those who understand the world the best, overwhelmingly tend to not believe in God. That's just the way it is.


RF
Also,
> watch Ben Steins movie, “Expelled: No Intelligence
> Allowed.” I would be interested in knowing what you think
> about it.

DAR
We have had a couple short presentations on it at our meetings. I have studied it extensively and posted quite a bit about it. You can read all about this profoundly dishonest and completely exposed piece of propaganda, here:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4458

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4656

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4469


RF
> Let me know what kind of miracle God could show and you
> actually believe it to be “supernatural.”

DAR
Oh, I'm pretty easy to please. We have a little styrofoam ball under a piece of glass at our Springfest booth this coming Saturday. We offer $5,000 to anyone who can move it three inches using supernatural powers. We also have a word in an envelop in a box which if you can figure out with some special powers, you get $1,000. These tests really shouldn't be to hard when you are going up against the powers of the spirit world and an all powerful God. Unless they don't exist. Then nothing happens. Try it and see.


RF
> Otherwise, I
> would appreciate you taking off the $5,000 reward off your
> website.

DAR
Nope. It's a valid and legitimate offer and it stays. I may raise it as I save up more money. And don't forget the house offer too. It's completely serious.


RF
> Also, I can give you an exact account of what happened on
> the day that Jesus rose from the grave using all of the
> accounts from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

DAR
Actually, you can't.


> They all tell
> different parts of the same story just like if you got 5
> different witnesses at the scene of an accident, then you
> would get 5 different personal accounts in which the
> investigator puts together in a coherent report in order to
> get exactly what happened. The Bible does the same thing.

DAR
The only problem is, the pieces don't fit and cannot be made to fit. All standard mainstream Christian scholarship admits this and has for a hundred years.

Hey, how about a quick resurrection Quiz? Sixteen questions, multiple choice. Here it is. See how you do:

***
RESURRECTION QUIZ

1. There first came to the tomb on Sunday morning: a. one woman (John 20:1), b. two women (Matt. 28:1), c. three women (Mark 16:1), d. more than three women (Luke 23:55-56; 24:1, 10).

2. She/They came: a. while it was still dark (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1), b. after the sun had risen (Mark 16:2).

3. The woman/women came to the tomb: a. to anoint the body of Jesus with spices (Mark 16:1-2; Luke 14:1), b. just to have a look (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1).

4. The women had obtained the spices: a. on Friday before sunset--when the Sabbath begins (Luke 23:54-56; 24:1), b. after sunset on Saturday--when the Sabbath is over (Mark 16:1).

5. The first visitor/visitors was/were greeted by: a. an angel (Matt. 28:2-5), b. a young man (Mark 16:5), two men (Luke 24:4), d. no one (John 20:1-2).

6. The greeter/greeters was/were: a. sitting on the stone outside the tomb (Matt. 28:3), b. sitting inside the tomb (Mark 16:5), c. standing inside the tomb (Luke 24:3-4).

7. After finding the tomb empty, the woman/women: a. ran to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:7-8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9; John 20:2), b. ran away and said nothing to anyone (Mark 16:8).

8. The risen Jesus first appeared to: a. Mary Magadalene alone (John 20:14; Mark 16:9), b. Cleopas and another disciple (Luke 24: 13, 15, 18), c. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1, 9), d. Cephas (Peter) alone (1 Cor. 15:4-5; Luke 24:34).

9. Jesus first appeared: a. somewhere between the tomb and Jerusalem (Matt. 28:8-9), b. just outside the tomb (John 20:11-14), c. in Galilee--around 80 miles north of Jerusalem (Mark 16:6-7), d. on the road to Emmaus--7 miles west of Jerusalem (Luke 24:13-15), e. We are not told where (Mark 16:9; 1 Cor. 15:4-5).

10. The disciples were to see Jesus first: a. in Galilee (Mark 16:7; Matt.
28:7, 10, 16), b. in Jerusalem Mark 16:4; Luke 24:33, 36; John 20:19; Acts 1:4).

11. The disciples were told that they would meet the risen Jesus in Galilee: a. by the women, who had first been told by an angel, then by Jesus, after the Resurrection (Matt. 28:7-10), b. by Jesus himself, before
the Crucifixion (Mark 16:7).

12. The risen Jesus: a. wanted to be touched (John 29:27), b. did not want to be touched (John 20:17), c. did not mind being touched (Matt. 28:9-10).

13. Jesus ascended to heaven: a. on the same day as he was resurrected (Mark 16:9-14, 19; Luke 24:13, 28-36, 50-51). b. forty days after the Resurrection (Acts 1:3, 9), c. We are not told that he ascended to heaven at all (Matt. 28:10, 16-20; John 21:25; the earliest manuscripts of Mark end at 16:8).

14. The disciples received the Holy Spirit: a. fifty days after the
Resurrection (Acts 1:8; 2:1-4), b. in the evening of the same day as the
Resurrection (John 20:19-20).

15. The risen Jesus: a. was recognized by those who saw him (Matt. 28:9; Mark 16:9-10, b. was not always recognizable (Mark 16:12; Luke 24:15-16, 31, 36-37; John 20:14-15).

16. The risen Jesus: a. was physical (Matt. 28:9; Luke 24:41-42; John
20:27), b. was not physical (Mark 16:9, 12, 14; Luke 24:15-16, 31, 36-37; John 20:19, 26; 1 Cor. 15:5-8).

Did you get 44 correct Bible based answers to these 16 questions? Yes you did. And that's a problem.

***

RF
> It all goes in together and never contradicts itself.

DAR
That test just showed otherwise. You do know I wrote a book about Bible contradictions don't you? You can read a free sample, with lots of good examples, here:

http://fayfreethinkers.com/ourbooks/mirrorsample.shtml

RF
> If a
> skeptic thinks that there are contradictions in the Bible,
> then the Bible is not wrong but the critic is wrongly
> reading the Bible.

DAR
No, sometimes the Bible just flatly contradicts itself. See the examples from my book at the link above.


RF
> By the way, I would like to have the notes from the
> presentation "What Must We Do to Be Saved" to find
> out what your thughts are. Thanks. Take care.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ronnie F.

DAR
I'll pass this on to Doug and perhaps he can send you his Powerpoint presentation. Or perhaps we will post it to the website.

Anyway, thanks for the long note. Let me know if you have any questions. It took me a while to get to this because I was in Jamaica but I hope it was worth the wait.

Darrel
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Savonarola »

Darrel wrote:RF
> By the way, I would like to have the notes from the
> presentation "What Must We Do to Be Saved" to find
> out what your thughts are. Thanks. Take care.
>
> Sincerely,
> Ronnie F.

DAR
I'll pass this on to Doug and perhaps he can send you his Powerpoint presentation. Or perhaps we will post it to the website.
It's already on the website.
ppt format
pptx format
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

Savonarola wrote: It's already on the website.
ppt format
pptx format
DAR
Most excellent. Click a link, and boom, it's there. Wow. What a world.
User avatar
Betsy
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 11:02 am

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Betsy »

Darrel, again thanks for posting this. I always enjoy reading your rebuttals and learn from them. I especially like the way you present your arguments in a non-threatening - often humorous - manner. This is an excellent example of that.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

Betsy wrote:Darrel, again thanks for posting this. I always enjoy reading your rebuttals and learn from them. I especially like the way you present your arguments in a non-threatening - often humorous - manner. This is an excellent example of that.
DAR
Thanks Betsy. The one part where I may gone a little too far was when I responded to his outline of the most important doctrines of Christianity as: "complete and utter nonsense." But the way he laid them out, it's really hard to not think of them that way. It's a careful balance trying to not offend too much while at the same time being honest to the important principle of calling a spade a spade.

D.
tmiller51
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:12 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Houston, TX

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by tmiller51 »

I estimate I attended 10,000 church meetings.
Darrel, is that right? That would be one meeting every day for 27 years.

Tim
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

tmiller51 wrote:
I estimate I attended 10,000 church meetings.
Darrel, is that right? That would be one meeting every day for 27 years.
Tim
DAR
Good catch Tim. Glad you are paying such close attention. I've made an extraordinary claim, now let's see if I can back it up. It goes something like this. I was raised a Jehovah's Witness in an extremely observant family. Good JW's attend five meetings a week. Two of them are combined but they do call them separate meetings. Sunday sermon/lecture (1 hr), Watchtower study (1 hr.). Tues: Book study (1 hr.). Thurs: Theocratic Ministry School meeting (1 hr) follow by the Service Meeting (1 hr).

a) I went and was taken to these things to the age of 17-18 or so. Fading out at the end. 5 per week times (let's say) 50 weeks = 250 per year.

b) But wait, there's more. We had two circuit Assemblies (two or three days) and one national convention (six days) per year. Back then the national conventions were almost a week long. Tues. through Sunday. And they go all, day, long. So add at least +12 per year for this.

c) But wait, there's more. "Going in service." Knocking on doors. We did that a lot. Probably once or twice a week and back in the early days even more often than that. And before you go "in service," you go to a short meeting, prayers and all. I am going to say 2 times per week for the first ten years of my life and then 1 per week til age 15. That's 2 per week x 50 = 100 per year, for ten years = 1,000 plus 1.5 x 50 = 75 per year for five years = 375. So, 1,375 of those puppies.

So let's total:

a) 250 x 18 years = 4,500
b) 12 x 18 yr. = 216
c) 1,375

=6,091

Damn, still short. Maybe years ago when I worked this out I worded it differently and referred to "church related events." JW's are big on formally and carefully studying for their stupefying meetings and we did some of that. Also, I would have attended a great shitload of "Bible studies." This is where a JW is sitting down with some poor chump and indoctrinating them with their books. Typically for an hour. Not technically a "church meeting" but, same poop, different pile.

Or maybe I'm confused and my claim was 5,000, which is probably more accurate. I'll use that number now. Of course the above is a little ridiculous since I start at age zero (but I was there, nursing and all).

Well, after all of those meetings, it's a wonder I can think at all. If Ronnie comes by I will be glad to make the adjustment. Something tells me it will be probably one of the least of his problems with the letter! Glad you caught it.

D.

ps. Now, let me add... to make people (like my wife, who don't know the suffering I went through) get a taste of it I required her to attend just one single week of JW meetings. She didn't, couldn't make it. Not even close. She said she would run screaming from the place. She went to one. Try it sometime. It's an acquired taste.
tmiller51
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:12 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Houston, TX

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by tmiller51 »

=6,091
Yes, I'm surprised you're not in a rubber room after all of that.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

tmiller51 wrote:
=6,091
Yes, I'm surprised you're not in a rubber room after all of that.
DAR
Oh, the other day I figured out why I misstated this. My original calculations, done maybe 20+ years ago, led me to think 10,000 hours logged was a pretty accurate estimate of my time spent at church/door to door/assembly events. Not actual number of events. 10,000 Hours is probably pretty accurate, 10,000 events comes up short.

D.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

Ronnie, the fellow who's letter I respond to in this thread and via email, has been claiming on NWAonline that he never got a response to his email. So he's posted it online again.

Here is my response I just posted over there.

**********
Ronnie: "I looked up my previous letters to the Free Thinkers group and I never got a response.">>

You couldn't be more wrong Ronnie, and this very easy to prove. I searched my mail and found, on Wed, 4/15/09 you did indeed send your email to the Fayetteville Freethinkers (mail goes to me).

On Monday, April 27, 2009 I sent you the following response:

***
"Thanks for this Ronnie,

Sorry to take so long to get back to you. I just got back from a vacation and have been really busy, Doug too. I will go through this and respond to every point and answer every one your questions.

I will also post this in the "Freethinker News" section our forum here:

ind...

I will of course leave your name and email information out unless you let me know that it is okay to use it. You are welcome to respond there as well.
***

Then, on Tuesday, April 28, 2009, as promised, I sent you a detailed point by point, 15 page, 5,170 word response to your email. It is far too long and off topic to post here, but as anyone can see and read for themselves, on Apr 28, 2009 I also posted this entire response, with links and references, on our forum here:

viewtopic.php?p=18259#p18259

Notice the date.

So Ronnie, how about if you tell the truth and stop making false charges that you didn't get a response when in fact I took the time to give an in depth, line by line response to every single one of your points and questions. I responded, YOU are the one who did not respond.

An apology would be appropriate.

Next.

RON: "What about a tree that is fossilized through many different layers?">>

Easy. These are called polystrate fossils. All explained here:

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate.html

In general you will find all creationist arguments are carefully answered with reference and citation in this one FAQ (along with yours above):

http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

If you have a question that isn't answered there, pass it along and I will, as in the past, answer it directly or find an expert who will.

D.
***

PUBLIC VIEWPOINT: Hobson Impolite To Christians
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
Ronnie
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:14 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Ronnie »

Thank you Darrel. I thought that looked like you but just about 13 years older. :) Apparently my email filter or something did not get your message back to me. I just now read all it including the other notes between you and the others on the forum. I apologize for not getting your letter. But the fact goes, I didn’t get your letter at that time. I just figured something wasn't working. However, I will concede that it is possible when you got back to me, I was in the middle of my busiest time of the year and it didn't even register. I will try to be more careful from now on. Thank you for writing your detailed response to it. Since that time I have went through a complete Biblical Worldview study and learned a lot in order to answer all your questions/accusations about the Bible and true Christianity. You being from a Jehovah's Witness background explains much to me for why you "should be in a rubber room" to quote someone else in the forum. :) I give Jehovah's Witness fits when they come to my door. In my opinion, they are a cult leading people in the wrong direction away from the true God of the Bible and away from a true relationship with Jesus. I understand your distrust of Christians now since you were fed the mistruths and superstitions of the JW's for so long; however, I promise to never say anything untrue on purpose. I will not ever purposely try to mislead someone. After reading all your posts, I trust that you will do the same. I look forward to taking the quiz you posted. It may take me a little while, but I assure you that I will answer all the “contradictions” to it from a Biblical Worldview or I will be honest and agree with you that scholars don’t know. However, I already know some of the problems are that you put the word “only” where it doesn’t belong and wasn’t written. Thank you for answering the question about the "polystrate" tree fossils for everyone. It seems that the website gives a very good explanation of what I was talking about. I have to be honest. I haven’t read all of that website but just enough to see that it is talking about the same fossils I mentioned. My view of these fossils come from the website http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... sil-record. The article gives complete sources for everything. Maybe you can give me a good summary of why it doesn’t work with your thinking. I will try to read all the website you sent soon. The official statement that many/most evolutionists agree with is “all life originated from subatomic particles.” Evolutionists claim that the Earth and the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old with the universe starting to be formed about 20 billion years ago. Would you agree with those two statements? They believe this amount of time is necessary for all the life forms on earth to evolve. Many young earth creationists believe the earth to be about 6 thousand years old. I believe that both believing in the definition of evolution above and believing in the creation account according to Genesis are belief systems (opposing worldviews) since no one was there to witness the event, and since it cannot be repeated. But I agree that we can examine the evidence and decide which is more plausible. I have read Josh McDowell's book "Evidence That Demands a Verdict." He was an atheist who said he set out to objectively look at the evidence like you said you did, but he came to totally different conclusions. Have you read his book or his other one "New Evidence that Demands a Verdict" which puts in the newest evidence which backs up the true Christian Faith which were the 5 points that I listed which you got a real kick out of? I am sure there is a book that has been put out to counter his evidence. I have also read many other texts about why I can be an intellectual disciple of the living Jesus Christ. You haven't even touched the surface with your book or anything else I have read so far that contradicts effectively in my opinion what I have read. Slowly but surely, I will start trying to present those things one by one. However, I work about 12 hours per day, play with my kids for about two hours, talk with my wife for about one hour, and work out for one hour. So, I have time to devote to this in spurts, and you have given me a lot to research. So, how about we focus on truly understanding your view of the tree fossils at this point and go from there? I am also okay with just continuing this discussion on the freethinkers website. Just a couple of quick question about the founders. What do you think about the quote from John Adams of “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” (Thomas Jefferson, The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Washington D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XIII, p. 292-294. In a letter from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813) What do you think about the quote of George Washington, “While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.” (George Washington, The Writings of Washington, John C. Fitzpatrick, editor (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1932), Vol. XI, pp. 342-343, General Orders of May 2, 1778.) See http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAr ... sp?id=8755 for a fairly extensive list of quotes with sources.
Thanks again.
Ronnie
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Doug »

Ronnie wrote:I have read Josh McDowell's book "Evidence That Demands a Verdict." He was an atheist who said he set out to objectively look at the evidence like you said you did, but he came to totally different conclusions. Have you read his book or his other one "New Evidence that Demands a Verdict" which puts in the newest evidence which backs up the true Christian Faith which were the 5 points that I listed which you got a real kick out of?
DOUG writes:
We are very familiar with McDowell's work. His Evidence that Demands a Verdict is not only very dishonest in many places, where he intentionally misleads readers about what is in the Bible, but he makes numerous unfounded assertions and tries to pass off this fanciful thinking as "evidence."

If you find any of his arguments compelling, please feel free to post one or more of them here on the forum for us to examine.

His "New Evidence" book is really just a rehash of what he thinks is the best of his Evidence that Demands a Verdict and its sequel.

By the way, your "5 things in which over 100 Christian denomination believe" as a litmus test for a "Real Christian" looks pretty standard for narrow-thinking, fundamentalist Christians who just don't talk to many people outside their own little groups. In the Bible Belt it is very easy to get the false impression that all Christians are fundamentalists, but this is, as I said, a false impression. Your 5 points are just Calvinism warmed over.

MORE than 100 Christian denominations do NOT believe your 5 things because there are many nonCalvinist denominations. If you are correct that only people who believe these 5 things are Christian, then Christianity is a small religion compared to, say, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and others.



> 1. Heaven is a free gift. No matter how "good"
> we are or how many good things we do, we can not earn or
> deserve to get into heaven.

DOUG
If it's free, why did Jesus have to pay for it?

And if no one can earn a place there, why did Jesus say, "If you want to enter life, keep the commandments”? (Matthew 19:17) There are many verses that talk about being righteous through works. See below.

> 2. Man is a sinner and cannot save himself. We all do
> things that are wrong (sins).

DOUG
Isn't this the same as #1?

> 3. God is merciful yet just. God loves us, but cannot let
> sin go unpunished. Our sin causes a gap between us and God
> which causes our eternal separation from God.

DOUG
To be just means that a judge does exactly what is required by the law. To be merciful means that a judge does not punish as is required by law.

You are saying that God does and does not punish as required by the law.

> 4. Jesus Christ (God's only Son) was sent by God
> around 2000 years ago to bridge that gap that our sin causes
> between us and God. Jesus died on a cross with all of our
> past, present, and future sins placed upon Him which God
> punished by letting Him die a horrible death for those sins;
> therefore, punishing our sins.

DOUG
How is being punished for sins the same as bridging a gap? It sounds like the gap is still there, especially since it is still possible to go to hell, and before Jesus it was possible to go to heaven (Elijah, etc.).

And how is punishing an innocent person an instance of being just? That sounds unjust. Simply because God wants to punish sin doesn't mean that it doesn't matter who gets punished. If you know who is guilty, how is not punishing the guilty and instead punishing the innocent a way of dispensing justice? That makes no sense.

> 5. Faith/trust in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior is
> the only thing that can get us to Heaven. This
> faith cannot be a temporal faith such as that when a
> student says, "Jesus help me on this test", and
> then passes the test. That faith is temporary and is not
> needed after the test. We must have the faith that says in
> every situation, good or bad, that Jesus is there with us in
> the form of the Holy Spirit leading us and guiding our
> steps. With that faith, there is nothing that can shake the
> Christian’s world because we know that no matter how bad
> things are that when we die, we will be in Heaven with God.

DOUG
Again, there are verses that say that people are saved by works, not by faith.

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life. -- John 5:29

I the Lord ... give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings. -- Jeremiah 17:10

For we must all appear before the jugment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. -- 2 Corinthians 5:10

For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. -- Matthew 16.27

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. -- Revelation 20:12-13

Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works. -- 2 Corinthians 11:15

The Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work. -- 1 Peter 1:17

I will give unto every one of you according to your works. -- Revelation 2:23

There are others I could list. Of course, you can also produce verses that say that people are saved by beliefs, or by faith, but that would only prove that the Bible is contradictory.
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Savonarola
Mod@Large
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:11 pm
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50
Location: NW Arkansas

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Savonarola »

Ronnie wrote:I understand your distrust of Christians now since you were fed the mistruths and superstitions of the JW's for so long;
But I'm sure you think that your cult has told you no mistruths or superstitions, right?
Ronnie wrote:My view of these fossils come from the website [AiG]
Well there's your problem. Why get your information from a group that requires that its members sign a statement of faith that says that they already have the answer before they've even looked at the evidence? This is profoundly anti-intellectual, dishonest, and a completely bankrupt way of finding "truth." Why not get your information from practicing scientists, you know, who aren't required to come up with certain answers?
Ronnie wrote:The official statement that many/most evolutionists agree with is “all life originated from subatomic particles.”
I call double bullshit, or triple if we want to point out that the word "evolutionist" is a little silly. There is no "official" statement from scientists or even atheists about the origin of life. Additionally, there is no need to appeal to subatomic particles in order to pose a plausible scenario for the origin of life.
Ronnie wrote:Evolutionists claim that the Earth and the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old with the universe starting to be formed about 20 billion years ago.
Also wrong. Science shows that the universe is about 13.7 billion years old.
Ronnie wrote:They believe this amount of time is necessary for all the life forms on earth to evolve.
No, they don't. Those numbers come from geology and astronomy, respectively, have no causal connection with evolutionary theory. We have a good idea of when life originated here, but that tells us nothing about what "amount of time is necessary" for life to evolve. Why do you keep lying about what science says, Ronnie?
Ronnie wrote:I believe that both believing in the definition of evolution above and believing in the creation account according to Genesis are belief systems (opposing worldviews) since no one was there to witness the event, and since it cannot be repeated.
And I believe that you're not very inquisitive, but at least I have reason for my opinion. If I shoot you in the head with nobody around, then -- by your logic -- someone else believing that it happened is unreasonable because nobody saw it and we can't replicate the event. You know perfectly well that that's not how things work. You want to apply special rules here, and that's dishonest.
Ronnie wrote:I have read Josh McDowell's book "Evidence That Demands a Verdict."
McDowell is a favorite target of Darrel. This should be loads of fun to watch.
Ronnie wrote:He was an atheist who said he set out to objectively look at the evidence like you said you did, but he came to totally different conclusions.
I'm always amused by these claims. It allegedly happens a lot. Most of the time, these stories are wildly exaggerated. Maybe Darrel knows more about McDowell's personal case and is willing to share.
Ronnie wrote:However, I work about 12 hours per day, play with my kids for about two hours, talk with my wife for about one hour, and work out for one hour. So, I have time to devote to this in spurts,
I just have to ask: Do you think that the rest of us just sit around at a computer refreshing these pages all day long? We know how this works.
Ronnie wrote:So, how about we focus on truly understanding your view of the tree fossils at this point and go from there?
That would be a short discussion. Why not something more substantive? But, I know you're not talking to me. I'd just suggest a more major topic, like the alleged "evidence that demands a verdict."
Ronnie wrote:See [wallbuilders link] for a fairly extensive list of quotes with sources.
Wow. You have managed to base your position on the credibility of two of the most dishonest hacks in the business. I bet you didn't know that Barton has had to retract some of his claims about early US history. Barton really does collect relics from that era, but he then tells us what they say without letting other people see them. (It's a lot like Joseph Smith and the gold plates, now that I think about it...) He has no interest in determining what reality is; instead, he has an agenda, and he pushes it, sometimes dishonestly.
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

I'll post some of what I posted at the NWAline site (where Ronnie posted these same comments)

***

RF: "The official statement that many/most evolutionists agree with is “all life originated from subatomic particles.”>>

That's just absurd Ronnie. A complete caricature of science and something you must be repeating from creationist material. Again, nearly everything you read about science and evolution from creationist sources is going to be upside down, backwards and inside out. It's truly astonishing.

RF: "Evolutionists claim that the Earth and the solar system is about 4.6 billion years old">>

Close enough.

RF: "with the universe starting to be formed about 20 billion years ago.">>

Way off.

RF: "Would you agree with those two statements?">>

No. Now, so as to not hijack this thread with off topic material, I'll respond to your points on our freethinker forum as you have suggested. Those interested in following this conversation, or joining in, can do so here:

http://www.fayfreethinkers.com/forums/v ... 645#p23645

We don't censor (other than a little moderation if someone exhibits a great amount of anti-social behavior), everyone is welcome. I will ask that you focus a little rather than pursuing 15 rabbit trails at once. The truth is in the details. You've got your self in quite a muddle by not paying attention to the details.

I see Doug has already written a response to your post and many of your questions.

I work long hours too. It's 8:30 and I just got home.

D.
------------
"The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to characterize the ideas of their opponents." [Stephen Jay Gould]

***

RF: "this nation's history can show that most of our founders were Christians and not deists or atheists.">>

You don't define "founders" but it is no doubt true that many of the smaller players were Christians. This hardly matters. What matters is that they specifically went to great trouble to make sure that Christianity and religion were not inserted into our founding documents and that the US is specifically not a Christian nation. In fact they noted that this was a great departure from other countries.

The Constitution was not made Godless by accident, that was very much on purpose.

RF: "What do you think about the quote from John Adams, “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”>>

Did you get this from David Barton? A fellow who has been busted over and over and over again, peddling bogus quotes? This is what happens when you trust fundies on science or scholarship.

Let's unpack this one.

This supposed quote from John Adama's is a very sneaky patchwork concoction, and thus bogus. Yet it is all over the internet.

You can see a very thorough explanation of this here:

http://fakehistory.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... istianity/

Excerpts:

"This is a patchwork of three phrases taken from a letter (28 June 1813) to Thomas Jefferson juxtaposed to give a misleading impression of Adams’ meaning:

...The omissions here are easily significant enough to give this extract the red designation.

[snip]
...What did he mean by “the general principles of Christianity”? He doesn’t spell them out in the letter, but they are principles held in common by a diverse range of beliefs, including “Roman Catholics, … Presbyterians, Methodists, … Universalists, … Deists and Atheists ….” In other words, Adams had in mind the common system of morals held by all humankind throughout history. And far from giving it the unique status implied by the patchwork quotation, he couples “the general principles of Christianity” throughout with “the general principles of English and American liberty”.
***

So we see, without knowing the full quote from Adams this use of it is a complete distortion of what he said.

Adams and Washington were politicians in a country with a fair number of Christians, so of course they said, in a few instances, some nice things about Christianity. But neither one of them were Christians. I have had extensive debates on this topic and can go as deep as you like.

You might start with this short article which gives you a bit of background:

"The Founders Would Howl if Called Christian"

http://www.hwarmstrong.com/christian-fo ... hers-3.htm

--Excerpted from "Toward The Mystery" by Rev. William Edelen. An active ordained Presbyterian and Congregational minister for 30 years. Adjunct professor of Religious Studies and Anthropology, University of Puget Sound Tacoma, Washington.

There is at least one error in the article. See if you can find it.

D.
---------------
"See the book The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents, by Franklin Steiner. Prometheus Books, 1995 (1936). ISBN 0-87975-975-5.

There is an entire chapter on Washington and how he was misrepresented by many writers. Washington was simply not religious. He never
mentioned the name of Jesus in any of his lifelong writings. He refused to kneel in prayer or take communion. He said nothing religious on his deathbed. His wife Martha thought he might have been a Unitarian. So it
doesn't seem that Washington was a Christian. In fact, the first six presidents were not Christians.” --R. Nelsen

***
[slightly longer version, NWA only allows 3,000 characters per post]
SAV asks:
Why do you keep lying about what science says, Ronnie?
I don't think he's lying Sav, he just really doesn't know. At some point, we'll see if he's honest enough to admit what the science says, after a little instruction. Then we'll know.

D.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
Ronnie
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:14 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Ronnie »

Hello. First of all let me say that I don't appreciate it being said that I am being dishonest and lying. I asked questions. I thought that was what this forum was for. Darrel and Doug understand that very well. Thank you Darrel for standing up for me. Notice, I asked "what do you think and do you agree with that?" I have always been told that if you want to know what an evolutionist, atheist, agnostic, freethinker, etc thinks about something, then you need to ask them. (By the way, I was told this by the same people you have called some of the biggest hacks) So, I am asking you what you believe and your sources for those beliefs. I appreciate Doug and Darrel for answering my questions without accusations and slurs against me. However, I would appreciate anyone else wanting to make comments to me to at least give me the respect that I am inquisitive or I would not be on this forum at all. Apparently, some freethinkers need to allow other people to think freely without making slurring comments about them. I just wanted to clear that little tid bit up.

Now for my comments and questions.
Have you read John Adams’ diary and his letters to his wife? How do you explain away those in saying John Adams was not a Christian? What do you think about Thomas Jefferson creating a document with nothing but the words of Jesus to the Native Americans and having it published at tax payers expense? I can give you the link if you haven’t heard that before, but since you seem so learned, I figure I wouldn’t have to go to the trouble of looking it up. I just remember reading it. I don’t have a dictionary beside me of everything I know. I am going off of memory.
Also, what shows in the full quote by John Adams in your link that the principles of Christianity did not play a major part in the founding or our nation and uniting our nation? Please, explain. I read the whole quote within the context and still see that John Adams was saying the Christianity played a major role in uniting the country and helping us gain freedom. Here is the full quote from John Adams. I think it is kind of neat that John Adams said that these principles are as unalterable as human nature. Where did human nature come from? I would assume that your opinion would be that “human nature” came from survival of the fittest? Am I correct? I would of course say human nature came from the original sin of Adam and Eve.

“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence, were the only principles in which that beautiful assembly of young men could unite, and these principles only could be intended by them in their address, or by me in my answer. And what were these general principles? I answer, the general principles of Christianity, in which all those sects were united, and the general principles of English and American liberty, in which all those young men united, and which had united all parties in America, in majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her independence. Now I will avow, that I then believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God; and that those principles of liberty are as unalterable as human nature and our terrestrial, mundane system.”

http://www.hwarmstrong.com/christian-fo ... hers-3.htm makes a lot of claims and quotes from the main founders of Washington and Adams showing they were not Christians. It is however very interesting that for every quote they give, I can give twice as many which show that Washington and Adams were great Christians. Here is a link to a letter from Adams to Benjamin Rush (http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAr ... p?id=59755) where he says, “But my friend there is something very serious in this business. The Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system in this Earth. Not a baptism, not a marriage, not a Sacrament can be administered but by the Holy Ghost, who is transmitted from age to age by laying the hands of the Bishop on the heads of candidates for the Ministry. In the same manner as the Holy Ghost is transmitted from monarch to monarch by the holy oil in the vial at Rheims which was brought down from Heaven by a dove and by that other phial [vial] which I have seen in the Tower of London. There is no authority civil or religious: There can be no legitimate government but what is administered by this Holy Ghost. There can be no salvation without it. All without it is rebellion and perdition, or in more orthodox words damnation.” Please, let me know your thoughts.
Concerning what the link says about Washington, it says “historians say”. What historians? Also, the error in the article was that it was attributed to George Washington; however, it was John Adams who signed it and proclaimed it to the nation. Adams wrote too many letters supporting his faith in Christ to his son, his wife, to Benjamin Rush, and others to say otherwise in my opinion. You said that he was a politician and had to say good things about Christianity. However, I don't think he would do that so many times in his writings. In signing the treaty, I believe I have evidence that John Adams was agreeing that the federal government is not founded on Christianity, which is true. Matters of religion were left up to the individual states. Here is an article talking about why this treaty is not a good one to use to say that our founders were not Christians. http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAr ... asp?id=125 Here is a quick quote from it, “The did include a constitutional prohibition against a federal establishment; religion was a matter left solely to the individual States. Therefore, if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation. Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact. Article XI simply distinguished America from those historical strains of European Christianity which held an inherent hatred of Muslims; it simply assured the Muslims that the United States was not a Christian nation like those of previous centuries (with whose practices the Muslims were very familiar) and thus would not undertake a religious holy war against them.”

Also, it is interesting that up to Thomas Jefferson being president, presidents signed their names, “In the Year of our Lord,” and the date. However, Thomas Jefferson signed many of his documents with “In the year of our Lord, Jesus Christ.” Was this political expediency as well? One such actual document is found at http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAr ... p?id=22345.

By the way, to anyone who wants to know. Of course, I am going to go to the websites of Christians because I want a Biblical Worldview and arguement for why I believe what I believe. I am going to this forum to find out what the other side is. Thank you. So far, it seems like most of your responses seems to be earnestly seeking the truth. However, I still see that it is a different ways of thinking about the same thing, and that you are misguided or just believing in something that is not true. However, I also understand that you view me the same way. It would be nice for me to be enlightened or for you to be enlightened. However, you have been defending your beliefs in an open forum and debates much longer than I have, so I honestly don't think I am going to change your minds. However, I have been called the "Champion for the Underdog" many times. One Biblical Worldview speaker I listened to trains teenagers during the summer on how to defend their faith, and then brings in a very strong atheist who is a friend of the speakers to field their questions and try to let them convince him of the "truth." Every year, he goes, and every year goes away unchanged. However, he is helping those teenagers see first hand why someone doesn't believe in the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. I am one of those weird Christians who can actually enjoy being good friends with someone who has totally different beliefs than them as long as they can have open and honest dialogue with one another without getting angry. It's just a healthy discussion. I will try to make sure that I don't read in a bad tone with other responses because I know that tone cannot be gotten from writing very well. I hope that everyone will give me the same courtesy. Thanks.

Also, i will get the information from the church in Africa I was talking about where people have been healed of Aids. Is there any way that you would belied that God healed a person of Aids? I have heard of cases where someone's finger grew back after prayer in Jesus' name. If you were there to witness it, would you believe it was from God and a supernatural event?
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

Ronnie wrote: Have you read John Adams’ diary and his letters to his wife?
No. Did he ever claim to be a Christian in them? No. How do I know? Because we would never heard the end of it if he had. Why would it matter anyway Ronnie? Adams is usually classified was a deist but he no doubt had some Christian interests and influence. Why does this matter? These are just labels and labels are always limited in their description of human thought/opinion.
How do you explain away those in saying John Adams was not a Christian?
I have no reason to think he was a Christian, and he was very close to Jefferson who also was not a Christian.
What do you think about Thomas Jefferson creating a document with nothing but the words of Jesus to the Native Americans and having it published at tax payers expense?
I think it is more evidence that he wasn't a Christian. If you are speaking of the Jefferson Bible, this is where compares the Bible to a pile of dung and he says he is going to pick a few diamonds out of it. He removes all of the miracles and things he didn't believe and keeps most of the moral precepts which he quite liked. I can do that too. For instance the golden rule was mention by about ten different philosophers BEFORE Jesus. I could quote them, or Jesus. Quoting Jesus doesn't make me a Christian. Does a Christian say things like this?

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus by the Supreme Being will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter. But may we hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away with this artificial scaffolding, and restore to us the primitive and genuine doctrines of this most venerated Reformer of human errors."
--Jefferson, Letter to Peter Carr, 1787. This is almost identical to a letter to John Adams, 11, April 1823, as quoted by E.S. Gaustad, "Religion," in Merrill D. Peterson, ed., Thomas Jefferson: A Reference Biography, New Yourk: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1986, p. 287)

Also:
"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills."
--Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_Bible

And that's what he did. He picked diamonds out of a Bible he compared to a dung hill.
what shows in the full quote by John Adams in your link that the principles of Christianity did not play a major part in the founding or our nation and uniting our nation? Please, explain."
It's rather complicated Ronnie. This is all carefully explained here, but apparently you didn't read it, otherwise you wouldn't be quoting the whole thing now. Suffice to say, your quote is a completely dishonest hackwork and a misrepresentation of what Adam's said. Don't use it. Of all of things we could talk about, you spending time defending this hacked up quote is probably not the best use of our time.
Where did human nature come from?
Humans exhibit human nature. I have goats, they exhibit goat nature. Chimps exhibit chimp nature. These attributes aren't as different as you might think. And they probably aren't as different as they should be, if an intelligent agent were behind it all.
for every quote they give, I can give twice as many which show that Washington and Adams were great Christians.
Washington was a Unitarian. Unitarians are by definition not Christians. Unitarians don't believe in the trinity. You need to believe the trinity to believe Jesus is divine. How can you be a "Christian" if you don't believe Jesus "the Christ," is God? I used to be a Unitarian. I also used to be a JW, and neither group believe in the trinity, or that Jesus is God.

As for Adam's, treat me to a quote where he claims to be a Christian. You can't do it. Did he forget to mention it? Really?

Ronnie, this is just semantics. Labels and word games. Who cares? These guys had diverse and complicated views about religion. They bounced a lot of ideas around. They were politicians and sometimes they say things to get votes (no really, not kidding). They hated the organized Christianity they observed around them. Standard reference works (not the unscholarly fundie garbage put out by Barton and Wall builders) deem these founders to be deists. Some of them perhaps "Christian deists." And even deism varied over time and the founders had a specific variety of deism if you want to get into the tiny nuances. This doesn't matter. What matters is they made a secular country based upon their godless constitution and specifically gave the government no power to establish anything to do with religion. See rule number one.
Here is a link to a letter from Adams to Benjamin Rush (http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAr ... p?id=59755) where he says, “But my friend there is something very serious in this business. The Holy Ghost carries on the whole Christian system in this Earth..."
Another dishonest hackwork, passed around by Barton and recently popularized by Glenn Beck. Debunk here:

http://www.streetprophets.com/storyonly ... 1515/57670

Ronnie, are you beginning to see how dishonest your sources are? If they have the truth on their side, why do they have to lie so much?
Concerning what the link says about Washington, it says “historians say”. What historians? Also, the error in the article was that it was attributed to George Washington; however, it was John Adams who signed it and proclaimed it to the nation.
Wrong. That was not an error. Edelen's claim was:

"Historians say that Washington recommended and concurred with American Consul Joel Barlow's statement, written in the Treaty of Peace and Friendship that: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

The treaty was crafted under Washington. By the time it came before the senate it was just a couple months after Washington's term expired. It was ratified unanmiously by the US senate (only one of 3 to receive that in that session) and signed by president Adams. It was published in the newspapers with no complaints.

"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."

US treaties are binding as US law. So where's your Christian nation? Your Christian nation says in it's legally binding law that it is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
Adams wrote too many letters supporting his faith in Christ to his son, his wife, to Benjamin Rush,"
Show me where he claimed to be a Christian. There is one quote from the wife where she referred to him as a good Christian man, but at that time, the word Christian was used as a synonym for "good" (and some dictionaries referred to atheists as "wicked"). This is what happens when you let the Christians write the dictionaries. But again, these is just semantics.
Wallbuilder quote: "...if the article is read as a declaration that the federal government of the United States was not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, such a statement is not a repudiation of the fact that America was considered a Christian nation."
Wow. Black is white. We have the most plain language imaginable. "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." A child could understand this. Yet Barton pretends he can't understand grade school English and tries to spin it. Amazing! Don't fall for it Ronnie! Barton is a lying hack. I can bury you in examples.
Reading the clause of the treaty in its entirety also fails to weaken this fact.
What part of "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." do you think is giving Mr. Barton so much trouble?
Also, it is interesting that up to Thomas Jefferson being president, presidents signed their names, “In the Year of our Lord,” and the date.
Yes. A nice little bit of convention. Very traditionally. Left over from the monarch days. When you are reduced to pointing out how they signed the date, I think we are at the bottom of the barrel.
One Biblical Worldview speaker I listened to trains teenagers during the summer on how to defend their faith, and then brings in a very strong atheist who is a friend of the speakers to field their questions and try to let them convince him of the "truth."
Hey, let is us know if you want some "very strong atheists." We have a few in stock.
Also, i will get the information from the church in Africa I was talking about where people have been healed of Aids.
I think I have heard of rare instances of AIDS having gone into remission. No reason to think a God was involved. The interaction of the human immune system and virus can be very complex and when you have a few hundred million people in the sample, you are going to get some strange anomalies pop up. Prayer has been throughly tested. It fails every time. No exceptions.
Is there any way that you would belied that God healed a person of Aids?
That's probably not going to be a useful example. It would always be more likely that the person was incorrectly diagnosed in the first place.

Show me a missing limb that has been regrown. Funny, lots of crutches and wheel chairs left at Lourdes, but no artificial limbs! God can't do that?
I have heard of cases where someone's finger grew back after prayer in Jesus' name.
I am sure you have. How do you think we got the gospels? People "hearing cases."
If you were there to witness it, would you believe it was from God and a supernatural event?
Of course. I am very reasonable in my miracle requests. Make my car levitate for 30 minutes, one foot in the air. I will sell four houses and give the money to the church of your choice and devote my life to converting people to following Jesus.

D.
-------------
Four criteria must be fulfilled for a miracle to be a miracle:

1. The event as described must actually have taken place.
2. Natural causes or misinterpreted natural phenomena must be ruled out.
3. The event, if it did take place, must be demonstrated to have been caused by a supernatural being or deity ("god").
4. The deity must be shown to actually exist.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Doug »

Darrel wrote:
Also, it is interesting that up to Thomas Jefferson being president, presidents signed their names, “In the Year of our Lord,” and the date.
Yes. A nice little bit of convention. Very traditionally. Left over from the monarch days. When you are reduced to pointing out how they signed the date, I think we are at the bottom of the barrel.
DOUG
Worse, it's a false claim. More Barton nonsense.
Jefferson took pains to omit “in the year of our Lord” in his documents, instead using phrases like "in the Christian computation," and "of the Christian epoch."
See here.
What do you think about Thomas Jefferson creating a document with nothing but the words of Jesus to the Native Americans and having it published at tax payers expense?
DOUG
Another false claim. Jefferson never allowed his "Jefferson Bible" to be published during his lifetime. It was not intended for Native Americans. Jefferson just thought the miracles and virgin birth stuff, and the resurrection, were nonsense that Jesus' followers invented after the death of Jesus, and Jefferson wanted a personal Bible with what he thought was the original and best material. It ends without any resurrection.
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
Ronnie
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:14 am
antispam: human non-spammer
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 50

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Ronnie »

I don't know exactly how to get the quotes in the statement and for my response to be kind of linked to the one I am wanting to respond to. I will read the other responses later, but I just read the one about Jefferson. I looked at the document on Barton's website and concede that it was a pre-printed form that Jefferson signed and after reading the article Doug put a link for, I concede that it is very probable that the language "in the year of our Lord Christ" was not specifically "chosen" by Jefferson as the WallBuilder's website claims. Like I said, I thought it was very interesting. Thank you for letting me know about the full story behind that document. I knew it didn't sound like Jefferson since even Barton accepts that Jefferson was not a Christian.

However, I will have alot more to say about the claim that John Adams is not a christian, but I will read all of Darrel's response first to see what his response is about my counter arguement about Adams signing the treaty saying we are not a Christian nation being because he was refering to the federal government not being any religion but relegated rights to the states to worship the way they choose which at the time was predominantly Christian.

I look forward to reading everything above later.
User avatar
Doug
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:05 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville, AR
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Doug »

Ronnie wrote:I knew it didn't sound like Jefferson since even Barton accepts that Jefferson was not a Christian.
DOUG
Speaking of Barton, here's a quotation from Mike Huckabee:

"I almost wish that there would be, like, a simultaneous telecast, and all Americans would be forced–forced at gunpoint no less–to listen to every David Barton message, and I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen.”

See here.

Reason # 1,000 of why Huckabee could never be president of the United States...
"We could have done something important Max. We could have fought child abuse or Republicans!" --Oona Hart (played by Victoria Foyt), in the 1995 movie "Last Summer in the Hamptons."
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: $5,000 award for demo of supernatural claims

Post by Dardedar »

Ronnie wrote:...my counter arguement about Adams signing the treaty saying we are not a Christian nation being because he was refering to the federal government not being any religion but relegated rights to the states to worship the way they choose..."
This is very muddled but let me try and unpack it.

First, why on earth would it matter if Adams was in some sense a Christian? Explain why this is so important to you.

Of course the Treaty of Tripoli refers to the US federal government but your suggestion that this left the states to "worship the way they choose" is utterly wrong. The states must follow the US constitution first and this includes the First Amendment and all the rest. That the states regularly include completely unconstitutional BS in their constitutions (see the religious tests in the Arkansas constitution) in no way changes the fact that when pressed in court, these states rights are superseded by, and nullified by, the US supreme court.

Article VI, Section 3, US Constitution
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

I could give you hundreds of examples but you might start with the issue of school prayer and how the states have been repeatedly spanked by the SCOTUS. Begin here: http://ffrf.org/publications/brochures/schoolprayer/

The wiki blurb on Adams' religious beliefs is quite informative (all referenced at the link). An excerpt:
Adams was raised a Congregationalist, becoming a Unitarian at a time when most of the Congregational churches around Boston were turning to Unitarianism. Adams was educated at Harvard when the influence of deism was growing there, and used deistic terms in his speeches and writing.[83] He believed in the essential goodness of the creation, but, being a Unitarian, his beliefs excluded the divinity of Christ. He also believed that regular church service was beneficial to man's moral sense. Everett (1966) concludes that "Adams strove for a religion based on a common sense sort of reasonableness" and maintained that religion must change and evolve toward perfection.[84] Fielding (1940) shows that Adams's beliefs synthesized Puritan, deist, and humanist concepts. Adams thought Christianity had originally been revelatory, but was being misinterpreted and misused in the service of superstition, fraud, and unscrupulous power.[85]

The Unitarian Universalist Historical Society provides information about Adams's religious beliefs.[91] They quote from his letter to Benjamin Rush, an early promoter of Universalist thought, "I have attended public worship in all countries and with all sects and believe them all much better than no religion, though I have not thought myself obliged to believe all I heard." The Society also relates how Rush reconciled Adams to his former friend Thomas Jefferson in 1812, after many bitter political battles. This resulted in correspondence between Adams and Jefferson about many topics, including philosophy and religion. In one of these communications, Adams told Jefferson, "The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount contain my religion." In another letter, Adams reveals his sincere devotion to God, "My Adoration of the Author of the Universe is too profound and too sincere. The Love of God and his Creation; delight, Joy, Tryumph, Exaltation in my own existence, tho' but an Atom, a molecule Organique, in the Universe, are my religion." He continues by revealing his Universalist sympathies, rejection of orthodox Christian dogma, and his personal belief that he was a true Christian for not accepting such dogma, "Howl, Snarl, bite, Ye Calvinistick! Ye Athanasian Divines, if You will. Ye will say, I am no Christian: I say Ye are no Christians: and there the Account is ballanced. Yet I believe all the honest men among you, are Christians in my Sense of the Word."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_adams
So we see, Adam's said/described what was his "true religion" and like Jefferson, he echoed the comment that he was a Christian only in the sense of his personal definition, which included "all honest men."

So I guess I'm a Christian eh Ronnie? Do you think your definition of Christian is a little too broad when it includes atheists? I think so. Getting tired of simplistic labels for complex human beliefs that change over time and are buried in 200 years of history?

And again, Adams was a Unitarian and they, by definition, do not accept the divinity of Jesus (no trinity).

That doesn't leave much Christian to your John Adams, Ronnie.

But he did say some nice things about Christians. It was rather required at the time. Look what they did to Thomas Paine, who took the more outspoken option.

D.
--------------
"God has infinite wisdom, goodness and power; he created the universe; his
duration is eternal, a parte ante and a parte post. His presence is as
extensive as space. What is space? An infinite spherical vacuum. He created
this speck of dirt and the human species for his glory; and with deliberate
design of making nine-tenths of our species miserable for ever for his glory.
This is the doctrine of Christian theologians, in general, ten to one. Now, my
friend, can prophecies or miracles convince you or me that infinite
benevolence, wisdom, and power, created, and preserves for a time innumerable
millions, to make them miserable forever, for his own glory? Wretch! What is
his glory? Is he ambitious? Does he want promotion? Is he vain, tickled with
adulation, exulting and triumphing in his power and the sweetness of his
vengeance? Pardon me, my Maker, for these awful questions. My answer to them
is always ready. _I believe no such things_. My adoration of the author of the
universe is too profound and too sincere. The love of God and his
creation-delight, joy, triumph, exultation in my own existance- though but an
atom, a molecule organique in the universe- are my religion".

[John Adams, in a latter to Jefferson, Sept. 14, 1813, from
"Christianity and the Constitution: The Founding faith of our Fathers"
John Eidsmoe ISBN: 0-8010-3444-2]

"My religion is founded on the love of God and my neighbor; on the hope of pardon for my offences; upon contrition; upon the duty as well as the necessity of supporting with patience the inevitable evils of life; in the duty of doing no wrong, but all the good I can, to the creation of which I am but an infinitesimal part." [July 13, 1815]

“Where do we find a precept in the Gospel requiring Ecclesiastical Synods? Convocations? Councils? Decrees? Creeds? Confessions? Oaths? Subscriptions? and whole cart-loads of other trumpery that we find religion incumbered with in these days?” John Adams, February 18, 1756.

Sounds like a Freethinker to me.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer
Post Reply