Jonathan H. B. Lobl

You have stated some great truths. It is difficult to communicate with others with no label at all. Then we look at some of the people who have taken on the same label; and it's guilt by association. As a matter of ULC history; Kirby got started by putting a big sign on his garage. The sign only said "CHURCH". When people wanted more detail, it became "Universal Church". "Universal Life" was a later development. Based on this, I'm certain that Kirby had no hidden agenda about God or reincarnation. Of course, Kirby changed over time. For part of his life, he was a traditional Christian preacher. Some of his later sermons looked a lot like Atheism, without the word.

Your point is well taken. Some context of what happened will help. First, these were Facebook Atheist groups. Somebody asked the question: If you had to join a religion, which religion would you choose? This question comes up a lot in these groups. The response was a general laundry list. I went down the list and saw that nobody had said Agnostic. I thought it was a funny answer. If I had to take on a forced conversion, to the religion of my choice, I would choose Agnosticism. The group didn't think it was funny. From the general reaction -- they piled on -- you would have thought I had walked into their church and pissed on their altar. I told them that they were being rude. They told me that they were educating me. So I left. With minor variants, this happened in several Facebook Atheist groups. I left all of them. I can't stand groups with no sense of humor. They're no fun at all.

Of course.

My experience with Humanists is limited. How ever, There is a Humanist group trying to get Humanist chaplains into the American military. I think that would be a welcome development. There is a Humanist group resisting "under God" in the Pledge. They have lawyers. Ideology and personality aside, they could be a good thing.

I went back over the article. It seems to suggest that space itself is illusory.

After life is a separate issue. As far as that goes, I like to think that something survives death, but I have no confidence that it does.

According to Daniel Dennett, it was an attempt to come up with a popular word for Atheists; in the same way that "gay" worked for gay rights. It's a nice idea that never quite took. Well, maybe it needs more time.

They do say that the memory is the first thing to go. What was the question?

Thank you. I find the whole tone changes. These minor shifts in wording really do matter. It brings things into the here and now. It loses the "Once upon a time" feel.

Quite possibly. My memory plays tricks. "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance" ?

I think it was an attempt to get over the Agnostic vs. Atheist thing. So far as I can tell, it never caught on.

They are similar. I think when I use the agnostic label, I get sucked into fewer silly arguments. Except for the extremists. I have had to leave a few atheist sites on Facebook. I made the mistake of saying agnostic there. It wasn't pretty. It's amazing how quickly they gang up.

Change is the only constant.

Interesting. You continue to surprise me with your take on things. There is another translation -- I forget which one -- that says -- "In the beginning, God began creating the heavens and the earth". What do you make of that?

Perhaps my memory is off. I remember you saying you were agnostic. (small a) It's not important. Just how I remember it.

I'm inconsistent. I have discovered that I enjoy being an Agnostic minister. Being an Atheist minister wasn't working for me. So yes, I'm inconsistent.

I thought it might be a fun topic to discuss the different labels. Atheists, Agnostics, Brights, Free Thinkers, Secularists, Humanists, Secular Humanists, Spiritual Humanists, Objectivists, Pantheists, Apatheists, Nones, No Preference, Etc. Of course, there are combinations. Apathetic Agnostic and Agnostic Atheist are popular. We all end up wearing labels, whether they fit or not. Sometimes, finding the perfect label becomes a game. Which label do you like? One of these? Something else? Stoic Atheist?

Thank you. One of the great lessons of my life is that I can like and respect people -- without agreeing with them. I have enjoyed your presence in my life.

I'm not at all certain that this social evolution is taking place. Yes. There are visionaries striving to make the world a better place. People involved with such issues as prison reform. Or Education reform. Etc. There are also visionaries engaged in medical research, to make the world a better place. Or scientific research. Or the arts. For the most part, I think people are just living their daily lives.

I thought you were making a point. It's alright. Sometimes I miss the nuances.

I hope you feel better soon.

At the time, I thought he was a Creationist. According to meredog, I had jumped to an incorrect conclusion, due to faulty reasoning on my part. The explosion of resentment caught me off guard. Most people would have corrected my mistake and let me apologize. This fellow can carry a grudge. Then again, any excuse in the service of hostility, would have done just as well. Such fierce belligerence is rare.

If you care, I can present myself to you or your trusted agent. In person. I have a New York State issued Driver's license. The administrators at my senior centers can identify me. What kind of proof would you like?

I don't know who said it. "If you can't dazzle them with logic, baffle them with **."

I remember the other thread with pain. I asserted that there was inadequate evidence for the existence of God. For a response, I was given the technical names for three logical arguments. They came, with assertion by authority, that the arguments were valid and that further, they were proof. I was then commanded to look them up for myself if I was not familiar with them. My teacher didn't have time to bother with me. He was cooking dinner. I do so despise being lectured to by condescending, smug, arrogant, snots. The more so when I come looking for friendly chat, rather than life and death debate. I want to be clear about my Agnostic position. I don't actually know whether or not God exists. I am inclined to doubt God's existence, but I don't actually know. Further, I have been through periods in the past when I did believe. It seems unlikely, but I could change my mind again. Long time visitors to this forum may remember when I advocated for Pantheism. There were other periods of my life when I had other beliefs. They involved prayer. The beliefs of others are not my concern. I have nothing to sell. If others choose to believe -- I am not in any way wounded. Nobody is under any obligation to show me proof of anything -- unless they intend to change my beliefs. Then I need evidence. Arguments are not evidence. Not even when they are clever arguments based on logic. Not even if the arguer has academic credentials. One additional thought. Said academic snot was afraid to use his real name. Look to the left of these words. I am using my real name. Who has the courage of his convictions? If anybody actually cares, I have a Face Book page with my real picture. Same name. If I can figure out how to import the picture, I will.