Although a believer myself, I have a sincere desire to understand the atheist point of view. To that end, I think it is critically important that any fruitful debate begin with an understanding of the opposing position, thoroughly and fairly. As such, I respectfully pose the following two questions.
1) If you are an atheist, what affirmative beliefs does that entail for you?
2) If your response to #1 includes the affirmative position that “God” or anything “supernatural” does not exist, what do those terms mean to you? What, precisely, are you claiming does not exist? What is the demarcation between the “supernatural” that you believe does not exist and the “natural” that may, at least potentially in your analysis, exist? Alternatively or additionally, what attributes or qualities would make an entity a “God” or “god” such that you affirmatively claim he/she/it does not exist?
I do not intend to challenge anyones answers, although I may ask clarifying questions. Instead, I simply want to understand precisely what various people mean by these terms. Obviously, I am not looking for dictionary definitions, a “group” agreed definition, etc. Instead, operating on the assumption that an affirmatively held belief system would be reached by an individual analysis of the relevent arguments and data, I seek to understand more fully what individual atheists mean, in their own conceptions, by these terms and, perhaps, how usage may vary from person to person in ways that are often not appreciated.
For anyone who takes the times to respond, thank you.
ObsidianPhoenix
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
1. I am an atheist,I do not think being an atheist has any "affirmative beliefs" for me at all, by itself. I do believe in lots of things, but nothing in particular strictly because I am an atheist. Atheist is simply not theist to me. Like a name for someone that is not a stamp collector.
2a. The term God; I go by the commonly accepted definition for the broad encompassing term of god, I am fully aware many people have many varying meanings of what god is to them, but I go by the broad "god" idea. Requires worship, has supernatural abilities etc.
2b. Supernatural is in the very definition of the broad term god. So, people define it as supernatural, so kind of hard to separate out that. The difference between natural and supernatural? Well it is in the very definition of those words. I see that you ask under your questions for not dictionary definitions but personal thoughts, well my personal thought is: we need to use commonly shared accepted definitions, or we are all talking past each other and conversation goes nowhere.
2c. What makes an entity a god that makes me say it does not exist? Well for one, we can call almost anything we can dream up a "god" The rainbow farting unicorn can be called a god just as much as the christianity god can be called a god. The god of LogicForTW's toe jam, is also a god, it has supernatural abilities, it demands worship. (It is not likely to get it though) but it is a god all the same. Why? Because I decided to make it up and call it a "god" That has in it's definition everything necessary to be a god. Since there is no burden of proof for my claims of these gods, its just as valid as any other god that does not have to meet burden of proof.
I am in a bit of a hurry at the moment, but I will respond with longer/more thoughtful if you would like Obsidian Phoenix.
?? "Mean to you???
Atheism is clearly defined. How are you confused. Just ask any atheist how they are using the term. ATHEISM: A - without Theism - a belief in gods. Atheists do not believe in God or gods. How is that difficult to grasp. There is no other meaning.
1. Atheism has no affirmative beliefs. Perhaps you are confusing it with Secular Humanism or some other philosophy to which many atheists are attracted. Atheism is a position on a single proposition. "Do you believe in God or gods." The atheist says "No." That's all. Nothing more.
2. I have no idea at all which God you are talking about until you define it. If you are looking for someone to negate the existence of a god or Gods, you are looking for an "anti-theist." (a sub category of atheist.) I am an anti-theist with regard to most gods. If you tell me which god you believe in I can tell you if I am an anti-theist or atheist with regards to that God. Keep in mind there are 30,000 different Christian gods. Some of them live on Golob with their sons Jesus and Satan, others allow followers to worship and pray to saints. Some of these Gods assert that you knew them before your existence on this planet. There are even other Christian gods that encourage you to plant a seed and get rich. If you want me to talk about your god, you will have to be very clear on what you mean.
2A: “supernatural”
When you say "supernatural" again you have to define your terms. I have never witnessed anything supernatural or perhaps I have, I really don't know. When I think of supernatural, ghosts come to mind. Well, that's a bunch of "hogwash" (my favorite word today). Show me a ghost and then I will believe in ghosts but if you show me one, wouldn't it then be natural. So when you say "SUPERNATURAL" do you mean "IMAGINARY" and non verifiable?
@What attributes or qualities would make an entity a “God” or “god?"
Ummm.... Are you paying attention? NONE! I am an atheist. I don't believe they exist. (Or how about this. If I was going to make a god, I would make it purple.) Does that help? If we are playing "Imagine The God," anyone can join in. Come on... it will be fun!!!
@I seek to understand more fully what individual atheists mean, in their own conceptions, by these terms and, perhaps, how usage may vary from person to person in ways that are OFTEN NOT APPRECIATED.
I was with you right up to the "not appreciated" part. I have no idea why you stuck that on the end. Not appreciated by whom?
Perhaps this will help:
Atheists: Do not believe in God or gods.
Anti-theists (Sometimes called Strong-Atheists) assert that God or gods do not exist. Anti-theism is a subcategory of Atheism. Anti-theists do not believe in Gods.
Agnostic: A word meaning "No knowledge of God. Everyone is an agnostic as the god hypothesis is a non-falsifiable hypothesis. That which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. Just as no theist can prove the existence of magical flying invisible beings, no anti-theist will be able to prove that these same beings do not exist. (Non-falsifiable) Logic tells us that it is the person making the claim that has the burden of proof. Anti-theists have accepted that burden when they attempt to prove the non-existence of a god. Agnostics are both Theists and Atheists.
Theists: Believe in gods.
@ OP
"If you are an atheist, what affirmative beliefs does that entail for you?" None. I am an atheist. I lack the belief in a god or gods.
As an atheist I do not have any affirmative beliefs.
The difference between natural and supernatural is that natural manifestations can be observed, measured, and proven to exist. The supernatural is children's stories, products of the imagination.
Spiderman, Pixies farting rainbows, and god are all imaginary creatures, the supernatural. None can be proven to exist by any measurement or method of observation, but just like the black swan argument, I do not deny they cannot exist. But I will not gullibly reach for the magic candy cane until I have proof.
ObsidianPhoenix,
"What does “atheism” mean to you?"
I simply don't give a rat's ass if any God of any kind exists, especially Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews and the God of the armies.
The only thing such a creature can do for us per the biblical fairy tale is to give us eternal life. What good is that if we have to spend eternity praising him? And there's no guarantee that we won't be anything but mindless rotting zombies. According to the biblical fairy tale we already know the difference between good and evil, just like he does so he has nothing to add on that issue.
All:
Thank you for the responses. One common thread in the responses seems to be the claim that atheism, by itself, does not assert any affirmative beliefs. This response was mentioned by LogicforTW, Cognostic, Old man shouts..., and David Killens. Thus, it seems to be an almost universal position among responders at this point.
Additionally, I think Cognostic’s distinction between “atheist” and “anti-theists” is exceptionally illuminating and thank him for it. I believe I have learned an important clarification in terms from his post.
To ensure I have understood, would the following accurately restate the positions:
1. Atheism is simply a statement that a person does not believe in God, without taking the next step of affirmatively stating that it can be proven that God does not exist.
2. Anti-theism (“Strong Atheism”) is the stronger affirmative claim that it can be specifically proven that God does not exist.
Furthermore, based on my understanding of Cognostic’s post, a person cannot assert whether they are an atheist or anti-theist as to a particular “god” without a precise definition of what is meant by the term “God”.
Have I understood correctly?
Thank you.
ObsidianPhoenix
ObsidianPhoenix, I personally wish to thank you for your respectful and polite conduct. That earns a lot of points in my eyes.
But I request that you do not leave completely, because so far, you have only a very small sample group. There will be more comments, more opinions expressed, and thus you will gain a more thorough understanding.
Looks pretty good to me.
I am not as strong on definitions of anti-theism / strong atheism.) As I have not put as much thought and discussion and reading on those words, but your supplied definition is likely that what close to what my carefully thought conclusion would be on those words.
I have labeled myself as strong atheist before. And I do think that the evidence that man created the various "god" ideas is overwhelming, where I have never seen any real evidence that the various gods people worship created man, (or anything.)
@ Obsidian
" Atheism is simply a statement that a person does not believe in God"
That statement implies a choice of beliefs and also a particular god.
Atheism is simply a Lack of belief in a god or gods
Hey there, Obsidian. Welcome. Pressed for time at the moment, but if you hang around a bit I will try to address your post later this evening. See ya then.
By the way, cool name you've got there.
David Killens, thank you for the compliment. I certainly intend to continue listening to others on the topic. Ideally, I want to obtain a thorough understanding of the various aspects of the question so that, in the future, I can engage in more precise discourse with other forum members without (1) mistakenly misrepresenting their positions and/or (2) sparking miscommunications stemming from a failure on my part to understand the initial conditions and beliefs that ground the arguments.
Old man shouts..., that’s an important clarification. Thank you.
Tin-man, thanks for the welcome and I am glad you like my name. I will certainly hang around and look forward to your thoughts.
ObsidianPhoenix
@ObsidianPhoenix
Welcome! I am another member who appreciates your non-combative participation.
I am a humanist-atheist. Humanism defines my principles of life and atheism defines my spiritual beliefs. Outlined below are my PERSONAL definitions of the two.
ATHEISM
I do not believe in any gods, devils, heaven or hell. I have one life with no after life.
HUMANISM
Good without a god.
Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism or other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.
1) If you are an atheist, what affirmative beliefs does that entail for you?
Simply, the lack of a believe that any god exists. Personally, I'm really interested in paleontology and astronomy, paleontology being my main interest since I was a little kid, but that's sort of separate from me being an atheist. I've also been lucky to grow up in a country where religion is a really minor thing and where there are barely any creationists, so no one in my family had any difficulty with it cause the majority are atheists and agnosts.
2) If your response to #1 includes the affirmative position that “God” or anything “supernatural” does not exist, what do those terms mean to you? What, precisely, are you claiming does not exist? What is the demarcation between the “supernatural” that you believe does not exist and the “natural” that may, at least potentially in your analysis, exist? Alternatively or additionally, what attributes or qualities would make an entity a “God” or “god” such that you affirmatively claim he/she/it does not exist?
Anything that's made up does not exist. Generally things that have absolutely zero evidence until evidence is provided. This includes any god that any religion made up, stuff like ghosts, cryptids etc... If there is zero evidence, it does not exist. If someone does find concrete evidence (for an instance, the komodo dragon was long thought to be a cryptid and a myth until they actually proved they exist) only then I'll believe it.
There are no qualities or attributes that make an entity a god, there's only the religious stories they appear in that claim they're gods, there's no such as thing as a definition for what makes a made up creature a deity.
There are millions of folks who can be and have been called atheist. Be careful about drawing conclusions based on such a wee sample size.
MBrownec:
Thanks for your input. As to humanism, although I would not describe myself as a humanist for reasons beyond the scope of this discussion, I find it to be a highly laudable ethical framework whose adherents often do a better job of living moral and productive lives than many that base their ethics on an appeal to divine authority. Although I have nothing but anecdotal evidence for this, it seems to me this is often the result of humanism being a philosophy of ethics arrived at by individual, deliberate thought as opposed to simply assumed via upbringing etc. Of course, I find the same to be true of theistic ethical systems as well on the (admittedly rarer) occasions when the theistic beliefs are a result of individual long-term deliberate analysis and personal conclusions.
Do you believe that humanism and theism are logically compatible? For example, it would seem to me that someone could believe in the existence of a deity but at the same time believe that such deity provides no logically consistent grounds for an ethical framework. In such a situation, belief in the deity would be irrelevant to a determination of ones ethics and one could be both theistic and a humanist. As you put it, you would be in a situation of “good without god” while at the same time admitting that god exists. Or am I missing some logical incompatibility between the two positions?
@ObsidianPhoenix
There is one aspect of humanism that you need to keep in mind ... humanism is ATHEISTIC at its very core.
Where humanists differ from non-humanist atheists much of the time is that we gladly work with Christiana (theists) on "good works" projects when Christians are willing to do so. As you already know, Christians (especially evangelicals) aren't very keen on being associated with atheists any way. As a result, we have very few times that we come together and combine our efforts to feed the poor, etc.
Further complicating the situation is Christians absolutely refuse to stop trying to convert us when most of us have absolutely no desire or need to "convert" Christians to humanism-atheism since we do not believe in gaining brownie points with a god for heavenly favors. In fact, we find that whole concept as being gullible and reprehensible. Humanist-atheists perform good works to benefit of humanity ... not accumulating brownie points from a god ... any god.
MBrownec:
Thank you for the clarification. That makes sense to me.
If I may inquire further, I have a question regarding your statement that “most of us have absolutely no desire or need to “convert” Christians to humanism-atheism”.
I am aware that at least some atheists (whether they are additionally humanists I do not know) believe that religion, particularly organized religion, is a net negative for humanity. Thus, they actively seek to “de-convert” believers so as to minimize or eliminate these negative influences. Does humanism as an ethical system take a position on this issue? Again, I am asking only for your opinion and understand that answers might well vary from humanist to humanist.
As with any group, there will always be hotheads. There remains non-humanist atheists that are militant to the core. I find absolutely no kinship with these folks.
Humanist-atheists reject all forms of intimidation and coercion. We truly believe in self-enlightenment through study, science and validated experience. An individual either sees the light or they don't. The choice is theirs to make and its NOT for me to intimidate or coerce then into "seeing things my way." Here's the point, I do not have a NEED for anyone - for any reason - to believe as I do!
Finally, my humanist-atheist beliefs are personal and it's no one else's business. Rarely do I get into a conversation or debate on Atheism vs. Christianity. What is the point? Neither one is going to change the other's beliefs. Furthermore, my desire is to advance humanity ... not build barriers and resentment.
MBrownec:
Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions and educate me a little on your personal worldview. Though I am sure we would disagree strongly on some key issues, I find your thoughtfulness and goals admirable and appreciate you giving me the opportunity to learn about them.
@ObsidianPhoenix
I want to throw in my 2 cents on this question of yours:
"I am aware that at least some atheists (whether they are additionally humanists I do not know) believe that religion, particularly organized religion, is a net negative for humanity. Thus, they actively seek to “de-convert” believers so as to minimize or eliminate these negative influences."
I am one of those that believe religion, (especially today,) is a net negative for humanity. But I do not actively seek to "de-convert" believers. I am well aware it is a mostly futile effort, maybe if I spent a lot of time around kids and was also in a position of authority/trust with them, I would try to point out the major flaws of all religions, as young minds are not as set in their thinking as older folks are. (Seems like a simple leap for kids to make, to me; to tell kids that just learned Santa/tooth fairy are not real, that "god" is not real either.
Fortunately for all theist out there, I am not around kids :) Do not really care for them for the most part ;)
LogicForTW:
Thanks for the additional information. For what is is worth, I am around children, specifically my three sons. As other parents on this forum may appreciate, I have spent many sleepless nights debating the best choices on how to raise them. For me at least, one such choice deals with how to teach them about the intersection of religion, atheism, theism, morality, etc. A failure to properly handle these issues seems to me to be simply setting your kids up for precisely the type of intellectual crisis that I am currently discussing with Tin-Man in this thread.
If my children end up believers, I want it to be because they have, after rational consideration of the arguments, made that decision. If they end up atheists, then I want it to be because they have, after rational consideration of the arguments, made that decision. What I do not want is for them to believe either position simply because it is popular, easy, or mine.
@ Obsidian
"What I do not want is for them to believe either position simply because it is popular, easy, or mine."
Rest assured once your children become teenagers it will never be because it is "yours" .
I discussed things openly and honestly with my sons and stepsons with the old adage..."go look it up". And there was a discussion later on the topic, mostly because they were excited about ferreting out new knowledge whatever it was.
They understood even when young if we had foster kids that came from religious backgrounds I or my partner escorted them to Church, Schul, whatever. My kids were welcome to attend if they wanted. Being boys they rarely did, Footy, cricket or just mucking around was infinitely preferable LOL.
My kids are all in their late 20's and early thirties to late 40's. All atheists, all comfortable acknowledging other peoples religious bent. We don't discuss religion at all except in the context of church scandals, politicians naked pandering to religion and the lack of meaningful education.
ObsidianPhoenix,
"For me at least, one such choice deals with how to teach them about the intersection of religion, atheism, theism, morality, etc."
The only reason to teach a child about religion is to brain wash the kid into believing in eternal life. Of course there's the economic and social aspects of catering to right nitwits and in some instances it can act as a charm to keep them from killing you.
As far as the Bible is concerned the single best advice you can give a kid is found in Proverbs 1:10-19 https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs1:10-19&version=CEB... If you teach your kids anything from the Bible it should be that passage.
The books of Sirach, Wisdom, and Ecclesiastes also have some good timeless advice. The rest is pretty much junk.
As for morality teach them to obey the law in all things. It will save them a lot of grief.
Remember, there's well over 200 billion galaxies in the visible universe. Imagine how man worlds there are with intelligent life. To think that an ethnocentric Middle Eastern desert mountain dwelling deity rules over all of that is insane.
The bottom line is that unless you want to indoctrinate your children in your favorite version of eternal life there's no reason other than selfish ones to turn them into religious twits.
ObsidianPhoenix,
"Although a believer myself, I have a sincere desire to understand the atheist point of view. "
Why do you need to believe in the biblical God, Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews and the God of the armies?
According to the biblical fairy tale you already know the difference between good and evil. So you are just like him in that regard. There's nothing he can add to that.
The only thing he can do for you is to give you eternal life. But he's a racist and he doesn't like everyone so unless you're a member of his clique in good standing you probably won't gain admittance to the golden cube called New Jerusalem.
So if you don't want to live forever why would you be concerned about such a deity? He has nothing else to offer.
Diotrephes:
Apologies for the confusion. By “believer”, I meant simply “theist”. My theism would differ substantially from modern, mainstream beliefs in the “biblical God, Yahweh, the God of the Hebrews and the God of the armies.” Going into the details of that would go well beyond my purpose in starting this thread.
My decision to believe is not based on a desire for eternal life or for admission to heaven. Not to get too far afield but, although I have not reached a firm conclusion as I continue to examine the various arguments on multiple sides, currently my position would best be described as the belief that, if there is such a thing as an afterlife or heaven, which there may not be, one’s belief or lack of belief in a deity is irrelevant for “admission” to either.
Instead, my decision to believe is because I sincerely and honestly think that analysis of the relevant arguments leads to the conclusion that something approaching what most people would consider a “deity” must exist. I believe because to do otherwise creates logical dissonance for me. Again, further details go beyond the scope of this thread.
By way of example, I believe in the theory of evolution because I think the scientific evidence for it is overwhelming. On a day-to-day basis, my personal belief in evolution does not “get me” anything other than the personal satisfaction of believing that I have reached a rational, well-supported, and internally consistent conclusion. My belief in theism is the same.
Put differently, I believe that having a well-reasoned and internally consistent worldview is its own reward.
ObsidianPhoenix,
"Instead, my decision to believe is because I sincerely and honestly think that analysis of the relevant arguments leads to the conclusion that something approaching what most people would consider a “deity” must exist."
OK, so a God creature exists. What does does knowing that do for you? You will still live your existence and then you will die. What will your God do for you, if anything?
Now think very carefully. In ancient times nitwits thought that the world just consisted of their forty acres of dirt. They had no idea how large the world was or about all of the other people who lived on it. So it was OK for them to think that they were special and the center of the universe. Then people started moving around and meeting new people from around the world. But some twits still thought that they were special because of their superstitious backgrounds.
When people looked into space they saw a handful of tiny lights at night that they thought would fall to the Earth. Even Yeshua is on record with that belief and he was supposed to have been the son of the creator. He was totally clueless. They had no idea that other worlds revolved around those distant lights. It's highly probable that some of those worlds have intelligent life forms.
Then about 100 years ago a few intelligent people became aware of just how large the universe might be. It's now estimated that there might be 200 billion or more galaxies in the observable universe. Now think about how many planets could have intelligent life forms on them at some point in time. But the biblical God, Yahweh, who supposedly created all of that, is only concerned with the people who live on forty acres of dirt on a very small planet called Earth. How can that make any sense?
It's hard to visualize 200 billion galaxies. But look at this video at the 1 minute mark that shows what the size of 1 billion represented by $100 bills https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJrnf1l2AFQ. Now imagine 200 more blocks like that that represent the 200 billion galaxies. Then calculate the number of planets and how many might have intelligent life.
The bottom line is that if anyone today really believes in the ancient ethnocentric religious creation fairy tales then that person is dumber than a rock. It's time to become educated and to stop believing in silly-ass ancient ethnocentric Middle Eastern religious fairy tales.
Obviously you have not read a single reply to your original query. "Put differently, "You don't have anything like a well-reasoned and internally consistent worldview that is its own reward." You have a belief system based absolutely nothing but blind assertion. What you have is one big argument from ignorance.
OsidianPhoenix: I say there are no gods. When I was a child I learned there was no Santa Claus. No one asked me to prove that assertion.I do not see any reason to consider God more valid than Santa Claus.
Hello again, Obsidian. Oddly enough, my time during weekends is a bit more restricted than during the week, but I wanted to get in here for a moment and address at least part of your OP. Before I do, though, I would like to echo the comments of others concerning your polite and respectful approach. If you look around other threads, you will notice that tends to be a rarity here from most theists asking questions. Your sincere attitude is very much appreciated.
Anyway, you asked, "1) If you are an atheist, what affirmative beliefs does that entail for you?"
Simple answer is that being an atheist (to me) means only that I do not believe in any god(s). But I did not give myself the "label" of atheist, and I honestly do not care what term is used to "define" my lack of belief. Call me a "dorselhoffer" for all I care. Makes no difference to me one way or the other. *chuckle* Bottom line is that I spent most of my life in an almost constant state of dread and uncertainty wondering if any/all the good things I ever did would be considered "good enough" to keep me out of hell. Not a fun way to live. Didn't help that even as a young kid going to church/Sunday school regularly, the bible and the God/Jesus/heaven/hell concepts never made much sense to me. I was always plagued with the thoughts of, "What is wrong with me? Am I a bad person for not believing these things? Will I be sent to hell for having doubts?" Took me many, many years to finally realize I did not need any type of god to be a good person. I do not need the promise of heaven nor the threat of hell to do the things I know to be right. Moreover, I am the one solely responsible for any wrongs I might commit. I do not need nor want some invisible non-corporeal good or bad entity on which to blame any bad behavior or acts I do.
On a slight tangent, as I have said before on other threads, even IF some type of god(s) were somehow proven to exist, I suppose I would have to BELIEVE in it/them at that point. Does not mean I would worship it/them, though. In my opinion, any such powerful being/entity that is so insecure and petty that it requires those beneath it to bow down and worship it is not worthy of my respect, much less my worship. But that's just me...
Hope that helps you for now. If you are still around, I will try to get back on here with more within the next couple of days. Later.
Tin-Man and/or Mr. Dorselhoffer:
Thanks for taking time to speak with me. For what it is worth, I do sincerely appreciate your willingness to help another advance his own understanding, especially another that is at least partially opposed to some of your beliefs.
From your answer to (1), it appears to me that you were raised “in the church” and, as many are, were then faced with serious doubts as to the validity of what you were being taught. I actually went through a very similar experience, being raised around religion, coming to question it, and having to face the difficulty of breaking with my family and friends as to central beliefs. We are different in that we landed in different places (you in atheism, I in a form of non-traditional theism) but I would bet that, if we ever compared notes, we would agree strongly on the reasons we broke from “tradition”.
I also agree that, if one must rely on divine blessings as motivation to do what is right, then one is undermining the foundation of morality. As you said, and as my discussion of humanism with MBrownec explored, it seems to me that belief in “god” is not necessary to be a “good person”. Likewise, blaming “the devil” for ones own failures seems to me to be simple scapegoating.
I find your position on worship interesting. As I understand it, you are asserting that (1) if a god was proven to exist and (2) it demanded worship, you would not feel it worthy of worship because its need for such worship would be a sign of its own insecurity and that (3) any being with such insecurity would not be worthy of worship in the first place. Have I articulated this position correctly?
An an extrapolation of the above position, is there any hypothetical deity that, if proven to exist by indisputable scientific evidence, you would feel compelled to worship because of reverence for the qualities it had been proven to possess? Obviously, I am not in any way implying that such a being exists or is even logically possible. Instead, I am trying to explore the depths of your position on when something, even something purely hypothetical, would be worthy of worship.
Again, thanks for getting back with me and I hope I am still around in a few days.
ObsidianPhoenix
Pages