Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story
Imhotep

Orlando, FL

#172833 Jul 22, 2013
Just Results wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope , haven't missed a single verse, including these that talk about you.
Romans 16:17-18 ESV
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive.
1 John 4:1 ESV
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.
Matthew 7:15 ESV
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves (atheists).
2 John 1:10-11 ESV
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
2 John 1:7 ESV
For many deceivers (atheists/ex-Christians) have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such is the deceiver and the antichrist.
How about these?

" Happy the one who takes and dashes
Your little ones against the rock! "
-- Psalm 137.9.

Did Jesus lie or was it John?

" Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater works than these, because I am going to the Father."
--John 14.12

Ignorant or lying angel?

"The Lord God shall give him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever and of his kingdom there shall be no end." – Luke 1.32.33.
Hmm. Did Jesus ever get to reign over the house of Jacob?

Obedient slaves are righteous?

"Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves ... obedience leads to righteousness?"
– Romans 6.16.

Simple-minded God?

"I am jealous over you ... I fear your minds be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."
– 2 Corinthians 11.2-3.
"I form the light, and create darkness. I make peace, and create EVIL. I the LORD do all these things."
– Isaiah 45.7.

Puerile God?

"If ye will not give glory unto my name saith the LORD ... I will spread dung upon your faces."
– Malachi 2.2,3.

Making "every thought captive.

"For the weapons of our warfare are casting down imaginations ... and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ."
– St Paul, 2 Corinthians 10.4,5.

The cost to humanity of fifteen centuries of Christian savagery – of hundreds of millions of lives brutalised and truncated, sacrificed to war, torture, pogrom, burning, pestilence and plague – is incalculable.
Imhotep

Orlando, FL

#172834 Jul 22, 2013
Just Results wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess that's why you embrace it since you are incapable of learning.
Speaking of learning disabilities... ;)

I assume sufficient education and intelligence are present to accept the fact that… Neither Egyptian nor Roman history records any persons known as Moses or Jesus.

NOTE
Feel free to DISPROVE the following...

Please refrain from using Christian apologists as their viewpoints are clearly biased in favor of their dogma.

These alleged 'saviours/prophets' exist only in holy books, which themselves are copied from previous legends and myths.

"In fact, the quest for Biblical accounts of ancient Egypt at least into the 19th Dynasty of Egypt's New Kingdom, take on an interesting approach by most investigators. Essentially, since there is no evidence to clearly support the existence of Joseph, or Moses, or the Israeli Exodus, most of the investigation examines what was possible, what cannot be ruled out, or what fits into and Egyptian context.

In other words, is it possible that such events or people could have existed from what we know of ancient Egypt.

Some specifics are very possible, such as Joseph's rise to importance in the Egyptian court.

Other events, such as the Exodus, as specifically told in the Bible, are much more difficult.

Though the Egyptians may not have liked to record defeats, it would seem very probable that, were the disasters inflicted upon them as detailed in the Bible, there would have survived some textual evidence.

For example, the Egyptians recorded events such as eclipses of the sun and the levels of the Nile Flood.

Were the Nile to have turned to blood and every firstborn child suddenly have died, not to mention all of the other plagues mentioned in Exodus, there would have doubtless been some record left, particularly during the New Kingdom. Tomb records frequently provide us with the most meager of details, and we have, from that period, many thousands of documents recording civil actions and even commercial contracts."

"Despite the mass of contemporary records that have been unearthed in Egypt, not one historical reference to the presence of the Israelites has yet been found there. Not a single mention of Joseph, the Pharaoh's 'Grand Vizier'. Not a word about Moses, or the spectacular flight from Egypt and the destruction of the pursuing Egyptian army."
Magnus Magnusson (The Archaeology of the Bible Lands - BC, p43)


For many centuries the Egyptians were present in Palestine, controlling the trade routes and importing the timber, olive oil and minerals not found in Egypt.

Archaeology has uncovered dramatic evidence of this pervasive Egyptian presence in 'Canaan'– yet nowhere does the Bible refer to Egyptians outside of Egypt.

It would spoil the story!

How could Hebrews escape into the promised land if the Bible admitted Egyptians were running the show there too?

"Neither Moses, nor an enslaved Israel nor the event of this Exodus are recorded in any known ancient records outside the Bible ...
Although its climate has preserved the tiniest traces of ancient bedouin encampments and the sparse 5000-year-old villages of mine workers there is not a single trace of Moses or the Israelites."
– John Romer, Testament

In spite of this evidence you can, in fact, convert me! PTL. hallelujah!

1. Provide evidence that your God is the only true God in a way that religions other than yours cannot do.

2. Provide evidence that your holy book is true in a way that religions other than yours cannot do with theirs.

Until this time, and it will be an eternity - you are only one of many religious cult members - each claiming more or less the same immortality or enlightenment as others.

Science is inquiry. Religion is presupposition. Reasoning people do not accept religious dogma without evidence. Religion has an answer for everything, but solutions to nothing.

Since: Jun 13

Milwaukee, WI

#172835 Jul 22, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I can certainly understand your point of view. But I thought I saw inconsistencies too. They're only inconsistencies in text. Meaning, we have to delve deeper than just the font in front of us. There are vast cultural differences that kept me from understanding.
I asked you what the fear factor would be if God was to suddenly show up in His true form in such a way that His identity as the creator and rightful king would be unmistakable. You answered that if He was the petty, angry, jealous God you were picturing Him to be, that the fear factor would be very high. And if He was the tyrannical monster you describe, I would agree. People would be committing suicide in droves. Much worse than the 1929 Wall Street stock market crash. But that's my point.
Maybe God isn't the angry petty God we humans imagine Him to be. Maybe it's our perception that's inaccurate. If He really is our judge, maybe it's better that He doesn't appear just yet. Maybe it's better that He give everyone a fair chance to accept or deny freely.
For if He did appear, our perception of Him would have us scared shitless, and any effort to placate Him wouldn't be out of respect, but out of fear. And when something is done on the basis of coercion, intimidation, fear-mongering, then it's not worth having.
In retrospect, I think He doesn't show a massive sign directly because skeptics wouldn't believe it anyways, and those who were convinced would be reacting out of fear and not love. I think that the resurrection was the only sign we were going to get, and that He did *update* His message to all of us through all the various periods of transition and translations of the bible.
And if He did show us directly, then He wouldn't be acting through humanity. In other words, humans need to experience God's influence while still retaining their individual identity. And I believe that's how men were influenced to write the bible.
Maybe His absence from our sensory capabilities is a gift in it's own right. That's the way I think of it.
so basicly just to be on the safe side belive in god? lol ur a sad individual
Thinking

York, UK

#172836 Jul 23, 2013
If MaccyDs were trying to target our tastes, they're getting it wrong now. 70% of sit down restaurant meals on a Saturday night in Britain are Indian.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
McD's is closing it's doors in the UK?
What? Not bland enough?
<laughing my azz off-- sorry about the joke on UK cuisine...>
:D

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172837 Jul 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, bullshit. There is no other way to describe your lame excuse here.
I expected better from you, than this tired old excuse.
Skeptics may take longer to come around-- but if there really **is** evidence in support of something?
They **will** come around.
Clearly, your god is incapable of ... being convincing.
I don't see this as an excuse. I see this as being true. I'm convinced that it's the most reasonable explanation in a very difficult subject.
I'm not going to sit here and tell you something that goes against what I believe.

And the reason I mentioned the podcast is because it may be able to answer your question about why Jesus did what He did in far better a manner than I could. And I think that God doesn't have to be direct to reach us. Rather, we need to understand that He works through humans, not independent of humans. That's not to say that He can't, but that He chooses not to.

I'm just telling you what I believe. I think your expectations are too high based upon a number of factors:

1) Biblical literalism. Proof-texting. In our modern practice of literacy, everything is read literally. Everything must be explicitly spelled out for us. This is the great tragedy of our modern time. Everything has to be dumbed down. The bible is not immune to this phenomenon. That's why I believe we see so many translations. We keep dumbing it down to suit the time and cultural span between us and ancient Israel.

2) Distorted view because of contrasting differences in cultures which is affected by biblical literalism. A great example of this is your argument that Paul speaks of a spiritual resurrection and not a physical one. This goes against ancient Judaic beliefs about the resurrection at the end of the world. Ancient Jews expected a bodily resurrection, not a spiritual resurrection. If they expected a spiritual resurrection, then there wouldn't have been an empty tomb to discuss.

3) This distortion when contrasted against your ideal shows you a god that is ineffective and therefore must not exist. This is simply a mistaken ideal of what you think God should do. Are you saying that God should dumb it down and require no effort on our part? Is that what you would do? If that's what you believe God should do, then where is our incentive to learn through experience? Experience is the best teacher.

These aren't intended to be offensive critiques. These are my beliefs according to my understanding. If I've misrepresented anything you've said, please let me know. Understanding you is key to this dialogue.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#172838 Jul 23, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>1) Biblical literalism. Proof-texting. In our modern practice of literacy, everything is read literally. Everything must be explicitly spelled out for us. This is the great tragedy of our modern time. Everything has to be dumbed down. The bible is not immune to this phenomenon. That's why I believe we see so many translations. We keep dumbing it down to suit the time and cultural span between us and ancient Israel.
..
So you dont take the Bible literally? If so, please say clearly that it is not the word of God. Simples.

The OT God is angry and violent, a being unworthy of worship IMO. The NT one, although flawed, is a big improvement.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172839 Jul 23, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
So you dont take the Bible literally? If so, please say clearly that it is not the word of God. Simples.
The OT God is angry and violent, a being unworthy of worship IMO. The NT one, although flawed, is a big improvement.
That's another point of contention. This is an assumption based on perception. Our assumption and perception in modern society is that every document must be read literally. We even read novels that way. Metaphor isn't easily recognized. That doesn't mean that the OT isn't still the word of God. The problem isn't with the writing. The problem is with our own understanding of the writing.

In the OT, God comes across as angry and violent because of the style of writing and ancient understandings. Hyperbole is a prime example of this. I've written about this before. Hyperbole is a method of exaggeration to make a specific point or highlight a concept.

For example, let's suggest that you are an alien from another planet and have no idea what the sport of ice hockey is. You've never heard of it. Now let's go a step further and suggest that you're visiting Times Square in New York City and you see a newspaper headline that reads as follows:

"Rangers Slaughter Penguins!"

This confuses you. You ask a person who is not a hockey fan or is unfamiliar with today's sports headlines. So the following dialogue ensues:

You: What are rangers?

Local: Rangers are law enforcement officers that protect the environment and wildlife.

You: What are penguins?

Local: Penguins are wild flightless aquatic birds.

You: What is "slaughter?"

Local: Slaughter is killing on an intensive scale.

Because the local is unfamiliar with hockey, current events, and because you're unfamiliar with cultural metaphor, you come to the following conclusion:

"Rangers who are supposed to protect wildlife just killed penguins that are a part of wildlife. This is a contradiction.
The Rangers are evil and that publication is nonsense."

This is exactly the mistake we commit when reading the bible. We don't understand the culture or the metaphoric principles of literacy, and we give up on it.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#172841 Jul 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't give a damn if your story is real, or a lovely-lovely bit of hyperbolic prose.
I loved reading it either way!
So funny, the scene you painted into my mind's eye.
:D
It's real, a quick search on google will pull up several occasions where McDs has been on the receiving end of French farmers waste disposal plans. I guess I was just lucky to be there at the time.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#172842 Jul 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
The robocensor is kind of an idiot... in case you haven't already figured that one out...
... <laughing>
One had suspected as much - but one very rarely gets flagged.

Kind of amusing, actually.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#172843 Jul 23, 2013
Just Results wrote:
<quoted text>
You're lying to yourself.
No he is not, he is stating FACT, or perhaps you can show ANY occurrence of the name Moses being mentioned in Egyptian history.

Or perhaps you have some secret stash of documents that over rule the Roman archives and several Roman historians. Remember that at the time in question the Roman administration was the most prolific producers of documentation ever seen prior to the 20th century.

You also cannot provide evidence that you god exists yet alone is the only true god

You also cannot provide evidence that the babble is the only true religious book, far from it, much of the evidence shows the babble, both OT and NT to be incorrect.

You also cannot, with all honesty contradict Imhotep’s statement that science is enquiry based and religion is presupposition

So no, he is not lying to himself, he is stating FACT

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172845 Jul 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, bullshit. There is no other way to describe your lame excuse here.
I expected better from you, than this tired old excuse.
Skeptics may take longer to come around-- but if there really **is** evidence in support of something?
They **will** come around.
Clearly, your god is incapable of ... being convincing.
I disagree. I think that argument cuts both ways. Perhaps it is we who don't want to be convinced. As an example, I asked you if you would consider listening to an interesting perspective from a pastor. You declined, and I respect you and your decision enough to not push it upon you. Yet, at the same time, I see an internal inconsistency in your philosophical position. Please do not think this is an attack on your integrity. It's just an observation that puzzles me.

Your statement was that you wouldn't listen to the podcast on the A PRIORI assumption that the pastor's presentation was based upon emotion. Yet in one of your recent replies to me, you stated that the evil and suffering in this world is offensive to you, and is a key reason in why you lost your faith.

Evil and suffering are subjects that affect our sensibilities. Or at least they should. Those who aren't offended by evil and suffering are usually considered to be pathological. This is where I notice an inconsistent philosophy. You're justifiably emotionally offended by evil and suffering, but yet you prefer not to listen to a pastor's podcast on the A PRIORI ASSUMPTION that his presentation is purely emotional.

Do you see why I am puzzled? Am I missing something here?
blacklagoon

Brookline, MA

#172846 Jul 23, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:

<quoted text>That's another point of contention. This is an assumption based on perception. Our assumption and perception in modern society is that every document must be read literally. We even read novels that way. Metaphor isn't easily recognized. That doesn't mean that the OT isn't still the word of God. The problem isn't with the writing. The problem is with our own understanding of the writing.

In the OT, God comes across as angry and violent because of the style of writing and ancient understandings. Hyperbole is a prime example of this. I've written about this before. Hyperbole is a method of exaggeration to make a specific point or highlight a concept.

So God had an important message for all of mankind, and how does he convey this message? In Metaphor? Really? Is this the very best way to deliver such an important message?

So this ancient method of writing means that men wrote the bible? Uneducated, ignorant men from a backward desert region during the bronze age? Why would an all powerful God need to use hyperbole in delivering his message?

That this extremely important message from God was resigned to ancient text, to me is the nail in the coffin Christianity. Hyperbole, Metaphor, why not just concise, plain, easy to understand language, and delivered in a way that all people of all nationality and race could easily understand? Is this to much to expect of a supreme being, one who created the cosmos and is all powerful?

Can you begin to see the twisting and turning you're are doing in trying to justify the immoralities and cruelties contained in the bible. Always a disclaimer with you, always hidden meanings, special pleading, twisting and turning every which way to make things you believe in come out right.

A message worthy of a supreme being would have been delivered in clear easy to understand language for all peoples of the planet, and delivered not to ignorant shepherds in a backwards desert region, but to a thriving enlightened civilization like China.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#172847 Jul 23, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Hate speech duly reported.
You continue to show you **not** a religion of love-- but one of hate and abuse.
hate speech is not a violation of topix TOS.

good luck with that report.

But my main point was to pass this along to you and others.
Two days ago I signed up for membership on the New Republic website and was accepted. I then posted a response pointing out the errors in their anti gay stance and unchristian like behavior based on 103 Bible verses on Obeying Authority
http://www.openbible.info/topics/obeying_auth ...

today I just found my privileges on their site have been revoked.

Color me not surprised!

I am an editor here on Topix. I edit 3 forums. Ever since the SCOTUS decision and this sudden 'upgrade' to the website, I no longer can access the editors tools on two forums (FL and Religion). Yet Topix insists I am still an editor there. I have had no problems on the 3rd forum (the G&L) however.

Backlash or glitch?

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172848 Jul 23, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
So God had an important message for all of mankind, and how does he convey this message? In Metaphor? Really? Is this the very best way to deliver such an important message?
In what way should God have delivered His message? Should He have waited for radio and satellite television to be invented? Should He just appear suddenly and without warning with a cosmic megaphone?
Should He use subliminal messages, dreams, visions?

What language should it be in? Every language or just the ones important to modern Western civilization?

In what time period should He appear? Should He appear just in our own time because we're the only people that matter? Are all those ancient bronze age goat herders unworthy of such an important message? Why should He just appear in China? Are only the Chinese people worthy?

Should He appear in human form or as a lion or as a penguin?

Should God forcefully (like a tyrant) compel men to write or subtly and peacefully? Should He tamper with their personalities or allow them to write in accordance with their capabilities and personalities?

Should He just stand up and make an announcement every 10 minutes and strike something with lightning? Should He ring a bell like a town crier from the 17th and 18th centuries?

Should He interrupt our favorite TV shows with live updates and assume that we'll all come flocking to His call?

How would you do it?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#172849 Jul 23, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
In what way should God have delivered His message? Should He have waited for radio and satellite television to be invented? Should He just appear suddenly and without warning with a cosmic megaphone?
Should He use subliminal messages, dreams, visions?
What language should it be in? Every language or just the ones important to modern Western civilization?
In what time period should He appear? Should He appear just in our own time because we're the only people that matter? Are all those ancient bronze age goat herders unworthy of such an important message? Why should He just appear in China? Are only the Chinese people worthy?
Should He appear in human form or as a lion or as a penguin?
Should God forcefully (like a tyrant) compel men to write or subtly and peacefully? Should He tamper with their personalities or allow them to write in accordance with their capabilities and personalities?
Should He just stand up and make an announcement every 10 minutes and strike something with lightning? Should He ring a bell like a town crier from the 17th and 18th centuries?
Should He interrupt our favorite TV shows with live updates and assume that we'll all come flocking to His call?
How would you do it?
Funny how the actual way that God chooses to do things is indistinguishable from non-existence.

What is the *test* for the existence of a deity? What observations distinguish a universe with a deity from one without?

Here is another way to ask the question: what test could we perform that, if it goes the way that surprises you, would be sufficient to demonstrate to you that your deity does NOT exist? In what way is your belief falsifiable? How would you know if you are *wrong*?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#172850 Jul 23, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. I think that argument cuts both ways. Perhaps it is we who don't want to be convinced. As an example, I asked you if you would consider listening to an interesting perspective from a pastor. You declined, and I respect you and your decision enough to not push it upon you. Yet, at the same time, I see an internal inconsistency in your philosophical position. Please do not think this is an attack on your integrity. It's just an observation that puzzles me.
Your statement was that you wouldn't listen to the podcast on the A PRIORI assumption that the pastor's presentation was based upon emotion. Yet in one of your recent replies to me, you stated that the evil and suffering in this world is offensive to you, and is a key reason in why you lost your faith.
Evil and suffering are subjects that affect our sensibilities. Or at least they should. Those who aren't offended by evil and suffering are usually considered to be pathological. This is where I notice an inconsistent philosophy. You're justifiably emotionally offended by evil and suffering, but yet you prefer not to listen to a pastor's podcast on the A PRIORI ASSUMPTION that his presentation is purely emotional.
Do you see why I am puzzled? Am I missing something here?
I think what you are missing is that our desires do not determine truth, but they *do* determine morality. Any deity that allows the suffering in the word, especially the suffering that is NOT man-made, to continue is either not all-powerful, not all-knowing, or not all-good. Even if such a deity exists, it would be unworthy of worship. Fear and contempt are possibilities, but not worship or even 'trust'.

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#172851 Jul 23, 2013
Titus 3
9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;

11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#172852 Jul 23, 2013
I'll be on vacation for a week starting this evening. I wish everyone a good week filled with peace and prosperity.
Thinking

York, UK

#172853 Jul 23, 2013
If only your god hadn't cursed us with all those languages...
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
In what way should God have delivered His message? Should He have waited for radio and satellite television to be invented? Should He just appear suddenly and without warning with a cosmic megaphone?
Should He use subliminal messages, dreams, visions?
What language should it be in? Every language or just the ones important to modern Western civilization?
In what time period should He appear? Should He appear just in our own time because we're the only people that matter? Are all those ancient bronze age goat herders unworthy of such an important message? Why should He just appear in China? Are only the Chinese people worthy?
Should He appear in human form or as a lion or as a penguin?
Should God forcefully (like a tyrant) compel men to write or subtly and peacefully? Should He tamper with their personalities or allow them to write in accordance with their capabilities and personalities?
Should He just stand up and make an announcement every 10 minutes and strike something with lightning? Should He ring a bell like a town crier from the 17th and 18th centuries?
Should He interrupt our favorite TV shows with live updates and assume that we'll all come flocking to His call?
How would you do it?

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#172854 Jul 23, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
I'll be on vacation for a week starting this evening. I wish everyone a good week filled with peace and prosperity.
Have a wonderful vacation :D

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Introducing The Universal Religion (Feb '14) 9 min Patrick 762
An atheist returns to Christ (Jan '09) 1 hr Patrick 4,094
Atheism vs. Theism: Knowns and Unknowns 2 hr woodtick57 100
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 2 hr emperorjohn 22,217
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 3 hr Thinking 77
Stump a theist with 2 questions 7 hr TheHeadlines 58
Bill Maher's "dirty secret": He's deeply religi... 12 hr Thinking 5
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••