Genesis 1 - Where's the Beef?

0
Go to Google Images and type in:

"human tails"

What do you think God will do to people who deny the truth of God? what God himself laid down in the fossil record? Christians deny the simplest truth.

, and would deprive kids of an actual education in the school system? the church doesn't even teach the truth about the Bible (20,000+ sects/denominations) and would be so arrogant as to superimpose their ignorance into Science and Education? denying the empirical all the way.

I don't think so.

Evolution is true. In fact, Genesis 1 speaks of early . . . . . . VEGETARIAN . . . . . man (that's ye old primitive hominids, and Australopithecus, etc), they know from dental structure...

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, ....
bible cc/genesis/1-29.htm

But ... no beef ?? how interesting.

"Where's the Beef?"

( ole Adam arrived late on the scene about a million years after homo sapien and homo erectus and was merely the _FIRST FARMER_ ! As it is written, it doesn't say "there was no man on the face of the earth," rather, it states, "there was no man TO TILL THE GROUND"

Genesis 2:5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the ...(it hadn't been created yet... that is, the field itself hadn't been created yet, for lack of farmers), but every plant BEFORE IT GREW... so some plants existed, the ancestors to cabbage, turnips, collards, field peas, while some didn't...Ooooo, oooo, sounds like evolution to me!

"There was not a man to till the ground,. Young's Literal Translation and no shrub of the field is yet in the earth, and no herb of the field yet sprouteth, ...
bible cc/genesis/2-5.htm

Yup, no lettuce, no string beans, sorry... -- these things were cultivated by the first FARMERS around 10,000 years ago. God didn't "create" the Lettuce, man cultivated it. Go check the web for verification: "Agriculture = 10,000 years ago Mesopotamia".

I've provided you enough information, all of it verifiable by science and a handful of honest theologians.
Read More »

Richard Dawkins Admits Intelligent Design Possible

0


dazco01 wrote: According to your logic, if I show that 2+2 does NOT equal 5, then someone could REASONABLY CLAIM that 2+2 MUST equal 6, if not 5. What we both don't know is that 2+2 equals 4!

To bring it back to this video: if you've shown that aliens did NOT travel to Earth, then you say you can reasonably claim that God must be the answer. What we BOTH DON'T KNOW, is [INSERT TRUTH ABOUT UNIVERSE HERE].
To clarify the metaphor:
aliens = 5
God = 6
TRUTH = 4

do you see what I'm saying?


I'm wondering when folks are actually going to read the text of Genesis for the first time, instead of all this made-up stuff.

Epoch Three of Genesis DOES NOT SAY DESIGN, nor does it say "HAND CREATE". *smile*. No, it implies God stood afar off and commanded THE EARTH to bring forth the ancestors of plants (algae, fungi, etc). The Earth evolved tender (algae) grass, herb, and trees (ancestors of Prototaxites, a fruiting fungi), .. yea, "After their kind," which also implies EVOLUTION.

I have challenged Creationists and Darwinists to dig Epoch Three in Genesis for any term in Hebrew, implying "Design" or "Hand Create".

God commanded THE EARTH to bring forth, or evolve, algae, herbs (like fungi), and fruiting fungi trees.

So, Darwin began looking at nature, and observes "the Earth brought forth the algae, fungi(herb) and fossilized primitive fungi trees like Prototaxites, and they evolved, aka "after their kind," God had a hands off policy and Phew -- Darwin was a genius.

@dazco01,

Got a question for you that even a kindergarten child can figure out, but brainwashed adults can not.
Atheists and YEC are both Fundamentalists

Read Genesis, Epoch Three (Heb. "Day" = Yowm for "Epoch" or "Indefinate Period of Time), and you tell me, where either the word "Design" or "Hand Created" appear in the text. No cheating. Show me where it implies God designed anything.

God stood off and commanded the Earth to bring forth ancestors of plants / fungi, that is EVOLUTION.

dazco01
I believe you that nowhere in Genesis does it say that God hand-created life or designed life or anything with that connotation.

This does not have any effect on the debate at hand. We do not know if God, if there is a god, brought "forth ancestors of plants/fungi", and we (the scientifically minded) do not claim to know. Scientists ADMIT that they don't know.

If you don't know how something happened, that's when the conversation should stop, and the search for proof and evidence begins.


Exactly. If Creationists (believers in the God of Abraham) are relying on Genesis' text, there's nothing in Genesis that supports Intelligent Design. Contrary, it implies God stood back and commanded the Earth to evolve herb species (logic dictates randomness... extinction and evolution). Far cry from designed creation.

Then, God says "Let the waters" do the creating... some fine tuning suggested, when "creating" extant species after their kind (Heb. term which implies evolution).

... I also mean, the text in Genesis, "God said let the waters bring forth creatures... after their kind(evolution)" and then God creates them "after their kind(evolution again)."

Point being, if you're God with a hands off policy, you don't "Design" creatures. You allow Natural Selection to do the job. Survival of the fittest, and you fine-tune what's left at end of the day. 95% of all species that lived, went extinct.

Genesis implies an Intelligent Creator, but not a Designer.

To simplify. God used Evolution/Natural Selection to proliferate life and merely "Fine Tunes" the extant species (the first mention of "create' is way up until whales, so that's got to be a mere 45 million years ago... if you believe the fossil record. The Bible speaks often of God as HIDDEN... so a "hands off policy" would be in the nature of the Biblical God

In other words Genesis provides a dead end for Creationists who think to search for a scientific Designer's fingerprint.

dazco01
You're saying that it's impossible to find evidence that God exists.

Thank you.


That's what the Bible states in the prophet's words:
Isaiah 45:15 "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour."

dazco01
It seems you are using the lack of evidence for God...as evidence for God.
I think in order to have an intelligent discussion about God's existence, both parties need to agree that evidence is needed in order to confirm God's existence. The debate should really lie in the validity of evidence provided to support either side of the argument. It is as if we were speaking different languages completely. Therefore, I cannot carry on this conversation any further. Thank you your time.


The issue is God is a matter of FAITH, not science. That's what the majority of valid scripture elaborates on and, (not the forgeries like Enoch, the Apocrypha or Pauline Forgeries, etc.,), are about. Christians (posing under ID) have forgot, it is completely about Faith.

Jesus answered your question, aleady:
"But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it..."
~ Matthew 12:39


So the same is with God.
Read More »

Can't Tell Who's The Christian and Who's The Atheist Anymore

1
I've managed blogs for an Atheist and Agnostic, and sometimes comments roll in. Including some who argue among themselves. There were 3 comments, and earnestly, I'm unsure which was the Christian and which was the Atheist. I'll alter the names to protect the innocent:

******: has left a new comment on your post:
"I would beg to differ with ***** as to why Christianity is suffering from an "image problem" at the start of the 21st century.
The problem... was that as he became more informed about Christianity he began to doubt. He stepped outside of the dogmatic, traditional, "Let's Not Address This Issue Directly" cage and took a good look at what he had been believing, (much like --- hero, Luther, had done at one time) and found it wanting.
Additionally, when he went to those who were supposed to be experts, or at least knowledgeable about such matters, what he was handed was sorely lacking in any form of substance. Compound that with trying to search for his answers in the Bible itself and further not finding them - he turned to outside sources. Most likely the internet. There - of course - he finally found some answers: his faith was based on inconsistencies, myth, plagiarism, historical inaccuracies and in some instances, outright lies. How could he not doubt?"


Why yes... this is true. The church has failed for centuries to teach the truth. In fact, centuries ago falsehoods were circulated, i.e., the Pauline Forgeries, and people like Luther took it upon themselves to attempt translation of a Bible for the common person, and the church wanted to maintain a tight grip on the scriptures, rendering people helpless with the church as intermediator to God... but it was not so. In the midst of this, apocryphal manuscripts circulated... Jesus was the only intermediator between man and God, but the church attempted to superimpose itself into the authority of Jesus Christ.

CONTINUE...

"If --- want to answer him, they would do well to stick with addressing ***** specific problems as opposed to beating the "Here's How I Deal With Stupid Questions" bush. I would submit to ***** that there is a third criteria as a "easily identifiable and telling symptoms of false doctrine": that of obfuscation in answering the intellectual and emotional needs of the fold."


The other person responded, and this person, *****, posted again in response.
"Christians on the whole seem to somehow expect others to take what they have only experienced within the confines of their belief system on faith, for, whether you want to "believe" it or not, there is absolutely no proof that anyone named "Jesus" ever lived."


Testimonies of his existence are preserved in the Bible, and prophecies of the Messiah, but that's beside the point I suppose.

CONTINUE...

"None. Not one shred of evidence - even in the Bible itself - that anyone alive at the time that "Jesus" was supposedly living even ever knew the guy. No scrap of paper, no golden tablet, no stone inscriptions, no burial chamber, no cross, no first-source material (and there certainly seems to be a lot of copies of copies of copies, but not one original torn corner of a papyrus that even indicates that anyone ever knew him), not even any relatives left to give any account of him a generation after the fact! Nothing. Nada. Zip. Pilate: silent. The Sanhedrin: silent. The Romans: silent. On and on and on and on - you'd think that a guy who apparently raised somebody from the dead, fed a multitude on a couple of haddock and shards of bread, turned H20 into Pinot Griggio, got nailed to a cross, died and then came back might have made some form of impression on people. Nope. No one even noticed him apparently amongst the multitudes of other "prophets" of that time.
Not until 70 years later did he even actually start to appear in any meaningful manner, and even then, it doesn't appear that that guy even ever might have known him - just "of him", as it were."


INTERMISSION : Actually it's estimated to have been around 30 years after the death of Jesus, that recorded testimonies came into publication. But continue...

"No, there's nothing "selfish" about questioning the veracity of
Christianity. If anything, I'd say that was a noble endeavor. It is not "egocentric" to want to know - it is the mark of a "God-like" human to seek this so-called "God" out wherever "He" may be, wherever it may lead. It is not selfish or egocentric to admit you don't know something and wish to - it is selfish and egocentric to believe you have the answers when in fact, you don't.

"God or Intelligence: one has to give. One will quench the soul's thirst and the other will be like drinking salt water in the desert."

When Intelligence gives, Ignorance takes over. One could probably bank on that."


And the other person, who posted in the midst of the two comments wrote this,

###### has left a new comment on your post":
"The first problem of doubt stems from the human condition of selfishness, as articulated with "the doubter finds the Christian faith wanting", "the doubter finds God lacking", and "the doubter finds himself need or requiring to know X or Y".
We are an egocentric lot that will forever clash against a God who asks for trust and faith.
God or Intelligence: one has to give. One will quench the soul's thirst and the other will be like drinking salt water in the desert."


God or Intelligence: One has to give??

Am I reading this correctly? One person is denying the existence of God, whilst the other is teaching the falsehood that one must become "ignorant" to be a Christian??

Both appear to be Atheists (or at least, the latter, a Sheep in Wolf Clothing).

Actual scripture states in contrast: King James Bible (Hosea 4:6-9)
"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. The more the priests increased, the more they sinned against me; they exchanged their Glory for something disgraceful. They feed on the sins of my people and relish their wickedness. And there shall be, like people, like priest: and I will punish them for their ways, and reward them their doings."

Which also brings to mind the very insightful verse, in regard to what the former (presuming, an Atheist(?) stated, which is truly sad:
"He stepped outside of the dogmatic, traditional, "Let's Not Address This Issue Directly" cage and took a good look at what he had been believing... those who were supposed to be experts, or at least knowledgeable about such matters, what he was handed was sorely lacking in any form of substance."


INDEED! as it is written,

Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much grief; and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow."
http://bible.cc/ecclesiastes/1-18.htm, as it was in Jesus' day, he came teaching the Commandments of God (not the law of Moses), but God's law, and for doing so, the corrupt religious establishment murdered him.

And further, indeed: International Standard Version (©2008)
"How terrible it will be for you when everyone says nice things about you, because that's the way their ancestors used to treat the false prophets!"
http://bible.cc/luke/6-26.htm

And yes, if you speak the truth... it will make many enemies, and persecution, which equates to sorrow. The religious establishment (organized religion), the same who murdered Jesus, will turn into a witch-hunt against the righteous, which lead to the Inquisitions and other atrocities against many Saints: Those who keep the Commandments of God, and hold to the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Either way, both contributors failed to contribute any positive light, enlightenment on Christianity, and appear to be on the same side: To make a war on the Truth of God, and Jesus Christ.

There was no Commandment among the 10 which stated, "Thou Shall Not Utilize Thy Brain." But some who claim to be Christian, do indeed teach the false doctrine, and often practice it as well.

King James Bible
Jeremiah 31:34 (Old Testament Prophet): "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."

Hebrews 10: "Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more... By his death, Jesus opened a new and life-giving way through the curtain into the Most Holy Place. And having an high priest over the house of God; Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water."

So who is this entity, called the Church (the lie of Organized Religion which Jesus stood against, and was murdered), which with-holds knowledge, teaches falsehoods, endorses scriptural forgeries, pretends you must go through "them," flawed men, to obtain audience with God... what else was the purpose of Jesus' death and sacrifice? So that greedy preachers and televangelists could store up millions in their bank accounts? Men are unfit to teach the truth!. The corrupt and wicked priesthood who taught idolatry, lead to the destruction of Israel and Judah. When Jesus took his stand against them, they murdered the Lord. God alone has the power, the patience, the knowledge, (the Spirit of TRUTH, through grace in Jesus Christ that we may come into the presence of God, and will be taught by God), who are these persons who have usurped the authority of Jesus Christ himself, to teach falsehoods?
Read More »

Why I reject a belief in Satan

2
Here's an old movie clip I ran across tonight and it reminds me of what I strongly believe. There's some Christians (at least they claim to be) that ask me, how can I reject a belief in satan and demons and still believe in the Bible? Well, foremost, those things weren't taught by Moses or the early prophets. In the book of Genesis, there is no mention of a dragon, snake, evil spirit. The earliest (true) books of the Bible are not tainted with false gods. The Hebrews continued to pollute themselves with idolatry. Eventually, false doctrines and forgeries such as the book of Enoch (with many tales of demons), began creeping into Jewish religion. God destroyed Israel and Judah. This clip (assuming) comes from heavy influence of early Old Testament doctrines.


First, the nazis who are heavily influenced by anti-Christian socialist influence attempt to open the ark (with no reverence for God). What they find is "sand," and begin laughing (like the Atheists and non-believers they are). What follows is paranormal activity and then ghosts and other "angelic beings" that swamp the scene, and deceiving the onlookers, eventually to show its "dark powers" and consumes them. Of course Harrison Ford warns, "Don't look at it," and keep her eyes closed. And that's how I feel about "Satan" and "Evil Spirits" and other things that are false gods. You can find in the book of Acts, well, I'll let the verse speak for iself:
King James Bible, Acts 23:8
"For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both."
Competing concepts, such as evil spirits, devils, dragons, et cetera crept into Biblical theology toward the time of the destruction of Israel, because they worshipped such things (idolatry). However, this clip from "Raiders of the Lost Ark," shows paranormal activity, as well as ghosts and other phenomena coming from the most Holy Ark. How could evil, come from Holiness? Easy:
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."
http://www.bible.cc/isaiah/45-7.htm
The prophets commanded the early Hebrews to abstain from Necromancy, and other paranormal phenomena such as found in witchcraft, but the Hebrews refused. They continued to break the commandment of God which instructs, "Thou shall have no other gods before me."

"The Lost Books of the Bible," The Apocrypha, Commentary (Halo Press, pg. 8)


"Hard Sayings of the Bible", (Intervarsity Press)


Read More »
SEARCH NOW:
by title by author

If educated and reason-minded Christian men of science like Louis Agassiz found it plausible to embrace the concept of a supernatural entity at work in nature, then the possibility is good enough for me.

Science Fact: "The Sun and all the planets were formed at around the same time, depending on when you define the birth of the sun. Before the Sun became as it is today it was a proto sun, which had all the elements it has now but it just had not started the nuclear reaction which fuels today's sun. As the sun started to form from the debris of the dust/particle cloud so did all the planets."
The entire commentary (link).
The Earth is not Young, but the Sun's nuclear reaction, is... based on fossil evidence, a wee 500 million years old.

Astronomers Discover Coldest Star Ever [VIDEO]

Early Earth

But what about Stromatolites and photosynthesis 3.5 billion years ago?

That's covered here in full.

Had there been any sunlight, it would have never reached the surface of the Earth, anyway.

Early Earth

I profess my innocense of the crime of Bibliolatry, however, I am scathed with certain Atheists who've somehow came to the conclusion their deconversion (which soon lead to blasphemous attacks on people of faith and anti-religious tyrades) supposedly equal a one size fits all, "patent truth"(TM), or even worse, a "scientific truth." Only the religious minded are under the delusion they advance their creeds by deception and claims to possess a monopoly on "absolute truths". Not unlike their counterparts Theistic Fundamentalists, who also believe they monopolize some sacred "Truth of Truths"(TM)... yet in my years acquainting both extremes, not much appears to be about an actual search for greater truths, understanding or knowledge. Rather, hatred and bigotry tend to be the motivating factor behind their many senseless squabbles.

Straight from Scripture Commentary:

Trees Before Sunlight
See the King James Hebrew-Greek KeyWord Study Bible, AMG Publishers, 1991 for yet another reprint of this century-old LIE. This EVIL lie has been told and retold by theologians, biblical scholars, preachers and priests to paralyze brains of the religious, so that they may continue unabated generating billions in tithes and donations from the faithful, never again to question the dishonest anti-Darwinist rhetoric, so the church can continue fighting to stamp out truth and enlightenment. These men within the hallowed halls of the establishment of organized religion, just as those priests, the murderers of Jesus, are the enemies of God because "God" can only be found on the side of what is proven to be TRUTH. And I present the truth here vs. their evil lies that have deceived millions.

Prototaxites, A Fossil Fruiting Fungi, 'Tree'
Scientists discovered this fossilized, non-photosynthetic, fruiting "tree," and call it Prototaxites.

They said it couldn't be done, but here it is, thanks to modern science and praise to God for revealing the truth about the fossil record. Still waiting on evangelicals to address this fossil discovery and begin owning up to their wretched LIES and DAMNED LIES for over a century... if it looks, waddles and quacks like a tree... its probably a tree.
    "The various attempts to join together the biblical account of creation and evolution are not supportable by the various gap theories because the order of creation is in direct opposition to the views of modern science (e.g., the creation of trees before light.)"
Source: King James Hebrew-Greek KeyWord Study Bible, AMG Publishers, 1991

Yes, finally, trees exactly as described in Genesis, before, and without sunlight. And no, it's not another lame hoax. (Short) and (Long). See, Prototaxites, Fossilized "Fruiting Fungi," 'Tree'.

Also see Evolution of the Earliest Plant Organisms, specifically the "Fruiting Fungi" which fits an identical description,
1. Has fruit with "seed" (spores) inside itself, and
2. Can survive without sunlight (exactly as described in Genesis). Such organisms would have certainly existed during the Vendian/Precambrian.
3. For a long time, scientists presumed or presume a giant "mystery fungi" was a tree, a conifer, to be precise... and some have now described it as one of the "Fruiting Fungi".

Also, see "Fruit Trees Before Sunlight".

I Challenge All with this Thousand Dollar Question:
Please engage brain and point out where either term, "Create" or "Design," even appear in this text of Genesis?
Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth (tender) grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Genesis 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Still Waiting...

When you Atheists or Fundamentalist Xtian Darwin-haters can squeeze "creation" or "design" out of any of those verses which imply natural selection, let me know.

And yes Atheists... please spare your sermon. Don't preach to the choir. I know all too well what you believe.

Just because people become familiarized with Atheism, hardly means they are so blown away... so mesmerized with "The Truth"(TM) and taken in by a few persuasive argument fallacies that they automatically deconvert and lose faith. That they didn't accept your religion, hardly constitutes a lack of understanding. Perhaps it's just that Atheism is that unappealing. *The Shock* *The Awe* -- how could everyone not see things your way? They're just in denial. (Sound familiar?) Every religious adherent is *in shock* and *in awe* when others do not want to buy into their brand of religion and they fail to convince potential converts. Just as my views might not interest you, well, perhaps I am fully understanding your views and yet, Atheism still remains just that unappealing. Mainly because of the hateful attitudes and blatant lies that often accompany "The Truth"(TM). Any religion that has that extent of negativity in it can't be good for anyone's emotional well-being. Meanwhile, I fully understand why most people will not subscribe to my views. Foremost, it requires a minimal amount of knowledge of several scientific fields of study and secondly, reasoning that requires "thinking outside the box". Lastly, I'm not proposing to have any "One and Only Truth(TM)". Just presenting scientific facts whilst challenging long-held cherished falsehoods as well as faith in people to exercise critical reasoning and make up their own minds, and whatever conclusion people may arrive at is fine with me.

Trees and Plants Before Sunlight
Documentary from "The Soviet Story,"
Jim Jones was a Communist
Eddie Vedder
Stage Name Marilyn Manson
Alice in Chains

The religious establishment and their twisted evil twin, anti-religion baiters said it couldn't be done, yet...

TREES INDEED!

Vegetation, Herbs and Trees Before Sunlight.
Oh well, I guess that dashes arguments of Atheists and Science-Hating fundamentalists to little itsy bitsy pieces.
(and more found here)

Karl Marx Created Adolf Hitler
Darwin's theory did not create Hitler as some have accused, nor did Hitler's Socialism have anything to do with Jesus Christ or Christianity. Besides Eugenics programme in early American history and over 27 states which had sterilization laws on the books before the time of Nazi Germany, Hitler derived his version of Communist ideologue, "National Socialism" directly from the Socialism of Karl Marx, advocate of the most malevolent version of toxic Atheism, and author of The Communist Manifesto which lead to the bloody death toll of at least 100 million in the 20th Century alone and the killing continues ...
See Anti-Communism

For more information on Communism, and the ghastly death tolls:

The Black Book of Communism
Black Book of Communism
Amazon

Harvard University Press
Communist regimes around the globe are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement. It takes a brick of a book to provide the crushing scope of this murderous ideology, that killed tens of millions in the 20th Century and that will continue to kill.

And while we're on the subject, let's set the record straight about Jim Jones, another evil, toxic atheist and Marxist-Leninist.
"How could I demonstrate my Marxism? The thought was, infiltrate the church."
- Jim Jones, founder of the murderous "People's Temple," a disgusting Atheist and Marxist degenerate camouflaged under the guise of being "A man of God".
Carried out to the instruction as Marxist Revolutionary Vladimir Lenin, founder of the USSR, stated a necessity to infiltrate the Church, because the religious will '"swallow anything" if it is wrapped in religious terms.'

Hitler, Messiah, Anti-Christ
Like Atheist Stalin, Hitler wages a war against people of all religion.
(See Commentary Link.)

Communists murdered 100 Million over the past century.

Communist party members are Atheists.

And no, sorry, but Joseph Stalin was not a Christian because he attended seminary once and Christianity did not turn him into a butcher. George Bernard Shaw was no Christian either when he openly supported Hitler and mass genocide by gassing.

I’m an atheist and I thank God for it.”
- George Bernard Shaw

Atheists know this doesn't look good when they attempt to convert people to Atheism, and people are aware of the death tolls under Communist regimes so Atheists will do mental cartwheels to conveniently deny history or come up with some other lame twisted argument fallacy to explain away the atrocities committed by Atheists, such as, "Communists worship the state," I suppose therefore they're not Atheists?? Hogwash! Enough of the silly grammar school semantics!! That's not what the Communist Party is saying, Atheists!! To become a member of the Atheist State Religion, ooops, I mean Communist Party, you must be a sworn Atheist. No exceptions!

Darwin was never the problem. ATHEISM was the problem!? No wonder Christians rejected Darwin's theory after people like George Bernard Shaw and Karl Marx latched on to it like the parasites they were!

I believe in the religion of Love which the Prophet Jesus Christ taught.
So, Atheists! Looks like that agenda to convert the world to your religion of atheism has alas backfired. Your hate propaganda has turned people off. People as a whole are still as spiritual as ever, if not more so. Oh, don't delude yourself, people understand very very well what you believe, and I know all too well what you believe with your religion of hate. Whatever side you're on, I'm not there!!!

My favorite Atheist, Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam, whose wonderful song "Jeremy" brought attention to the anguish of kids who deal with school bullies vs. my least favorite

Mr. Brian Warner, aka Marilyn "Who Needs Fred Phelps?" Manson? guilty of regularly bullying and abusing his employees, both physically and mentally. THE VIDEOS ARE DISTURBING. Just "boys being boys"? or more age old ignorance that leads to a society of bullies. Most people have heard about the evil antics, but remain oblivious to the level of inappropriate bullying and ruthless violence even band members apparently have grown weary of.

Saving the best for last.

Sorry 'tis not Atheist that I can tell, but it is Alice in Chains. My favorite band of all time, brazenly questioning religious dogma and rhetoric.

And not to forget my commentary on the meaning of Soundgarden: Black Hole Sun A must read... or at least, a must-listen!