1. Comments are cramming up the pages. So I have added a comment summary to each post.

Two kinds of Atheists

Many people have classified atheism into many kinds, on basis of beliefs, knowledge, breadth of their views etc. But I am here to reveal to you a truth.  The truth is that there are two kinds of atheists. Let us take a look at them.

The Deceivers
You may not even believe what I am now going to now reveal. There are a set of people (let me call them set "A"). They have an agenda. They want to make the world a better place to live or in other words they want to have a new world. They have drafted out what they they think is how that new world ought to be. According to them, one of the things that is required for their world is the absence of a God. Thus they have a set of people among them (I will call them set 'B") holding key positions, working to achieve this. The job of this, set "B" people is to propagate ideas like God does not exist, God is evil, God does not fit into logic etc. I call this set of people the deceivers. It is my position, that these people are well aware that a God exists and that this is the God that the Christians worship. They know exactly whom they are fighting against.

The Deceived
If you are an atheist and if you find what I have written above to be complete nonsense, then you are in this category of atheists. You are the ones who have had a lot of confusion with whatever beliefs you previously held and then bought into the lies spread by the above mentioned set of people and have decided that that made sense. Thus you were the deceived. You have bought into their deceptive ideas.  

My aim is to get the message of truth to the second kind of atheists (The Deceived), so that they may saved from the eternal destruction.     


  1. I see you failed to publish my earlier comment about being a third kind of atheist; one who has come to his non-belief through his own analysis of Christianity, and then theology in general.

    As stated previously, I became an atheist decades before I ever read any "deceiver" literature. In fact, I would say the real deceivers are the hucksters who pass themselves off as messengers of the Almighty. Thousands - if not millions - of people world wide make a living this way. How many atheists do you think support themselves through non-attendance or non-prayer?

    TheFewTheProudTheMarinara (Church of the FSM)

    1. I have posted all comments and even replied to them.

      If you don't mind, could you explain to us, how your analysis of Christianity and theology in general drove you to this conclusion?

      I believe I have asked this question before, but did not get any reply.

  2. The physical impossibilities, incongruencies and contradictions in the Bible itself led to my doubts. For instance, let's take the central idea of Christianity, the need for redemption through Jesus:

    Sin is an affront to god, not any specific act. So god gets put out by the natural actions of a mythical first couple, and decides the only way he's going to be appeased is to wait 1.5 million years, then impregnate a virgin and have his half-god son tortured and killed. Am I the only one here who thinks is just stone crazy??


    1. There are many flaws in your perception. First I can see that you have started out with the per-supposition that God does not or cannot exist. This is where many people err. Lets take a look.

      You have stated out by saying "Physical impossibilities...." This points to the fact that you have pre-assumed that something other than the natural does not exist.

      Then you said, "incongruencies and contradictions in the Bible". Obviously you started with an error and that has led you to find incongruencies and contradictions in the Bible.

      Next you call the first couple "mythical". This again points to the fact that you have pre-assumed that a God does not exist. If a God existed then the first couple are are not mythical.

      Next you claim that God waited 1.5 million years (and you stated that you have not read any of those deceiver literature before you came took this world view). That shows that you have not studied the Bible properly. According to the Bible Adam live around 4000 yeas before Christ.

      According to you man sinned and God was angry and wanted to be appeased. So Christ was sent into this word to appease God. You will not get such a concept from the Bible unless your are severely guided by your ego and many erroneous pre-suppositions.

      Atheistic indoctrination need not be by literally reading some literature. It could happen (and most often does happen) through any normal and seemingly harmless that any average man reads. You say that you studied Christianity and found it made no sense and thus you became an atheist before any you read any of those literature. You are either lying to me and yourself or you just did not know that the indoctrination had happened.

      If anyone goes to hell it is because they have rejected God's provision for their salvation. This is what you are doing.

  3. "Education consists mainly of what we have unlearned." - Mark Twain
    I did not PREsuppose anything - I too, was indoctrinated in the Christian faith and had to overcome it.

    Does the supernatural exist? Perhaps, but why should I build my world-view around something billions of people have sought for thousands of years and have never found a shred of evidence for?

    Rather it is you who are locked into disbelief of anything not in your flawed book. You doubt it has contradictions? How many generations between David and Jesus, 27 or 41? How many days did the Great Flood last, 40 or 150? Aren't there 2 different Genesis fables in the Bible?

    Getting back to the idea of redemption, God supposedly killed almost ever living thing on earth in the Great Flood, yet it's HE who forgives US?

    "According to the Bible Adam (& Eve)live around 4000 yeas before Christ." Yes, and according to the Bible Satan took Jesus to the highest mountain top where he could see "all the kingdoms of the earth". I live on earth. How come I can't see that mountaintop? If the universe is only 4K years old, why are we receiving light from stars billions of light-years away? How was the Grand Canyon or diamonds formed so quickly? How did present day animals and plants evolve so quickly from the fossil records? Assuming the world is so young based on hazy analysis of a book whose authors are largely unknown and accepted by less than a third of the world is - sorry - foolish. TFTPTM

    1. You say that you did not pre-suppose anything. You have and your erroneous understanding of the Bible is the evidence that you have done so. You can deny it a thousand times but that will not help.

      If you were some one who had sincerely analyzed the Bible before rejecting it, I would find in you someone who would be sincere in explaining the problems with the Bible. Instead I find a person who is mindlessly repeating like a parrot the atheist mantra ....."no evidence" and "bible has contradiction". Talking about contradictions here is my challenge. Just for a sample give me 2 or three verses that you consider contradictions and I will prove to you that they are not contradictions. Here is another challenge. Do you believe in (let's say) evolution? I can show you that you are believing in something without a shred of evidence.

      Your last paragraph also is clearly showing your complete misunderstanding of the Bible. This has happened because you started of your study of the Bible (if at all you did) with an error. For example the Bible never tells you that the universe is young. That is your wrong understanding of it.

      You can deny facts. You can spend your life repeating the atheist mantra. You can believe the errors that your world view teaches you and the false freedom that it offers you. In then end when you land in Hell, you will have no one else to blame but you.

  4. Genesis 1:1 "1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
    If that's the first "day", it certainly implies the universe and the earth are the same age. OK, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're not a complete YEC loon and think the earth existed at least millions of years before man came along. What was god waiting for? How long did it take him to get the whole "humanity" idea?

    You are correct that I do not study the Bible. Neither do I study Archie comic books for the "real" Jughead and Veronica. The Bible (actually there are many versions, aren't there?) is a dated, rambling incoherent mess of ancient fables written not by god (why would god need ghost writers?) but by semi-literate ancient men.

    Presupposition? You start out thinking the Bible is the literal truth, in spite of thousands of instances where various scientific disciplines have proved it wrong. That, Annie, is a giant leap of faith. And while you may see faith as the greatest virtue, I define it as the ability to ignore facts in order to protect an unfounded belief.

    1. First of all you did not bother or dare to face my two challenges. I have no comments about that.

      Next your response this time shows many things.
      1. You claimed in your first post that you were "one who has come to his non-belief through his own analysis of Christianity, and then theology in general." Your response shows that you have never done any analysis on Christianity. You were just lying.

      2. You also lied when you said "I became an atheist decades before I ever read any "deceiver" literature." As it is very evident that when you started the analysis (if you did one) you already had an atheistic view.

      You are so naive that you do not realize the error in saying that something is wrong without studying it. What would you say if I said "Biology is full of nonsense" without studying it?

      I would only say that you are rejecting your salvation.

  5. I gave you 2 instances before you issued your "challenges". 1. Jesus's ancestral link to David. One source says 27 male ancestors, the other 41, and there is little agreement between the links. 2. The length of the Great Flood; 40 days or 150?

    How can you call me a liar when I say I didn't read any deceiver literature? Did you know me back in the late 60's?? What little atheist literature might have been around did not reach or appeal to me at the time. I just saw too damn many absurdities in Christian literature.

    And it is you who are naive, Annie when you reject any argument from an Atheist just because they don't (not haven't - don't) study the Bible. Why should they?

    And yes, if you studied science (archaeology, genetics, geology, astrophysics, biology, etc. with an open mind, you would NOT be a Young Earth Christian).

    1. Okay get this if you can. You said that you are who has come to his non-belief through his own analysis of Christianity.."
      Then you say
      .........You are correct that I do not study the Bible

      Now that is called contradiction. How can you say that you have analyzed Christianity without studying the Bible?

      Lem me show you your error. You quoted two instances. One was the regarding the ancestral line of Jesus. If you had studied the Bible you would have known that there are no problems with these genealogies. Since you lack the knowledge it makes no sense to you. I am not going to give you a Bible study now but would like this just for your information. Did you know that in Israeli culture, you could have a son who would biologically be your son but legally not yours? Or you could have a son who would be legally your son but biologically not yours?

      Deception is not accomplished only through atheistic literature. I can happen through any literature. The point is the ones who week in faith or do not do a proper study their religion are the ones who are more likely to be deceived.

      Let me tell you this. This is your statement about the bible
      ...........ambling incoherent mess of ancient fables written not by god (why would
      ...........god need ghost writers?) but by semi-literate ancient men.

      And you are saying this without studying it properly. This is foolishness. By the way you assumed (as you do in may cases) that I believe in a young Earth. I do not.

      You have been deceived and the deception has led you to reject the truth. By rejecting the truth, you are rejecting your opportunity to be saved that God has offered you.

  6. No conflict? Here are the 2 lists which differ THE FIRST GENERATION AFTER DAVID

    Matthew 1:6 thru 16

    but according to Luke 3:21 - 31

    1. If you put the two lists together, any fool can see that one list is longer than the other and has names. Any fool can conclude that there is a conflict by taking one look at it. But it takes study to know that Mathew and Luke are talking about geologies of two different people. It takes study to know why they have done this and to know how they are allowed to do this.

      This shows the amount of study you have done on the Bible.

      If you think that you know it all and refuse to learn then only you are responsible for your destruction.

  7. You keep on going back to my not studying the bible. I never said I NEVER studied it - just that I don't now. And it shouldn't take one too long to say "this is a bunch of hooey".

    You don't believe in evolution, do you? How many scientific papers do you or have you studied before rejecting it? The only reason you would have - assuming you're not a top scientist yourself - is that it conflicts with your entrenched beliefs. How nice for you that you yourself are omniscient!

    1. If you study the Bible without any pre-assumption and if you do a honest study of the Bible, you would know the truth. But seeing all the wrong ideas that you have it is clear that you have not done such a study. Though you say that you have studied the Bible, you really have not done a proper study of the Bible.

      You are right in saying that I do not believe in Evolution. And here is why I don't.
      .......I study the Bible
      .......I believe in the Bible because I have evidence
      .......The Bible says that it was not evolution who created us.
      .......It is scientifically improbable according to some scientists.

      Now can you say the same things about your beliefs? In fact I would say that you are the one who believe without evidence.

    2. Take away the "scientists" graduating from the Creationist Institute, and you only have a few nut-jobs who doubt evolution. Overall, you're talking less than 1%.

      For a theory to qualify as scientific it must be:
      consistent (internally and externally)
      parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
      useful (describing and explaining observed phenomena)
      empirically testable and falsifiable
      based upon controlled, repeatable experiments
      correctable and dynamic (changing to fit with newly discovered data)
      progressive (achieving all that previous theories have and more)
      tentative (admitting that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)
      For any hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet at least most, but ideally all, of the above criteria. The fewer which are matched, the less scientific it is. If it meets two or fewer of these criteria, it cannot be treated as scientific in any useful sense of the word.
      Scientists have considered the hypotheses proposed by creation science and have rejected them because of a lack of evidence. Furthermore, the claims of creation science do not refer to natural causes and cannot be subject to meaningful tests, so they do not qualify as scientific hypotheses. In 1987, the United States Supreme Court ruled that creationism is religion, not science.

      Your argument about how anyone who doesn't have their nose stuck in a Bible and believe every word is either a liar or has a closed mind is ridiculous. When you said "The Bible tells us the world is 4000 years old", that's all you had to say. Have fun with your delusions - I won't be back. Conversing with you is like trying to talk logic with the furniture.

    3. What we have here is:
      1. Another atheist running away unable to answer logical questions
      2. One who ignores logical thought and argues in a typical atheistic way
      3. One who never once dared to face even one of my challenges
      4. One who mis-quotes me
      5. One who is completely deluded
      6. One who is rejecting his salvation and going to end in eternal destruction - Hell

      If you are running away and unable to talk to me, I can only pity you.

      If you continue the debate I will answer your above posting.

      If you want to run away defeated so be it.

      May God open your eyes.