Alan Watt reinforces the power of the individual to speak directly to God

[Michal Ptacnik]

The Two Babylons

http://www.canadastreetnews.com/twobabylons.pdf

Here is why so many beliefs are the same.

You DO realize that Semmiramis was as close to Nimrod historically as we are to St. Peter or Jesus, do you? Please stop pushing this fable, if any story was created by the Powers that Be to discredit the Truthers, this must most assuredly be it.

/OT

[WakeUpAmerica]

Birth of Krishna: http://www.sanatan.org/en/campaigns/KJ/birth.htm

I am sure I don't have to source the birth of Jesus. Do you want me to spend time to try to locate the birth of Krishna story in the Mahabharata or will you be content with what his own followers tell about him?

Again, this is not about proving whether or not the Z story is REAL, but whether it is historically believable without being "stupid." So my link proves that there are interesting paralells and THEREFORE Allan Wats does not have to be "stupid" for following that rabbit trail. Savvy?

Not a source text

Show me the original Mahabharata text (no interpretations, no commentary) with a completely literal translation that backs up these claims.

Unlike some people I am happy to look at evidence contrary to my preconceived notions. But if you keep posting non source texts and keep parroting nonsense I'm going to have a hard time even reading your posts in the future

[Rebelitarian]

So who was Jesus based on ?

[WakeUpAmerica]

You DO realize that Semmiramis was as close to Nimrod historically as we are to St. Peter or Jesus, do you? Please stop pushing this fable, if any story was created by the Powers that Be to discredit the Truthers, this must most assuredly be it.

/OT

Why do you selectively buy undocumented facts only when it fits into your world view?

[EvadingGrid]

Repeating the religious garbage propagated by the New World Order ?

Epic....

[Dok]

You DO realize that Semmiramis was as close to Nimrod historically as we are to St. Peter or Jesus, do you? Please stop pushing this fable, if any story was created by the Powers that Be to discredit the Truthers, this must most assuredly be it.

/OT

can you back that up? Because it is in the book. So who is believing a myth?

[WakeUpAmerica]

You could also ask him to list the differences . . .

Like was jesus the eight son, or was jesus imprisoned as a child ?

I'm trying to make it clear that this has nothing to do with faith, belief, or religion. Why would an orthodox rabbinical scholar teach me that if it was about this? No source documents back up their claims and the differences you mentioned are just icing on the cake

[Michal Ptacnik]

can you back that up? Because it is in the book. So who is believing a myth?

I can't believe myself saying this -seeing that I tend to critisize this approach - but can you source the book of Hislop? He certainly was not her contemporary so what was he engaging but in the most fanciful of speculations? The historical queen Shammuramat of Assyria, the wife of Shamshi-Adad, lived in the first millenium BC. The mythical queen Semmiramis who was created by hellenic mythologists is NOT credited for even being a goddess, though there is an episode where she hid her husband's death in order to win a battle... not in order to keep rulling or anything.

My source is wikipedia, their sources are books on the topic. Your source is a protestant minister that lived in the late eighteen hundreds, an age that gave us the "science" of eugenics if we want to engage in the game of "who has the bigger... source".

[Michal Ptacnik]

Birth of Krishna is narrated in Bhagavata purana and it is the famous story of him being born in prison, etc. etc. Do you really want me to seek it out in the text or will you be content with the hundreds and hundreds of tellings that you can find on the net and elsewhere. Hindu scriptures are not as well sourced as the Bible is, you can not readily find chapter and verse or so to say, online.

If we take the yes as an answer, and no, I don't have the time or the inclination to comply to absurd sourcing requirements (got more than enough at school, will be presenting my final papers by monday), there are enough similarities to raise an eyebrow, also many differences. BUT the punchline is that these similarities are not easilly dismissable so that guy in the original topic, before we left him, is NOT stupid or manipulated by espousing these beliefs.

For sourcing enthusiasts: http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/ The Bhagavata Purana. You SHOULD find the story there, I got the impression from Mahabharata that it is not told there. It is certainly not told in Bhagavadgita, I read the first chapters of this one and it is about how a warrior should behave and be motivated and why to fight and not to fight.

[WakeUpAmerica]

If I took your word for it I'd be no better than you or the Zeitgeist followers. One thing I appreciate about Bill Cooper is that he insisted his listeners think for themselves and research. Your fallacious appeals to popularity are not welcome among scholars or those who care about the truth.

Birth of Krishna is narrated in Bhagavata purana and it is the famous story of him being born in prison, etc. etc. Do you really want me to seek it out in the text or will you be content with the hundreds and hundreds of tellings that you can find on the net and elsewhere. Hindu scriptures are not as well sourced as the Bible is, you can not readily find chapter and verse or so to say, online.

If we take the yes as an answer, and no, I don't have the time or the inclination to comply to absurd sourcing requirements (got more than enough at school, will be presenting my final papers by monday), there are enough similarities to raise an eyebrow, also many differences. BUT the punchline is that these similarities are not easilly dismissable so that guy in the original topic, before we left him, is NOT stupid or manipulated by espousing these beliefs.

For sourcing enthusiasts: http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/ The Bhagavata Purana. You SHOULD find the story there, I got the impression from Mahabharata that it is not told there. It is certainly not told in Bhagavadgita, I read the first chapters of this one and it is about how a warrior should behave and be motivated and why to fight and not to fight.

[Michal Ptacnik]

-sigh- OK. Krishna being divinely born... http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto10/chapter3.html

Good luck making sense of it, but it is here... somewhere... I got to the place where miracles and signs from the Vedic gods appeared to commemorate his birth and then gave up. I GUESS the virgin birth is found elsewhere on the page or in the book, but if you read it, you'll see WHY I gave up so soon.

Anyways, sometimes even people who try to find scientific facts have to trust other people that did the searching before them, or we would be re-inventing the wheel over and over again.

I guess I could be searching for the Steele of Shammuramut SOMEWHERE on the web, but then Dok would just say that the dating is flawed and that just MAYBE it really is five thousand years old and that he certainly will take the undocummented word of a preacher that speculated about myths over the words of scientists that dated the tablet... or he will say that Shammuramut is not Semmiramis, despite the name similarities and despite the fact that you can not say Semmiramis in Assirian (it would not be a feminine word, for one, and the -is suffix is indoeuropean) so it certainly could not have been her name... look if you want to believe McArcheology (dok) or condemn people for being seekers of the truth (WUA), be my guests.

[Dok]

I can't believe myself saying this -seeing that I tend to critisize this approach - but can you source the book of Hislop? He certainly was not her contemporary so what was he engaging but in the most fanciful of speculations? The historical queen Shammuramat of Assyria, the wife of Shamshi-Adad, lived in the first millenium BC. The mythical queen Semmiramis who was created by hellenic mythologists is NOT credited for even being a goddess, though there is an episode where she hid her husband's death in order to win a battle... not in order to keep rulling or anything.

My source is wikipedia, their sources are books on the topic. Your source is a protestant minister that lived in the late eighteen hundreds, an age that gave us the "science" of eugenics if we want to engage in the game of "who has the bigger... source".

he puts all of his sources and quotes in the book.

these topics are getting off topic and more into another astrotheology he said/ she said thread.

[Michal Ptacnik]

http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto10/chapter4.html

... and a certain king Kamsa of the Kuru dynasty (the "evil guys" in the Mahabharata) seems to have killed Vasudeva's (Vasudeva being a parent to Krishna, and yes, a parent, I did not find out in the book whether the mother or the father though the suffix would hint at him being male) children, so he would kinda correspond to king Herod...

again, these are interesting similarities. And that proves my point that it is not STUPID to follow these lines. Have you had enough of Hindu obscurity already?

[WakeUpAmerica]

http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto10/chapter4.html

... and a certain king Kamsa of the Kuru dynasty (the "evil guys" in the Mahabharata) seems to have killed Vasudeva's (Vasudeva being a parent to Krishna, and yes, a parent, I did not find out in the book whether the mother or the father though the suffix would hint at him being male) children, so he would kinda correspond to king Herod...

again, these are interesting similarities. And that proves my point that it is not STUPID to follow these lines. Have you had enough of Hindu obscurity already?

I took a crap earlier today and Jesus probably took a crap once so Jesus is based on me. That is literally as logical as your position. The links are so tenuous it's a joke. Why do you think NO religious scholars support this?!? How can I get that through your head?!?! Go ask an Imam, a Rabbi, or a Biblical scholar they'll all tell you the same thing.

Your BELIEF is just that. Watt tries to play it off as a fact when his position is base on pure faith and belief. WAKE UP!

[Dok]

keeping it clean applies to every one. oK

[Lynchoid]

Was this thread about Allan Watt?

[EvadingGrid]

Was this thread about Allan Watt?

Allan Watt repeating Zitgeist and or read Acharya which are not factually based.

Michal Ptacnik is trying to wriggle out of it by derailing the topic onto Hinduism. Michal Ptacnik prefers Zitgiest to Restoring The Republic.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=209265.msg1251653#msg1251653

[chrisfromchi]

actually its all from jordan maxwell's the naked truth from 1992.

http://youtu.be/qJqivq4BzcU

[stymo1]

This new thread title makes it sound like his "willy" was out!!   

[Dok]

is that better?

[WakeUpAmerica]

is that better?

No as I'm not debating astrotheology, I'm pointing out that Allan Watt can't manage to conduct real research before cutting callers off multiple times.

[Dok]

No as I'm not debating astrotheology, I'm pointing out that Allan Watt can't manage to conduct real research before cutting callers off multiple times.

another astrotheology debate with exposing Allan Watt

better?

[WakeUpAmerica]

another astrotheology debate with exposing Allan Watt

better?

Fair enough. That is more accurately reflective of this topics turn into parroting the same tired old irrelevant and debunked astrotheological myths peddled by theosophists and their ilk.  

[DAVIDE MTL]

No as I'm not debating astrotheology, I'm pointing out that Allan Watt can't manage to conduct real research before cutting callers off multiple times.

you can dwell on that call from a few years back or you can listen  to his May 4 broadcast at about the 28 minute mark,
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/
it's not to say you're going to get him to say he believes in Christ or what not but it's a far cry from that clip you posted

[WakeUpAmerica]

you can dwell on that call from a few years back or you can listen  to his May 4 broadcast at about the 28 minute mark,
http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/
it's not to say you're going to get him to say he believes in Christ or what not but it's a far cry from that clip you posted

I listened to it. I couldn't care less what he believes in. Once a liar always a liar. I don't trust liars or people who talk about things of which they are ignorant. Defend him all you like, I wouldn't put any stock in him but that's just me. You're welcome to believe what ever you like, I cannot judge you. I am only showing that he obviously cannot research properly (again, I was first made aware of this by an orthodox rabbi in a world religions course, not a Christian or a man who believed Jesus was the son of god.) as well as someone who hangs up on callers who challenge his BELIEF with FACT. Can't you see the difference?

[DAVIDE MTL]

I listene to it. I couldn't care less what he believes in. Once a liar always a liar. I don't trust liars or people who talk about things of which they are ignorant. Defend him all you like, I wouldn't put any stock in him but that's just me. You're welcome to believe what ever you like, I cannot judge you. I am only showing that he obviously cannot research properly (again, I was first made aware of this by an orthodox rabbi in a world religions course, not a Christian or a man who believed Jesus was the son of god.) as well as someone who hangs up on callers who challenge his BELIEF with FACT. Can't you see the difference?

what you call liar I call that he changed his stance on a subject, I listen to him because he brings a wealth of knowledge but  he ain't perfect , if he were to be spewing the Zeitgest baloney i would be calling him a disinfo agent, I think you're are putting too much stock on 1 phone call from a few years back. What did the rabbi tell you?

[WakeUpAmerica]

what you call liar I call that he changed his stance on a subject, I listen to him because he brings a wealth of knowledge but  he ain't perfect , if he were to be spewing the Zeitgest baloney i would be calling him a disinfo agent, I think you're are putting too much stock on 1 phone call from a few years back. What did the rabbi tell you?

The rabbi told me that it is laughable to say Jesus was based solely on older myths. There is no proof anywhere. Every single academic and theologian knows this. I don't trust anyone who can't manage to do research even if he changes his mind later. What else has he told you that you believe but haven't verified on your own?

[goforward]

As mentioned earlier he plagerizes too
http://www.outlawjournalism.com/?p=85
I used to listen to him regularly and he plays the victim constantly
is he disinfo I don't know, the guy is a no name, mystery and he does push hopelessness
I wouldn't pay attention to him

[Michal Ptacnik]

The rabbi told me that it is laughable to say Jesus was based solely on older myths. There is no proof anywhere. Every single academic and theologian knows this. I don't trust anyone who can't manage to do research even if he changes his mind later. What else has he told you that you believe but haven't verified on your own?

Yes, it is true, He is not SOLELY based on other myths but His story is a myth, that does not mean that it is unreal or that He did not exist, but His story follows the mythological pattern. Now is Tolkien right and is this a "God's myth," a way that God communicates with us? Or was the storry changed to follow the desired patterns that were known by the educated people of Jesus's age? We can not know. But we can try to understand it for ourselves, and mayhaps we will find an even more awesome answer.

That is, if we do not stop at screaming "This Is 100% And Only Literal Historic Story And I Want To Here Nothing More!"

Michal Ptacnik prefers Zitgiest to Restoring The Republic

Indeed I do. I believe the Republic (when it was perverted) got us where we are now, both yours and ours (Czech Republic used to be a "small America"), and although it might have been better than what we have now, one can not step into the same river twice. It was a good idea for it's time, the best idea for it's time, but we must seek new ideas for new times. I know you don't like the word "new," but I for one would not want to live either in 18th century or in the first part of the 20th century (the time of our republic). Zeitgeist like models offer a world that is no longer based on blackmail of people by other people, and that is a good idea, and also a world where men are not artificially divided by race, nation and profit. I support that over war and particularism and I am quite proud of it. Now a GLOBAL/pan-western Republic, US style, would not be such a bad idea (still infinitelly better than what we have now), but my point is that it is about as probable as a global/pan-western Resource Based Economy, and of the two, I would chose the latter.

If we don't out globalize the globalists, we're toast; by DIVISION we fall, and national division is the oldest card in the game. Even if you achieved all that you desired, you would at best give yourself some twenty years of peace (for your country; the national model GUARANTEES war, especially with capitalism under it's surface) and then the game goes on again. Capitalism and particularism destroys it's children.

/massively OT, but I had to react to EvadingGrid's "accusation." Sry mods. Feel free to delete this.

[Dig]

As mentioned earlier he plagerizes too

Not true

http://www.outlawjournalism.com/?p=85

Site of someone who is pissed off that he cannot profit off of AW

I used to listen to him regularly and he plays the victim constantly

Were you listening to him through the backround music of a violin concerto?

is he disinfo I don't know,

I know, he isn't

the guy is a no name,

Then why bother adding to a thread about him?

he does push hopelessness

If reality is defined by you to be hopelessness, then in your world view it may appear as hopelessness.

I wouldn't pay attention to him

Obviously

[iks83]

Funny how a original text with literal translation is demanded for ancient hindu text but not for the bible text. You wont get it for both because there are no translators without an agenda. But it shows the bias of some people.

[Lannister]

Aside from Watt cutting the guy off due to impatience there's nothing wrong with that clip.  The caller is using a weak argument to push his own religious belief system as fact and Alan clearly says he's not going to argue with someone about their belief system.  The caller doesn't want to hear anything contrary to his beliefs and then resorts to crying on youtube about the Evil Alan Watt.

BOOHOO.....

[DAVIDE MTL]

Aside from Watt cutting the guy off due to impatience there's nothing wrong with that clip.  The caller is using a weak argument to push his own religious belief system as fact and Alan clearly says he's not going to argue with someone about their belief system.  The caller doesn't want to hear anything contrary to his beliefs and then resorts to crying on youtube about the Evil Alan Watt.

BOOHOO.....

in this clip (which was a few years back) Watt is off the mark mentioning the sun gods as if to dismiss the possibility that Chris did exist , in the call of May 4 he states roughly when asked what he thinks of Christ

" we don't have much except that someone did exist at that time that caused an awful lot of fuss for the authorities, the biggest evidence for that is in the Talmud, and I'm sure a lot of people are kicking themselves for allowing it to be verified that someone by that name did exist...there's no doubt someone came along at 1 time
and unfortunately the religion he created really was to be an individual, you didn't need priests by the way, up till then every culture ..regardless of the pagan culture...you had to go through priests who were special people, everything is a hierarchy of ...and he came along and told you didn't need to talk to God through a priest..you could talk to God yourself..but he also mentioned something that had never been said before, that was you mattered to God..and that had  never been said, .religions were communal things..not individual things..so he broke a big taboo and said that God can communicate with you  and vice versa on a personal level, and that gave for the first time a single individual's a feeling that they mattered...in those days remember if you were a nobody..you could be killed by any overlord, whatever it was ..a feudal system.. without any repercussions, you were nothing, and suddenly you were something, and affected all the laws even early christianity although it was definitely hijacked by a church which really was an empire,governmental empire, that hijacked it and turned i back to something for the masses,with priests again and all the rest of it, but it still kept the part that individuals had special rights, nothing else had come along to say you had rights, cuz God created you, that was a still a thorn in the sides for an awful long time..rulers that they had to give some show before they executed someone..to view someone that they had a divine right...before that you were simply another type of animal underneath these people, I really do think it was meant for individuals and not for a mass movement..I think all major religions actually except one were really made for  individual progression to a deity  ...something spiritual that comes in little bursts throughout your life...doesn't last very long but in little glimpses...I think it was a spiritual thing for individuals trying to attain and that you had to do it by yourself..unfortunately religion has always been used by leaders,the dominant minority will always  use religion and turn it around for their own purposes and  get you back on your knees basically worshipping or obeying the system rather than their deity"

[Jackson Holly]

JESUS or MITHRA?
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=73880.msg404840#msg404840

I "believe in" the historicity of Jesus ... and I also "believe in"
his being mythologized as the embodiment of many Pagan/Astrologic
beliefs ... and yes, as the embodiment of the "vegetation" cult.

[goforward]

Not true

Site of someone who is pissed off that he cannot profit off of AW

Were you listening to him through the backround music of a violin concerto?

I know, he isn't

Then why bother adding to a thread about him?

If reality is defined by you to be hopelessness, then in your world view it may appear as hopelessness.

Obviously

My main point cutting through the matrix cut and paste Glen Kealey (it's plain to see) and then complains when people give his photo copied spiral bound book away for free. I'm sure he's a nice guy, but I'd take his book list and read the books instead of listening to him. I don't care to get into the personality of radio people I've never met only the info they spread and if they do.

[WakeUpAmerica]

For those interested in actual scholarly debate and not conjecture, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bw1gVAWaRVw
Dr. White is quite a good scholar from what I can tell, I've just stumbled across him on youtube but from what I've seen he really knows what he is talking about and cites legitimate sources, uses non-fallacious logic, and actually utilizes intelligent and reasoned debate tactics.

For those who love to think only "fundies" believe in the fact that Jesus wasn't created out of older myths, this guy would anger a lot of the "fundies" on this forum. He puts forth some of the most well-put arguments against King James Onlyism that I have heard, citing the actual errors and omissions in the 1611 text while saying that no translation is infallible. The fact is that the Word of God was put on the record all those years ago and that is where the truth lies, not in a version authorized by a monarch or any other modern incarnation. The fact that people say KJV is the only Word of God I can't really wrap my head around.

I also might add that I don't appreciate the changes to the thread title, especially because it doesn't reflect the topic AT ALL. He is not "reinforcing the power of the individual to speak directly to God" he is saying JESUS WAS A MYTH STOLEN FROM OTHER MYTHS. Come on mods, why must you foist your opinion onto other peoples'? Can you not make a cohesive argument without twisting the words of others?

[Michal Ptacnik]

(in reaction to the video) ... of course, that counts on the Apostles and writers themselves being historical personages AND if they were, being fishermen and not, say, essene scholars, or even egyptian priests or greek men of learning. And all these groups would probably know Homer, or other myths to "draw from." I would not see their religion as a scam, but as a way to popularise what they percived as wisdom if they were such men, not frauds, not writers of fiction!

I would remind us all that one of the most "mythical" book in the New Testament is the Book of Acts. Just look at Ananias and Saphira! When doubting the historical reality and personage and background of Jesus, why are we not consistent, and don't doubt the fishermanhood of the Apostles or their existence as well? I mean, their profession has DEFINITIVE mythical connotation, for one, this is as if they were listed as cow herder girls (gopis) in the indian cultural area. (fish has astrological connotations, would have for the egyptians and Hellenes, fishing for men, for souls, for people to teach, "to draw people from this world to the world of the real God" for pre Christian gnostics, etc.)

I myself don't have a strong opinion on the historical existence of Jesus, or whether it is Tolkien-esque "God's Myth in action" or a deliberately constructed story. I believe that "bards" did exist in all ages able to "tap" to the timeless Truth. Just see the trubadours and their grail legends and tell me that these men did not have a profound knowledge of things seen and unseen. I believe this is the common source: The Truh, the Timeless Truth of God. And nothing else matters. I believe a faith based solely on a miraculum is a "house built on sand" par excellence. But that's just my opinion, if you are interested. (and I guess most of you are not. But it is here regardless)

[Krateros]

I, for one, not only like to read your opinion on such matters, Michal, but I am also amused by your poetic license and inventiveness which leads to such descriptive words as, say, "fishermanhood" for example.  That was a good one!

[Michal Ptacnik]

Thanks.

I should add that what the Bards that I mentioned did had NOTHING whatsoever in common with the babblings of spiritistic media and chewing ayahuasca, etc. What they instead did was "reading the letter written in their hearts" by God and expounding on it. I am not sure if I can relate the difference, one concerns itself with the absolute center of man, a center-beyond-center, whereas the other is "gazing at the inner stars" of man, the history, the "dead things" (e.g. voices of habits and experience and, yes, external spiritual influence) within man. The first words are indeed "alive" whereas the second are "dead," that is, made by the world of the dead that exists within the human microcosm.

[WakeUpAmerica]

(in reaction to the video) ... of course, that counts on the Apostles and writers themselves being historical personages AND if they were, being fishermen and not, say, essene scholars, or even egyptian priests or greek men of learning. And all these groups would probably know Homer, or other myths to "draw from." I would not see their religion as a scam, but as a way to popularise what they percived as wisdom if they were such men, not frauds, not writers of fiction!

I would remind us all that one of the most "mythical" book in the New Testament is the Book of Acts. Just look at Ananias and Saphira! When doubting the historical reality and personage and background of Jesus, why are we not consistent, and don't doubt the fishermanhood of the Apostles or their existence as well? I mean, their profession has DEFINITIVE mythical connotation, for one, this is as if they were listed as cow herder girls (gopis) in the indian cultural area. (fish has astrological connotations, would have for the egyptians and Hellenes, fishing for men, for souls, for people to teach, "to draw people from this world to the world of the real God" for pre Christian gnostics, etc.)

I myself don't have a strong opinion on the historical existence of Jesus, or whether it is Tolkien-esque "God's Myth in action" or a deliberately constructed story. I believe that "bards" did exist in all ages able to "tap" to the timeless Truth. Just see the trubadours and their grail legends and tell me that these men did not have a profound knowledge of things seen and unseen. I believe this is the common source: The Truh, the Timeless Truth of God. And nothing else matters. I believe a faith based solely on a miraculum is a "house built on sand" par excellence. But that's just my opinion, if you are interested. (and I guess most of you are not. But it is here regardless)

Did you seriously just say they might have been egyptian priests? Also I really think you need to get your timeline straight. I'm not attacking you but your view of history is pretty far from accurate.

Essentially it comes down to this: if you try hard enough, you can syncretize literally anything in order to serve your needs. I've seen the Luciferian I am in contact with do exactly that. Peoples' involvement in secret societies, mystery religions, etc. becomes very evident when they make such a concerted effort to minimize one certain religion's savior by picking and choosing so many connections from stories that all glaringly contradict themselves.

I've even heard people say that Jesus Christ being a carpenter is an allusion to Masonry. If you really want to, and make sure to ignore logic, history, and the entire story, you can totally make this argument. However, if you are scholarly and actually look at REAL texts and not second hand joke interpretations like Acharya S. it becomes very clear that, regardless of the reality or non-reality of Jesus Christ's historical existence it is not just a rehashing of old myths. Explain to me why monotheistic Jews would want to adopt Paganism, the thing they so reviled? You realize that the pagan crap came along way after the Bible was written and the events took place, right?

If you watch the whole video (and the other part) you will see the atheist object to having his book cited in a debate! And it was on the exact subject! That's how you know this is a factually and intellectually bankrupt position.

It's good to hear that you believe in some God, whatever it may be. Atheists are the most arrogant and presumptive people on Earth.