Design a site like this with
Get started

Further Atheistic Religious Fanaticism

Pexels / cottonbro

This article may appear to be one of those “atheists are nasty to me so I will pay them back” things, but if you’ll stay with me on this trail, you’ll see where it leads. (Edited for wording 1 September 2022.)

After all these years dealing with misotheists, I should no longer be amazed at their vitriol and bigotry. It seems to be increasing. (It may be a sign of the Last Days, but I will not delve into eschatology this time.) Many professing atheists (Romans 1:18-23) claim to believe in freedoms of speech, expression, and thought, but they seek out and ridicule Christians for doing those very things.

They frequently try to put us on the defensive by dodging what we discuss, introducing new subjects, ignoring replies, more dodging, and attempting to intimidate. They get furious — furious, I tell you — when we don’t let them manipulate us and play “Gotcha!” games.

If you study on it, you may also notice that Christians and biblical creationists are not “allowed” to argue from our own worldview. Those atheists insist that we engage on their terms and accept atheistic naturalism, but they call it “neutral ground” or some such. Christian, if you agree to “leave the Bible out of it”, you’ve just agreed with the atheist that God’s Word is incorrect when it discusses them and their rebellious condition! There is no neutral ground. You savvy that, Pilgrim?

There have been times where I have read comments such as this one: “My atheism is a side effect of being intelligent, rational, logical, and basing my conclusions on evidence.” However, they show an extreme lack of knowledge of science, evolution, logic, and Christianity. Then they make statements about God, the Bible, Christianity, Christians, biblical creationists, etc. Such remarks are simply prejudicial conjecture, indicating that those making them are not interested in serious discussions.

The one I quoted above has frequently stated that he already knows that the Bible, creation science, and other things presented by Christians are “wrong” and will not read them or watch the videos. This is being informed? No. I think that kind of arrogance is a cover for cowardice.

Indeed, he even reacted to a post and said that I don’t “understand what a theory is in science.” Boskus, the Page owner, humiliated himself yet again because he not only attributed the article to me, but if he had read it, he would have learned that it was written by a scientist. Scientists know what a theory is in science, if I recollect rightly.

Over and over, we get proven right by the atheistic goat rodeo denizens who do not display original thought, and especially their lack of critical thinking. F’rinstance, see how alleged Bible contradictions are shredded. Objections to Christianity and especially biblical creation are contumeliously thrown about by those with Atheism Spectrum Disorder, but for those of us with experience, we read and hear the same old nonsense. Mr. Bentley has a short, humorous article on the responses of atheists that I suggest you read.

My previous article on this weblog was a retooled post from Fakebook that examined alleged logic and morality from certain misotheists. It prompted reactions. One was built on complete dishonesty, including putting words in my mouth. I saw that he was just another angry bigot who was justifying his rebellion against Almighty God, and not worth my time. (I reckon he sent about ten visits here with his link.) If you go there, note that he doesn’t exactly enforce the comments policy for his sycophants.

A second reaction was written by an acolyte of the first writer. His comments on this weblog were the same old boilerplate rhetoric. When I stopped responding and allowing his disingenuous comments, he wrote his own post. I was a mite irked when I gave one reply:

To show the brilliance of The Mighty Atheist™, you begin with an ad hominem, using cowboy as a pejorative. This is followed by a hasty generalization about my knowledge of atheists based on just one article. I’ve got some bad news for you, Sunshine, I’ve been writing about atheists, theology, and other things for somewhere around fifteen years. That means I won’t fall for tricks. So, have fun with your argument from silence and other logical fallacies in your vindictive, petty post. Mayhaps when your frontal lobes develop and you can have a rational discussion, I’ll let you comment on my posts again, mmmkay?

I didn’t bother to read any responses.

There are a couple of things I’ve said on other occasions: The days of “You believe, I don’t, let’s turn on the game and watch it,” are long gone. Also, since evolution is foundational to the religion of atheism, they really get on the prod when fish-to-fool evolution is doubted. Things can be going well between a misotheist and a Christian, but express evidence against evolution and supporting creation (especially the Genesis Flood), and they’re ready to slap leather.

I know this trail is a mite long, but the end is in sight.

The secular science industry is dominated by atheists. Although the adored peer review process is saturated with difficulties and some even want it scrapped, they stay with it. A spell back, someone used a vile word and secularists rode into town and shot up the saloon. It began with a “c”. Yep, someone said “Creator“, and it wasn’t even meant in reference to the real Creator that we will all stand before in Judgment.

I mentioned earlier about a post that was written by a scientist. That atheist discussed earlier was angry because the title was, “Many Scientists Believe Scientific Theories Religiously.” It’s true. While they claim to believe things because of evidence, there is no empirical support for many of those things. Just-So stories (here’s a passel of them for example), inferences, bad science, fraud — sure. We get a prairie-schooner full of that. But nothing helpful.

Also, atheists and evolutionists hate presuppositional apologetics, but they are hardcore presuppositionalists themselves! Christians are to presuppose the truth of the Bible, but atheists and Darwin’s disciples presuppose evolution, deep time, that everything came from nothing, and materialism. There is precious little empirical evidence, and it is dragged down by the stones of all of those assumptions.

A post I saw this morning brought all these things together for me. There is a firefight among materialists about the Webb telescope and the Big Bang. Essentially, “Liar! I never said what you said I said!” Meanwhile, accusations against Eric Lerner were shallow, since he has rejected the Big Bang for decades. (His own belief has no evidence, however.) This link is to a secular article that affirms the “facts” of the Big Bang, but I present it here with a coarse wording warning.

All of this is to say that misotheists and evolutionists fiercely guard their origins myth, and despise freedoms of speech, expression, and thought. It is not about evidence, because they really don’t have any! It is a spiritual problem. God exists, they know it, but suppress the truth. Many hate his followers, like this sidewinder:

This example of atheist “morality” is posted under Federal Fair Use provisions for educational purposes

Many feral atheists have repented and become Christians. There are several in the biblical creation science organizations. Sin affects all areas of one’s thinking, and with salvation and the entrance of God’s Word comes light.

By Cowboy Bob Sorensen

The most important thing is that Jesus Christ is the Lord of my life. I am a biblical ("young earth") creationist that upholds the truth, inerrancy, and authority of the Bible. Science is fascinating and fun, and theology is a growth process. I will not lay claim to Calvinist or Arminian, and have actually been hated for that. Sometimes I don't feel like writing something serious or on this subject. I'm not as cool as the picture indicates.


  1. “Those atheists insist that we engage on their terms and accept atheistic naturalism”

    This kind of thing happens all the time. And we Christians just accept that. I am writing a book, that deals with another aspect of just accepting their terms without realizing it. You state you are a “young earth creationist.” No, you are NOT! Here is part of a long discussion. The rest of the discussion really nails it down! I think you will get the point.

    “Recently I became cognizant of the time-honored fallacy concerning the meaning and misuse of the words old and young by Evolutionists and their fellow believers, the OEC. They continue to lead us astray, by advocating something 6,000 years old, is in reality very young. George Lujack states:

    You and other Young Earth Creationists make the error of assuming the earth and universe are young, 6,000 years old.

    I think most everyone would agree, anything 1,000 years old or older (most certainly 6,000 years.), is old indeed, ancient in fact, be it an artifact or relic, Stone Age structure, coin, civilization, or a redwood tree. Sadly, we have been seduced by Evolutionary notions of “deep time,” pronouncements of billions of years, etc. By contrast, 6,000 years, which denotes antiquity, is supposed to represent a minuscule period. However, a 6,000-year-old Earth cannot in any way or fashion, be considered young! I believe in an old Earth, ours, which has been around for an exceedingly long time, 6,000 – 7,000 years. Anything that old is not new or young.

    But OEC would say that compared to the billions of years of Earth’s history, wouldn’t a mere 6,000 years be a very young Earth? It would be if you first swallowed the lie of billions of years. You cannot compare imaginary billions of years of Evolutionary history with actual history. Thus, 6,000 years would be ancient, and retain the meaning as Webster defined it: “Having lived or existed for a long time … not new.”


    1. You are playing semantics games and are off the topic of this article. By the way, my own semantics is that I am a biblical creationist because the Bible teaches a young earth and evidence supports it.


      1. I am sorry you believe I am off topic. You state:

        “If you study on it, you may also notice that Christians and biblical creationists are not “allowed” to argue from our own worldview. Those atheists insist that we engage on their terms and accept atheistic naturalism, but they call it “neutral ground” or some such. Christian, if you agree to “leave the Bible out of it”, you’ve just agreed with the atheist that God’s Word is incorrect when it discusses them and their rebellious condition! There is no neutral ground.”

        I am responding directly to this statement. I am sure you have misunderstood my comment. Let me see if I can clarify that. Here is a bit more of that discussion:

        “Christians who believe God created the Earth about 6,000 years ago are contemptuously called YEC by both Evolutionists and OEC. However, YEC is a misnomer, a term as inaccurate as it is misleading. For the Earth is not young but extremely old, 6,000 years or so. As it conveys in Scripture, God created all things in six literal days, about 6,000 years ago. As this is the truth I embrace, I identify myself as an ACS believer (Ancient Creation Scripturalist). Webster defines Scripturalist as: “One who derives his religious beliefs and general philosophy of life from a body of scripture teaching a single harmonious system of doctrine.”

        Christians who debate Evolutionists and OEC on the age of the Earth are using a vernacular defined by Evolutionists. In so doing they unwittingly admit to Evolutionism’s assumptions and premises (as they frame debates, old vs young).

        “One of the most basic rules of debate is to build subtle assumptions into your statements and arguments that lead your opponent to accept certain premises that benefit your position.” Evolutionists are experts at cajoling us who are ACS into one big trap. Before addressing their claims, we need to “call them out” on their loaded language and built-in assumptions. We need to wisely define the terms and examine their claims to ensure the Evolutionists/OEC conform to an acceptable standard. Failing to do so will continue to bolster their egregious errors and misunderstandings.

        It is precisely this Evolutionary ploy that allows the OEC to insert billions of years to buttress their origins argument.”

        I am not playing semantics games, and neither are evolutionists.


        1. You zero in on a section with 107 words and ignore the other 1,113. Not interested in your excuses and off-topic word salad. I am a biblical creationist because Scripture teaches a young earth, and science (ignoring the tendentious interpretations of secularists and churchian compromisers) have a passel of evidence for the same.


          1. Brother, I am not your enemy nor antagonist. But it seems you think I am. We are on the same side. We are on the same page concerning the age of the earth (about 6,000 years old), the six days of creation were literal 24-hour days, etc. I spend the whole first chapter in my book “Reindeer Don’t Fly: Exploring the Evidence-Lacking Realm of Evolutionary Philosophy” defending this! And the rest of my 400 page book showing there is no evidence, empirical or otherwise, by squashing and annihilating the belief in evolutionism.

            No, brother, I did not ignore the other 1,113 words. Here is another, out of other portions that ties in with it.

            “Also, atheists and evolutionists hate presuppositional apologetics, but they are hardcore presuppositionalists themselves! Christians are to presuppose the truth of the Bible, but atheists and Darwin’s disciples presuppose evolution, deep time, that everything came from nothing, and materialism. There is precious little empirical evidence, and it is dragged down by the stones of all of those assumptions.”

            Yeah, atheists are hardcore presuppositionalists. And I was merely pointing out, most Christians when dealing with this issue, the age of the earth, buy into their presuppositions, such as, “deep time,” which is a great hindrance when we discuss or debate this with evolutionists.

            If you still can’t understand my point, I will drop this.

            One more thing. I am glad you take a stand for the Scriptures and the six-day creation. Stand firm in that belief.


  2. Bob I have been encouraged how you persevered through all these years of these atheists fanatics attacking you. Please know that there are Christians who are encouraged to stand for Him


  3. Hi y’all. Sorry to butt in but can in say something possibly controversial… at least for a Christian to say? As a Christian for 40yrs now, I used to be Very committed to a 6-10 thousand year earth and universe (I stretched it to 10000 to give a little wiggle room just in case my understanding of scripture was off… how ‘accomodating’ I was, right? 😉 ). And I was Very committed to a literal, six 24hr “Days” of creation. I was one of “those” guys who would argue and defend and go into great depths how “those guys” were wrong and I was “right” because God’s Word said it. At 56… I realize I don’t really care how old the earth/universe is. The whole micro vs macro evolution arguments hold very little sway on my Faith or my relationship To or With God. I think a lot of times… we do these types of things not because we are defending the Faith or the Gospel… neither of which have anything to do with the age of the universe or evolutionary/non-evolutionary biology… we do these types of things, argue and “debate” with ‘atheists’ or as the post labeled them as “misotheists” (ie.God Haters… although how can they Hate what they don’t believe to exist?)… we do these things to demonstrate to them (and perhaps to ouselves(?) that we arent “foolish” and our Gospel isnt “fooliahness”. Remember what Paul said in 1 cor… it’s the “foolishness” of preaching that Saves… not the wisdom of men or clever arguments. The danger of arguing with people about the age of the earth and the “impossibility” of evolution of the “necessity” of an Intelligent Designer… is that we Fail to proclaim the Gospel and refuse to tell people about Jesus Himself. I don’t care how old the earth or the universe is. And attacking people who don’t believe you as “God haters” simply because they don’t believe… is NOT sharing the love and life and redemption of Jesus. It’s just more “self justification” on why you don’t want to feel foolish for believing a gospel that even Paul said was foolishness to believe to those who don’t. Preach Christ and Him crucified… the Holy Spirit will “convince and convict” the ones whose hearts and minds are open and ready to receive. Getting off my soap box now. -barabbas


    1. If you want them, there are plenty of articles about “never mind the dates, evolution, etc., just preach the gospel.” Short form: Although those are not salvation issues, they are extremely important because the gospel message is undermined and the authority of Scripture is waved off.


          1. So forat… no need to get adversarial. We are brothers in Christ with a difference of opinion. We can still afford each other the Grace and respect we both deserve. But no. I wouldn’t say you’re wasting “your” time. You’re wasting His time and your efforts. Preach the Gospel. God can be trusted with the rest. Thx for responding. Have a great day.


          2. So, once again, you told me that what I’m doing is unimportant, as are all the other biblical creationists, “brother in Christ”, then you added a self-righteous remark. Do not want.


          3. You just told me again that what I’m doing is irrelevant, and so is the work of biblical creationists. After all, you have your opinion, don’t need to learn anything — especially that you’re very wrong. Nice touch with the ignorant but sanctimonious sign-off. Do not want.


          4. “But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.”-Titus 3:9‭-‬11 ESV
            That was your two admonitions. Now this, if could hear it, is the sound of me dusting my shoes off and taking leave of the conversation. I hope you realisse one day that I was attempting to help you out. Cheers. -barabbas


          5. Now I’m a fool. Great “Christian” attitude you have there. Now you’re adding Scripture twisting and proof-texting to your list of crimes, still being sanctimonious. Do not ever come back.


        1. Listen, I have a life, and didn’t get around to approving your comment, “brother in Christ.” I can’t sit around waiting for comments when I have to be wasting my time writing about the importance of biblical creation science and the young earth so people can dismiss them as irrelevant.


  4. “The days of ‘You believe, I don’t, let’s turn on the game and watch it’ are long gone.” Sadly, for many people this is true. The words, “I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree,” enrage some people. I am blessed to have cousins who adamantly disagree with me on some major issues, and we all know it. We still get together and have fun, talking about other things. I pray for them daily, and if and when they ever come to me with questions, I’ll be happy to answer them. Meanwhile, since their minds are closed at the moment (and God alone can open them), they’re in His hands.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: