(Romans 1:18-32 NIV) The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, {19} since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
{24} Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. {25} They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen. {26} Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. {27} In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. {28} Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
A comment at the outset
We face difficult times. Massachusetts, California, Oregon, and New York are “pressing the legal envelope” and marrying same-sex individuals against state and federal laws. Christians aren’t surprised, because 2-4% of our country (it seems) has proven what Romans 1 describes: that people who deny the truth about God are going their sinful ways and homosexuality and lesbianism is the natural result. The Supreme Court ruled that it will not address the issue, clearing the way for many of our states to continue down this path.
John McArthur makes the following comment, which is in complete agreement with many other religious leaders’ words: “In the United States and many other western countries it is not uncommon for homosexual males to have 300 partners a year. Even when relationships are on a friendly basis, the most bizarre acts imaginable are committed, and mutilation is common. In his biography (Where Death Delights, by Marshall Houts [New York: Coward-McCann, 1967]), the New York City forensic expert Dr. Milton Helpern, who makes no claim of being a Christian and avoids making moral judgments about homosexuality, nevertheless comments that, after having performed thousands of autopsies, he would warn anyone who chooses a homosexual lifestyle to be prepared for the consequences: “When we see … brutal, multiple wound cases in a single victim … we just automatically assume that we’re dealing with a homosexual victim and a homosexual attacker.… I don’t know why it is so, but it seems that the violent explosions of jealousy among homosexuals far exceed those of the jealousy of a man for a woman, or a woman for a man. The pent-up charges and energy of the homosexual relationship simply cannot be contained. When the explosive point is reached, the result is brutally violent.… But this is the ‘normal’ pattern of these homosexual attacks, the multiple stabbings, the multiple senseless beatings that obviously must continue long after the victim dies” (pp. 269-70).
A San Francisco coroner estimated that ten percent of his city’s homicides were probably related to sado-masochistic sex among homosexuals (cf. Bob Greene, “Society’s Been Given Far Too Much Rope,” the Chicago Tribune [19 March 1981], sec. 2, p. 1). Yet in spite of such impartial and damning evidence, many people, including a large number of psychologists and other social professionals, persist in maintaining there is no scientific proof that homosexuality is abnormal or harmful to society. Some even assert that attempts to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals are ethically questionable. The city government of San Francisco has even conducted workshops to teach homosexuals how to avoid serious bodily harm while engaging in sado-masochistic sex—although by definition, both sadism and masochism are destructive! The very purpose of both deviations is to inflict pain and harm, sadism on others and masochism on oneself. Many mass murderers seem to be homosexuals.
Unimaginably, many church denominations in the United States and elsewhere have ordained homosexuals to the ministry and even established special congregations for homosexuals. One denominational group claims that homosexuality is no more abnormal than left-handedness.
Instead of trying to help their children become free of sexual deviation, many parents of homosexuals have banded together to defend their children and to coerce society, government, and churches to recognize and accept homosexuality as normal. In many cases, religions that hold homosexuality to be a sin are blamed for the tragic results that homosexuals bring on themselves and on their families and friends. Evangelical Christianity in particular is often made the culprit and is accused of persecuting innocent people who cannot help being what they are.
But in both testaments God’s Word condemns homosexuality in the strongest of terms. Under the Old Covenant it was punishable by death. Paul declares unequivocally that, although homosexuality can be forgiven and cleansed just as any other sin, no unrepentant homosexual will enter heaven, just as will no unrepentant fornicator, idolater, adulterer, effeminate person, thief, covetous person, drunkard, reviler, or swindler (1 Cor. 6:9-11; cf. Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:3-5; 1 Tim. 1:9-10; Jude 7).
As a result, it is felt that this study is important at this time. It shows much of what serves as a foundation to many of these lifestyle decisions. Certainly, those “who deny the truth about God” would fit into categories similar to that of the atheist.
Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God. – Heywood Broun, Gaily the Troubadour, Arthur Guiterman, 1936 .
God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. – J.B. Phillips in For This Day
On August 7, 1961 the world heard the cynicism of Atheistic philosophy clearly defined. On that memorable day Soviet cosmonauts orbited our planet and safely returned. Later one was recounting his feat at the 1962 World’s Fair.
An interview on May 7, 1962 recorded him saying: “Some say God is living there [in space]. I was looking around very attentively. But I did not see anyone there. I did not detect angels or gods … I don’t believe in God. I believe in man, his strength, his possibilities, and his reason.” [Lawrence Richards, It Couldn’t Just Happen, Ft. Worth: Sweet Pub., 1987, p. 15].
The communistic press quickly picked up on his remarks and soon there appeared cartoons depicting space travellers cynically searching for God in outer space. The unspoken message was clear – it is absurd to believe in a Supreme Being of the Bible called Jehovah God!
But Titov’s challenge was not new. In Psalm 42:3, 10 the existence, care, and provision of Jehovah God were questioned with a sarcastic pitch:
(Psalms 42:3 NIV) My tears have been my food day and night, while men say to me all day long, “Where is your God?”
(Psalms 42:10 NIV) My bones suffer mortal agony as my foes taunt me, saying to me all day long, “Where is your God?”
In 2 Chronicles 32:10‑16 we find blatant atheism:
(2 Chronicles 32:10-16 NIV) “This is what Sennacherib king of Assyria says: On what are you basing your confidence, that you remain in Jerusalem under siege? {11} When Hezekiah says, ‘The LORD our God will save us from the hand of the king of Assyria,’ he is misleading you, to let you die of hunger and thirst. {12} Did not Hezekiah himself remove this god’s high places and altars, saying to Judah and Jerusalem, ‘You must worship before one altar and burn sacrifices on it’? {13} “Do you not know what I and my fathers have done to all the peoples of the other lands? Were the gods of those nations ever able to deliver their land from my hand? {14} Who of all the gods of these nations that my fathers destroyed has been able to save his people from me? How then can your god deliver you from my hand? {15} Now do not let Hezekiah deceive you and mislead you like this. Do not believe him, for no god of any nation or kingdom has been able to deliver his people from my hand or the hand of my fathers. How much less will your god deliver you from my hand!” {16} Sennacherib’s officers spoke further against the LORD God and against his servant Hezekiah.
God’s existence, care, provision, and leadership are challenged with Assyrian sarcasm (v. 15):
(2 Chronicles 32:15 NIV) Now do not let Hezekiah deceive you and mislead you like this. Do not believe him, for no god of any nation or kingdom has been able to deliver his people from my hand or the hand of my fathers. How much less will your god deliver you from my hand!”
We could easily add to this list. Throughout history man has heard the clamor of atheistic proponents. What used to be shrugged off as ignorance about the Almighty has now become the standard of “reason” for the intelligentsia of modern opinion!
Atheism offers an unparalleled challenge in our present day. Today’s children are impressed with atheistic philosophy in almost every spectrum in life. From Saturday morning cartoons to “religious” programs of self‑help the subtle forces of Atheism are found. Too many have ignored this challenge.
We need to consider Atheism and reckon its danger to society’s existence (cf Ps 33:12; Pr 14:34):
(Psalms 33:12 NIV) Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people he chose for his inheritance.
(Proverbs 14:34 NIV) Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.
What can be said about Atheism? Does God really exist or is He only a “psychological necessity”?
In this series we will examine Atheism and expose its glaring inconsistencies, unanswerable faults, and gross inaccuracies.
Description of Atheism: [1]
“Atheism is not a religion in the sense that Christianity, Islam, and Judaism are. Conventional religions usually include a belief in the nature of deity, other religious beliefs, a moral code, religious rituals and sacraments, and a membership in a religious community. Rather, an Atheist’s belief system about a supreme being is confined to one factor: the existence or non-existence of a deity. He or she will have a personal moral code. However, it would generally be derived from purely secular considerations, and will be unrelated to any religious texts.”
Most Atheists have analyzed the available material evidence for the existence of one or more deities (gods and/or goddesses) and have concluded that there is no real evidence of the existence of gods or goddesses. They believe that the universe, Earth and its life probably evolved by perfectly natural processes. They see no evidence of intervention by a supernatural entity. They generally feel that ethical and moral systems governing human behavior can be developed without reference to any code of behavior of allegedly divine origin. Other Atheists are people who have simply never been exposed to belief in a deity or deities and therefore have no belief in them.
In ancient Greece, the term was used to refer to people who did not believe in the official pagan religion; i.e. unbelievers. “Atheism is derived from the Greek, atheos, and means simply ‘away from the belief in a god or gods.’ ” [2]
In ancient Rome, Christians were often called Atheists because they did not believe in the pantheon of Roman gods and goddesses. Until the word Agnosticism came into general usage during the 19th century, people we now call Agnostics were commonly lumped together with Atheists.
“Atheist” according to most modern dictionaries:
Most dictionaries define an “Atheist” as a person who either passively believes that no God exists, and/or who actively asserts this belief. For example:
| Webster’s New World Dictionary®, Third College Edition defines an Atheist as “a person who believes that there is no God.” This definition implies that Atheists have investigated proofs and for the existence and non-existence of God, and have decided that no God exists or that the probability of one existing is phenomenally small. It seems to include a “closet” Atheist: one who believes that there is no God but does not assert this belief to others. This definition would seem to imply that a person who believes in the existence of a Goddess, but not a God, is also an Atheist. This definition will probably not satisfy many Goddess worshipers. Webster Dictionary, 1913 had a more inclusive definition that includes non-male deities: “One who disbelieves or denies the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.” So did Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: “One who disbelieves the existence of a God, or Supreme intelligent Being.“ | ||||
| Websters Collegiate® Dictionary defines an Atheist as “one who denies the existence of God.” This is a particularly vague definition, because it does not define which God is being referred to. If Websters means the Christian God, then it would seem to imply that anyone who does not believe in the Trinity is an Atheist — including Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, Sikhs, and Atheists. The word “denies” would seem to imply that the individual actively promotes their belief. | ||||
Other definitions:
|
How This Deadly Challenge Arose
Atheism has never lacked a spokesman. Even in Eden the care, provision, and protection of God were questioned (Gen. 3:1):
(Genesis 3:1 NIV) Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
From that beginning Satan effectively used a number of spokesmen, movements, and groups to propel the Atheistic philosophy. A survey of history provides an interesting discovery as to how Satan manipulated forces to achieve the evil, atheistic end. Consider some of the most prominent of these points.
First, begin with Galileo, a 16th century mathematician, physicist, and astronomer. He dared suggest that Earth was not the center of the solar system, just a part of it. Such was considered blasphemy that cast questions upon God’s creation. The Inquisition forced him to recant but his theory did not die. Some began to see his theory as evidence for a determined, mechanical Universe. Such a Universe could not possibly have a caring, protective God overlooking it. Rejoicing was prompted because “scientific” grounds justified a rejection of Deity could stand.
Second, the character of Charles Darwin presents an interesting study in the development of Atheistic philosophy. His theory of man’s origin shook the bedrock of Christian Faith. But Darwin’s hypothesis was only a logical step of a mechanical world‑view – if the Universe was not superintended by Deity, but working in a mechanical manner, why not man?
Thus arose “grounds” upon which a mechanistic view of man could be argued. Man/Woman were seen to have arrived upon earth through natural causes. The cynical rejected God believing that there was not the slightest suggestion of the Supernatural about man’s origin.
Atheism thus appealed to “scientific evidence” to support its rejection of Deity. Atheism had “proved” there was no God by twisting Galileo’s theory and by accepting the unacceptable theory of evolution.
Third, another to figure in Satan’s Atheistic strategy was Karl Marx.[3] Here was a bitter enemy of religion. His life is a sad story of how rejection of Deity leads only to compounded sorrow. Marx’s supreme goal in life was to destroy the influence of religion. He saw Darwin’s theory as the means by which he could eliminate religion and establish the long sought “classless” society.
The fourth point that surfaces as atheistic philosophy is considered is the field of psychology. Sigmond Freud used a biased view of religion as a basis of his theories that would further destroy the credibility of religion. Freud saw religion as the culprit in all deviant behavior. He saw all compulsions rooted in religion, repressive morals. He saw ethics as dangerous hindrance to man’s true self. He branded the beliefs of the Church as the “future of an illusion”, the title of one of his books. Recent research has revealed the corruption of Freud.
Today the honest student realizes that Freud’s theories were presented to accommodate the psychologist’s immorality and rejection of God. But Freud had planted the seed that Atheism needed. Psychologists following him propagated Freud’s atheistic principles. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs suggested that man has the ability of “self‑actualization” within himself. Thus, Maslow removed the need for God in life. B.F. Skinner’s writings and theories further removed God from man and reduced man to the level of a mere animal.
Throughout psychology there was a philosophy that man was a pawn to environment. Thus was removed from man any accountability for choices made. After all who could be accountable for “S/he was the product of the environment!”
God was effectively erased. Man’s accountability was denied. In the end, it was “society” that was to blame and the only way to correct the wrong was for the government to legislate. Correction through repentance because of a belief in God was scoffed.
The idea that man was personally accountable was regarded as ludicrous. Thus guilt was removed from the person and placed upon society. The absence of a righteous Deity was regarded as an outdated myth. These influences of the radical psychologists persist even in our modern times.
They become deeply ingrained and accepted as truth. No one dares counter their teachings. Thus Satan has effectively manipulated a denial of God’s right to command behavior and man’s obligation to obey.
Fifth, the writers of the 1800’s Romanticism sped Atheism’s advance. Names as Lord Byron, P.B. Shelly, Wordsworth, Coleridge, etc., brought to the public literature which glorified the Bohemian lifestyle, attacked religion, glorified the myth of an attainable perfection for humanity, and claimed that happiness was possible only for those strong enough to wrest happiness for himself. The cynicism of life that these authors reflected infected society with hopelessness and fueled the Atheistic philosophy.
Sixth, Satan’s manipulation of philosophers is amazing. Among the many stands one of inestimable influence ‑ Frederich Nietzsche. He was a German who hinged the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. His writings were widely read and respected. Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin were influenced by Nietzsche.[4]
Literary authors fell under his influence. It was Nietzsche’s philosophy that led to the “God Is Dead!” movement in the twentieth century. It was Nietzsche’s influence that made “orthodoxy” wrong. He claimed that an objective right and wrong were tenets held by ignorant fools.
Nietzsche was honest about the ramifications of his philosophical thoughts. He looked at earthly life where God was missing and saw an agonizing picture. Those following him would live in a world that had no Mind behind existence; no transcending Voice giving counsel; no light at the end of life giving hope. Nietzsche’s philosophy led to an abject loneliness of existence on a planet that had no future!
Nietzsche’s insight was admirable. He saw a world that had “killed” God. He suggested that since God had been killed then the twentieth century would be marked by two dire facts: It would be the bloodiest century in man’s civilization. And, it would be marked by universal madness.
One only has to read daily media reports to see he was correct. Without God, man has nothing but tragedy!
Satan uses these factors masterfully and brought about the current crisis in our day. Notice today’s society as bearing the bitter fruits of these factors:
(1) Nietzsche considered the Beatitudes as damning in life. To him they only emphasized weakness. A society ruled by Beatitudes would be a society of “losers”. Hence he urged the strong to persevere, dominate, and crush.
(2) Moral law has been abandoned. If the universe and man are products of determinism, and there is no God superintending, it is absurd to claim absolute right/wrong. Our modern society is lawless. Absolute morality is rejected in favor of situationalism. Our youth have been educated in a civilization that does not enjoin moral law or educate in moral knowledge!
(3) Since man is the product of Evolution, s/he is not accountable for even the most heinous crimes.
The Folly Of The Challenge Exposed
A simple principle exposes Atheism as a foolish philosophy – Error is always contradictory. Such is true with Atheism. It is a philosophy riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions. Yet those who espouse its tenets fail to see this point.
This series will focus upon this folly. Each article will explore a facet of Atheistic philosophy and demonstrate its inconsistency and error. At the same time it will be shown that belief in God is not only creditable but is the only reasonable option.
Atheism is a philosophy that is void of all significance and is filled with self‑contradictions. Whenever we are aware of these glaring errors, the challenge of Atheism will be lessened.
Concluding Observations
Many can still recall the events of Christmas Day 1968. On that day three other “space travellers” would offer an observation regarding Deity. Three Americans were the first humans to travel around the “dark” side of the Moon. Having fired their rockets they were homebound on Apollo 8.
They saw the Earth as no human eyes ever had. The dramatic portrait has appeared numerous times since and no living human has not seen Earth as Apollo 8 saw it coming from behind the Moon. Earth rose over the Moon’s horizon, draped in a beautiful mixture of blue and white. It was bordered by the glistening light of the Sun against the void of black space.
At this awe‑inspiring moment, the first words heard, from the crew who had gone where no other humans had gone, “In the beginning God …” Their conclusion was quite different than Major Titov’s!
What shall modern man do with Atheism’s challenge? Let us follow King Hezekiah. When he was confronted with the Assyrian cynicism he trusted in the Almighty for vindication (2 Kings 19:14):
(2 Kings 19:14 NIV) Hezekiah received the letter from the messengers and read it. Then he went up to the temple of the LORD and spread it out before the LORD.
His faith did not waver. His resolve was not weakened. He rested confidently knowing that God would be vindicated (cf 2 Ki 19:22, 28, 34‑35; 2 Chron 32:21):
(2 Kings 19:22 NIV) Who is it you have insulted and blasphemed? Against whom have you raised your voice and lifted your eyes in pride? Against the Holy One of Israel!
(2 Kings 19:28 NIV) Because you rage against me and your insolence has reached my ears, I will put my hook in your nose and my bit in your mouth, and I will make you return by the way you came.’
(2 Kings 19:34-35 NIV) I will defend this city and save it, for my sake and for the sake of David my servant.” {35} That night the angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning–there were all the dead bodies!
(2 Chronicles 32:21 NIV) And the LORD sent an angel, who annihilated all the fighting men and the leaders and officers in the camp of the Assyrian king. So he withdrew to his own land in disgrace. And when he went into the temple of his god, some of his sons cut him down with the sword.
Tragic consequences have historically fallen upon all who choose to ignore the contradictions of Atheism. NO matter how loudly Atheism challenges Jehovah God, the philosophy can never resolve the dilemma of a world without God!
Numbers of Atheists
Estimates of the numbers of Atheists are hopelessly inaccurate:
According to the 2001 World Almanac, Atheists number:
|
|||||||
| American Atheists claim that almost 30 million Americans are Atheists. | |||||||
| According to the 1991 Canadian Census, there are only 13,515 Atheists in Canada. However, this number cannot be an accurate value. Many Atheists probably identified themselves to the census taker as Humanists, Free thinkers, Unitarian Universalists, Ethical Culturalists, persons of no religion, etc. | |||||||
| The Graduate Center of the City University of New York conducted a massive interview of over 50,000 adults. They estimate that 902,000 (0.4%) of Americans identify themselves as Atheists. The number of Atheists exceeds the number of followers of all of the organized religions, except for Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism. If one were to count the number of Agnostics among the Humanists, Unitarian Universalists, and those who refused to answer the pollster, they would probably outnumber all of the organized religions in the country, except for Christianity and perhaps Judaism. | |||||||
| A Canadian Angus-Reid poll taken in the mid-1990’s found that about 14% of Canadians are Atheists; that would total over 4 million Atheists, circa 2002. The pollsters found out, apparently to their embarrassment, that Atheists formed the largest single religious category of Canadians. So they split the group into two sub-classifications: real Atheists, and Atheists who attend religious services. This made certain that a Christian classification became the largest. |
A new, tongue-in-cheek, name for Atheists:
Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell of California decided to create a new word for “Atheists,” in order to encourage them to come out of the closet in spite of the heavy prejudice against them. Taking a cue from homosexuals and their embracing of the term “gay,” Geisert and Futrell suggest that “bright” become a synonym for “Atheist.” Richard Dawkins wrote in The Guardian: “People reluctant to use the word atheist might be happy to come out as bright.” [6]
Brezhnev’s Widow
As Vice President, George H. W. Bush represented the U.S. at the funeral of former Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. Bush was deeply moved by a silent protest carried out by Brezhnev’s widow. She stood motionless by the coffin until seconds before it was closed. Then, just as the soldiers touched the lid, Brezhnev’s wife performed an act of great courage and hope, a gesture that must surely rank as one of the most profound acts of civil disobedience ever committed: She reached down and made the sign of the cross on her husband’s chest. There in the citadel of secular, atheistic power, the wife of the man who had run it all hoped that her husband was wrong. She hoped that there was another life, and that that life was best represented by Jesus who died on the cross, and that the same Jesus might yet have mercy on her husband. — Gary Thomas, in C.T., October 3, 1994, p. 26
Stalin’s Daughter
Some years ago, when the news broke out that Joseph Stalin’s daughter had defected from Communism and Russia, many people were startled. Her statement given to reporters who met her plane in New York, told why she defected: “I found it impossible to exist without God in one’s heart. I came to that conclusion myself, without anybody’s help or preaching. That was a great change because since that moment the main dogmas of Communism lost their significance for me. I have come here to seek the self-expression that has been denied me for so long in Russia.”
That woman’s struggle was a terrible one. To leave Russia, she had to leave two children in Moscow and realize that it would be, as she said, “Impossible to go back.”
Pascal said there is within every person a “God-shaped vacuum.” He’s right. Historians Will and Ariel Durant observed in their summery volume, The Lessons of History, that There never has been a significant example of morality apart from belief in God.” — Morning Glory, 2-5-94
Madman
Have you not heard of the madman who lit a lamp in the bright morning and went to the marketplace crying ceaselessly, “I seek God! I seek God!” There were many among those standing there who didn’t believe in God so he made them laugh.
“Is God lost?” one of them said. “Has he gone astray like a child?” said another. “Or is he hiding? Has he gone on board ship and emigrated?” So they laughed and shouted to one another.
The man sprang into their midst and looked daggers at them. “Where is God?” he cried. “I will tell you. We have killed him–you and I We are all his killers! But how have we done this? How could we swallow up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the horizon? What will we do as the earth is set loose from its sun?” – Friedrich Nietzsche, 1889
Nietzsche’s point was not that God does not exist, but that God has become irrelevant. Men and women may assert that God exists or that He does not, but it makes little difference either way. God is dead not because He doesn’t exist, but because we live, play, procreate, govern, and die as though He doesn’t.
— C. Colson, Kingdoms in Conflict, p. 181
No Belief in God
According to the teaching of our Lord, what is wrong with the world is precisely that it does not believe in God. Yet it is clear that the unbelief which he so bitterly deplored was not an intellectual persuasion of God’s non-existence. Those whom he rebuked for their lack of faith were not men who denied God with the top of their minds, but men who, while apparently incapable of doubting him with the top of their minds, lived as though he did not exist. — John Baillie, in Our Knowledge of God
50 Years Ago
In the book Gaily the Troubadour, published in 1936, Arthur Guiterman wrote the following poem. Reading his observations, you wouldn’t guess it was written nearly fifty years ago.
First dentistry was painless; Then bicycles were chainless And carriages were horseless And many laws, enforceless. Next, cookery was fireless, Telegraphy was wireless, Cigars were nicotineless And coffee, caffeinless. Soon oranges were seedless, The putting green was weedless, The college boy hatless, The proper diet, fatless, Now motor roads are dustless, The latest steel is rustless, Our tennis courts are sodless, Our new religions, godless. — Source unknown
[1] From website: ReligiousTolerance.org: “Atheism: About Atheism or atheists”
[2] “Atheism,” American Atheists, at: http://www.atheists.org/drive.thru/atheism.html#fallacies
[3] [See Paul Johnson, Intellectuals, New York: Harper & Row, 1988. Johnson provides an excellent discussion of the influential “intellectuals” and how their philosophies impacted modern thought.]
[4] [Paul Johnson, Modern Times, New York: Harper & Collins, 1991, p. 48]
[5] The World Almanac and Book of Facts (2001), Page 692.
[6] Michael Kesterton, “Social Studies: A daily miscellany of information…” The Globe and Mail, 2003-JUL-2.
Proud to be TJ's man 