Science isn’t always the answer.

[Hollie]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

 

[barn sour]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

 

[Hollie]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

 

[ding]

Support this?

The universe is an intelligence creating machine. It's not an accident.

Again a statement. Not you supporting it.

Since we are dealing with a hypothesis. What is intelligence and what makes you believe it's necessarily pre-ordained? Earth is billions of years old. So far we have proof of one highly intelligent species. Out of billions upon billions species on the only planet, we know life exists, one developed intelligence. This species can not be considered especially successful since it has been around for only a few million years on the broadest interpretation of the word human. And from where I'm sitting we are just as likely to get ourselves extinct by nuclear war or by depleting this planet's resources.

What if that's the inevitable outcome of intelligence? You seem to present intelligence as the end result, what if intelligence is a very bad evolutionary adaptation because of the ability to manipulate the environment inevitable causes that environment to be destroyed? Seems to me this is just as likely a hypothesis as yours.

You do realize that the reason SETI searches for intelligent life is because they expect to find it, right?

The laws of nature are such that the potential for beings to know and create existed before space and time. It isn't some accident that intelligence arose. Intelligence arose because the laws of nature preordained it would rise.

The inevitable outcome of intelligence can be extrapolated from the evolutionary stages that preceded it. Do you even know what those stages are? Because it's like you have never given this any serious consideration before and yet you are determined to argue from a position of ignorance.

You do realize so far SETI hasn't found any right? Radiowaves originating from Earth have been penetrating space for a century. Meaning that any intelligent life within 50 lightyears would have been able to pick up and respond in the same manner to these radiowaves. Not only that but considering the age of the universe and the fact that there is little theoretical limit on the range of radio waves which is the simplest form of long-distance communication we know, there is no reason to not assume that by now at least some non-random signals would have been picked up if intelligent life really is prevalent in the universe.

Seti is NOT a supporting argument for your position.

Actually they do support my position. They believe as I do that the universe is an intelligence creating machine. That given the right conditions and enough time that intelligent beings will arise.

Why? Because intelligence is written into the fabric of existence. Try reading this and see if you disagree.

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

This is actually the heart of our disagreement. See if you understand this.

The people at SETI have a hypothesis. Intelligent life exists outside Earth. (something I have no problem accepting as a premise).They have devised a test. Scan space for non-random signals. Now unless and until they find those signals. Their hypothesis remains unproven and so unsupported. Exactly zero of them will publish that intelligent life exists outside Earth. They don't care how much they believe their hypothesis to be valid because BELIEF does not count as evidence.

You on the other hand have a hypothesis. And somehow claim that counts as evidence simply because it sounds logical to you.

See if you can understand this. People have a hypothesis for good reasons and believe they will be found to be true which is why they test them.

My path to faith took the same approach.

I have tested it and have reaped rewards for doing so. But I don’t believe you are interested in personal testimony so instead I explained the good reasons for my doing the test.

But the heart of our disagreement isn’t this. The heart of our disagreement is that I answered your question in an unexpected way and you are having difficulty accepting it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

No two religions can agree...nobody within the religions can agree...no way to tell who is right and who is wrong...

Could there be any more compelling reason to decide they are just ALL full of shit?

 

[Hollie]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

This Walt Brown?

Encyclopedia of American Loons

It’s … The Encyclopedia of American loons! Our new and exciting series presenting a representative sample of American loons from A-Z.

americanloons.blogspot.com

Walter T. Brown is an engineer, young earth creationist Kent Hovind-style, and director of his own ministry with the Orwellian name Center for Scientific Creation (which seems to consist of Walt Brown), for which he works full time as a ”researcher”, writer, and speaker. According to his self-published book ”Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood”, Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from MIT, and he may be considered one of the leaders of the creation science movement (this excellent overview over the creation movement at least awards him a relatively prominent place).

In 1998, Brown was appointed to a committee reviewing Arizona's state science standards, but despite his attempts he failed to remove evolution from the Arizona state science standards.
His main publication is his already mentioned book ”In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood,” in which he argues for flood geology, claims that the works of other scientists does not support evolution (which, as expected, is primarily based on misrepresenting them), and attempts to explain parts of reality that fits poorly with the Bible (astronomy, for instance). His general strategy is to argue that moderen science cannot explain these astronomical and geological phenomena, even though it can, and that therefore goddidit. Some criticism can be found here. His ”20 questions for evolutionists” are dealt with here, and his own claim that evolutionists refuse to debate him, therefore he is right, is dealt with here.

Diagnosis: Babbling beefhead and denialist whose main techniques are, as one would expect, ignorance, misrepresentation, goddidit, and – if everything else fails – appeal to ”worldviews”. He may not be the most influential creationist out there, but is often pulled out by the densest members of the creationist movement and probably does have some negative impact on the world.

 

[barn sour]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

There is no arbitrary standard, and I have established nothing. I haven't claimed either. The Bible clearly states that only God can see into the heart of man.

But, the Lord did give us common sense, and we can usually rely on that, unless we're too puffed up in our own conceit. When someone refuses to confess Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, they disqualify themselves from being called Christian. This is elementary.

 

[ding]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

What have I failed to take into account?

 

[ding]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

No two religions can agree...nobody within the religions can agree...no way to tell who is right and who is wrong...

Could there be any more compelling reason to decide they are just ALL full of shit?

Whereas I see many similarities between all religions.

Maybe you have never studied them the right way or at all.

 

[barn sour]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

Not true. I'm sure all you atheists walk in lock step, don't you? Yet you all reject your Lord and Saviour.

 

[barn sour]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

What have I failed to take into account?

I'm only referring to the time frame. Did you watch the video?

 

[Hollie]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

There is no arbitrary standard, and I have established nothing. I haven't claimed either. The Bible clearly states that only God can see into the heart of man.

But, the Lord did give us common sense, and we can usually rely on that, unless we're too puffed up in our own conceit. When someone refuses to confess Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, they disqualify themselves from being called Christian. This is elementary.

That's a shame. So you're saying that I can be a good person, I can love my friends and family, do good deeds because it's in humanity's interest to perform unselfish acts but unless I recite a slogan I can't be a Christian?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm sure all you atheists walk in lock step, don't you?

You're very confused. Atheists don't share any commonality, save for not believing in any magical gods. Yours is not special. In fact, it's the opposite...just another childish myth.

Furthermore, the best thing about being an atheist is not wasting time on communal delusions and gatherings dedicated to them. Keep your magical dogma in your pocket, and you wouldn't even know someone was an atheist.

 

[barn sour]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

This Walt Brown?

Encyclopedia of American Loons

It’s … The Encyclopedia of American loons! Our new and exciting series presenting a representative sample of American loons from A-Z.

americanloons.blogspot.com

Walter T. Brown is an engineer, young earth creationist Kent Hovind-style, and director of his own ministry with the Orwellian name Center for Scientific Creation (which seems to consist of Walt Brown), for which he works full time as a ”researcher”, writer, and speaker. According to his self-published book ”Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood”, Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from MIT, and he may be considered one of the leaders of the creation science movement (this excellent overview over the creation movement at least awards him a relatively prominent place).

In 1998, Brown was appointed to a committee reviewing Arizona's state science standards, but despite his attempts he failed to remove evolution from the Arizona state science standards.
His main publication is his already mentioned book ”In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood,” in which he argues for flood geology, claims that the works of other scientists does not support evolution (which, as expected, is primarily based on misrepresenting them), and attempts to explain parts of reality that fits poorly with the Bible (astronomy, for instance). His general strategy is to argue that moderen science cannot explain these astronomical and geological phenomena, even though it can, and that therefore goddidit. Some criticism can be found here. His ”20 questions for evolutionists” are dealt with here, and his own claim that evolutionists refuse to debate him, therefore he is right, is dealt with here.

Diagnosis: Babbling beefhead and denialist whose main techniques are, as one would expect, ignorance, misrepresentation, goddidit, and – if everything else fails – appeal to ”worldviews”. He may not be the most influential creationist out there, but is often pulled out by the densest members of the creationist movement and probably does have some negative impact on the world.

Oh wow. An atheist blog spot. I'm so impressed with your research.

 

[Hollie]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

Not true. I'm sure all you atheists walk in lock step, don't you? Yet you all reject your Lord and Saviour.

What's not true. Christianity has not splintered into many sects / subdivisions?

I would disagree with your comment about atheism. There is no real atheist asserted philosophy, all of atheism tends to be a critique of theistic assertions. Atheism is really a philosophical rejection of the assertions of theism as undemonstrated and fallacious, nothing more.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

An atheist blog spot. I'm so impressed with your research.

Haha..now this is irony. You don't seem too impressed with the research of the entire global scientific community, either. But reading a creationist blog full of laughable lies? Now THAT'S impressive!

 

[barn sour]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

There is no arbitrary standard, and I have established nothing. I haven't claimed either. The Bible clearly states that only God can see into the heart of man.

But, the Lord did give us common sense, and we can usually rely on that, unless we're too puffed up in our own conceit. When someone refuses to confess Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour, they disqualify themselves from being called Christian. This is elementary.

That's a shame. So you're saying that I can be a good person, I can love my friends and family, do good deeds because it's in humanity's interest to perform unselfish acts but unless I recite a slogan I can't be a Christian?

Did I say recite a slogan?

Do you not see how you refuse to admit Jesus Christ is your Saviour?

Even a fool can see you are not a Christian. Common Sense. It is a wonderful thing.

 

[Hollie]

It boggles my mind how anyone who claims to believe in science will argue against science the moment it doesn't suit their purpose.

The universe literally popped into existence ~14 billion years ago from nothing and then began to expand and cool until it produced beings that know and create. These are the facts.

Argue against it. I double dog dare you.

Ding, you don't seem to take into account the flood event. I don't know how to make this video show us like you did, but you should check it out (and maybe post it so it can be seen like yours was). Center for Scientific Creation | In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood

This Walt Brown?

Encyclopedia of American Loons

It’s … The Encyclopedia of American loons! Our new and exciting series presenting a representative sample of American loons from A-Z.

americanloons.blogspot.com

Walter T. Brown is an engineer, young earth creationist Kent Hovind-style, and director of his own ministry with the Orwellian name Center for Scientific Creation (which seems to consist of Walt Brown), for which he works full time as a ”researcher”, writer, and speaker. According to his self-published book ”Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood”, Brown has a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from MIT, and he may be considered one of the leaders of the creation science movement (this excellent overview over the creation movement at least awards him a relatively prominent place).

In 1998, Brown was appointed to a committee reviewing Arizona's state science standards, but despite his attempts he failed to remove evolution from the Arizona state science standards.
His main publication is his already mentioned book ”In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood,” in which he argues for flood geology, claims that the works of other scientists does not support evolution (which, as expected, is primarily based on misrepresenting them), and attempts to explain parts of reality that fits poorly with the Bible (astronomy, for instance). His general strategy is to argue that moderen science cannot explain these astronomical and geological phenomena, even though it can, and that therefore goddidit. Some criticism can be found here. His ”20 questions for evolutionists” are dealt with here, and his own claim that evolutionists refuse to debate him, therefore he is right, is dealt with here.

Diagnosis: Babbling beefhead and denialist whose main techniques are, as one would expect, ignorance, misrepresentation, goddidit, and – if everything else fails – appeal to ”worldviews”. He may not be the most influential creationist out there, but is often pulled out by the densest members of the creationist movement and probably does have some negative impact on the world.

Oh wow. An atheist blog spot. I'm so impressed with your research.

Thanks.

Could you identify what research Walt Brown has done? What research papers has he submitted to science journals? Are there colleges or universities which sponsor any lecture series he hosts?

 

[barn sour]

Case in point. Not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christians. You should be able to tell that just by looking around today. People have done lots of things in the name of their religion, but that doesn't mean God is anywhere near them.

I wasn't aware that you were assigned as the ultimate authority on who is, and who is not a real Christian. Such a weighty burden you bear.
"I am on a mission from God!" cried Hitler publicly and loudly in 1934. I agree. Given what Christians have done to humanity, he sure was.

No, you do not get to twist my words the way you do the Bible.

If you can't quit the crap and start speaking truthfully, I will lose all interest in responding to your posts. Simply put, you are bearing false witness and I will not encourage your bad behaviour.

Who decides if Christians who call themselves Christians are "real'' Christians? You have identified that "not all who call themselves Christians are actually Christian". You decides?

Are you bearing false witness or just being judgemental as some Christians are not meeting an arbitrary standard you have established?

It's just a way of avoiding admitting the evil stuff in their shared, iron age handbook.

With the various sects / subdivisions of Christianity, it seems Christians can't decide among themselves who holds the title of "real Christians'.

Not true. I'm sure all you atheists walk in lock step, don't you? Yet you all reject your Lord and Saviour.

What's not true. Christianity has not splintered into many sects / subdivisions?

I would disagree with your comment about atheism. There is no real atheist asserted philosophy, all of atheism tends to be a critique of theistic assertions. Atheism is really a philosophical rejection of the assertions of theism as undemonstrated and fallacious, nothing more.

And I disagree with your comment concerning Christianity.

Christianity is really a philosophical acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.