Freethought Nation

Actually the name is spelled Devan, not Devon.

And in reality I kinda had an inkling that was the case about Mike Licona.

First off this isn't Keith, as my writing style is much different. Secondly, Achrya S was invited to a debate in 2000. AKA, Ask Licona:

Secondly, he destroyed her in two articles. Secondly you say Denovan proved something, when your reviews are fringe in comparison to every other source giving good reviews. All well. If this is how you do research, then no wonder you fell for a cult. XD

LOL, it's comments just like that that sound just like Keith TRASH. Anyway, your Licona link made no mention of any debate invitation with Acharya. This is another Keith TRASH lie that's been debunked before. Remember, Keith is a pathological liar for the Lord who cannot be trusted.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

First off, if your going to say my name say it right. It's Devan, not Denovan, not Devon, it's Devan. Do you really lack the ability to even proof read your own posts before you even put them forth? Secondly, if there are problems with my article then actually bring forth criticisms with it and stop putting forth ad hominems and stop attaching my character. Finally... cult? What the hell does me doing my own research have to do with a cult mentality? Your making no sense here.

Hey Keith, nice to see you back again under a new alias. All of this talk about New Agers and Luciferians and God and Jesus still going around...

I'll tell you what, I'll debate you right here right now. You want debate don't you? So let's do it. Let's start at the very beginning shall we with Genesis 1:1 of the bible. Could you start by explaining to me when this world was created and by what force? Then let's move forward through the bible from there after we've been able to firmly establish that much. Then we can better understand what the bible is and therefore what things like God, Lucifer, Satan, and Jesus really are.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

Hey guy's. Every single objection to my article Keith keeps screaming strawman even though he never even attempts to tell me why it's a strawman. I mean, I am looking for reasons for Keith to prove me wrong but thus far all he is doing is saying "NAH UGH!"

Hey guy's, looks like after much goading from me and many insults to me from Keith; he is actually writing a response article. Let's hope he actually deals with my rebuttals.

Looks Keith made a response article towards me. I'm gonna read it right now so let me know what you guy's think.

LOL, same old trash we've come to expect from the Christian extremist cultist. He is guilty of everything he accuses of everyone else. Where he doesn't have facts or evidence to substantiate his claims, he just invents whatever giant leap of faith he thinks he needs to make connections where none exist. Keith is pathetic and proves himself to be a pathological liar once again.

Keith finishes his article with his Inquisition and DARK AGE loving scripture:


I wonder why he left off verse 6:

6 "And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete."

That's Keith showing his support for the extreme aggression and violence that is apparently necessary to force people to believe what they already know is utter nonsense.


Can't help but notice that Keith is still afraid to actually link to this thread.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Anybody have any idea what Keith is even talking about here? I have not read anything about the city of Atlantis in any of Acharya's book. Anyone got any idea what this statement is about?

It's just another ad hom attack for mentioning "Atlantis." And another one of Keith's giant leaps of faith attempting to make a connection were none exist. It doesn't matter to Keith that she made no comment about believing in Atlantis. That's how Keith does it, she mentioned it therefore, she must believe in it. So, if anybody mentions something they must, according to Keith's line of reasoning, believe in it. If someone cites another they must, according to Keith, endorse and support those they cite. What Keith doesn't get is that he himself must, according to his own logic, then also be a theosophist, Satanist and new ager since he mentions them and cites them.

Keith proves once again that he is just another pathological liar for the Lord. He doesn't have the moral compass or integrity to acknowledge his errors in his malicious smears against Acharya. Keith doesn't care about living breathing human beings, that's why he's so willing to lie for the lord. It's like the dark ages and inquisitions all over again with Keith. Keith's response to proving him wrong and showing him to be a pathological liar only further deepens his delusion to create even more lies because if he's wrong, then, his Jesus is exposed as the house of cards that it is. And Keith will have no part of that so Keith is always right and even when he couldn't be any more wrong, he's still right in his little narcissistic head. The same mentality as the religious hierarchy of the DARK AGES. Keith is a DARK AGES, Inquisition, Christian extremist cultist wannabe who needs to put down the crack pipe, get a job and move out of his moms basement.

Keith's argumentation reminds me of a Monty Python episode:



Here are a just couple threads of several & a trailer clip proving Keith and Dr. Swerdlow wrong:

National Geographic's "Ancient Astronomers"

National Geographic's "Nebra Sky Disc"

The video clip below is of the Lascaux cave paintings/mural depicting the zodiac and they're over 16,000 years old. But no, according to Keith and Dr. Swerdlow this didn't exist until recently.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Luva stated: "So, if anybody mentions something they must, according to Keith's line of reasoning, believe in it. If someone cites another they must, according to Keith, endorse and support those they cite." However this is fallacious as Keith is talking about citing people as authoritative sources either promoting your world view or version of history. There is a difference between citing Blavatsky to expose her and citing her as an authority to promote your personal positive beliefs. Keith does not do this with Theosophists. So nice distortion. Secondly, Keith is saying that there is no evidence that the zodiac signs were seen as 2150 year ages. So why post links that do not address that specifically? And you want to talk about dark ages and suppressing information? How hypocritical since you advocated censoring his film in this thread.

Please respond directly to his article accurately:




If you people can't have the decency to represent his arguments accurately then by that very action you show you are not interested in debating these issues. If you were interested you would represent your opponent correctly.

ZeitgeistTruth, you still don't get it, Acharya doesn't hold Blavatsky up as any sort of authority nor "our world view" as Keith claims she does. So, Keith's entire premise is an epic failure right out of the gate. Never mind the fact that Zeitgeist only mentions Blavatsky ONCE. None of that stopped Keith from exaggerating his giant leaps of faith trying to make connections where none exist.



Yeah, it's a hypocritical double-standard.



I knew you'd say that and it only proves you don't get it. They knew about the different constellations at least 16,000 years ago. Ulansey's work proves that they did know something about precession. Why is it that all of the Christian apologists cite Swerdlow? Could it be that he's biased in favor of Christianity? Ulansey has already proved him wrong as already noted in my previous post on page 6:

Hipparchus's understanding of the precession by David Ulansey



LOL, yeah we're really suppressing it aren't we. It's time for Keith and his cult to learn about taking responsibility and being held accountable for a change. Big difference between that and censorship. It does exemplify your ability to exaggerate and make connections where none exist though. So, thanks for that.



Oh, another hypocritical double-standard. That is all that Keith has to offer!!! His entire premise is founded on utter misrepresentation of Acharya's works and we've demonstrated that repeatedly. Decent Christians are embarrassed by Keith and his trash.

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Hey guy's, just got done with another article in response to Keith's found here:



I am waiting for a response from David Ulansey about a commentary I can add to my article. After that all that needs to be done is just going over the article and smoothing things out like redoing some typo's and misspellings, etc...

Hey guy's, got that article up. I got impatient waiting for Ulansey to reply so I decided to go ahead and post it. I didn't really need his commentary anyways considering it would have been overkill.

http://tinyurl.com/2cbaejx

Let me know what yah guy's think. Anyways I am off to bed.