Christianity is a religion that makes little sense.

We are to believe Jesus goes to all the trouble of virgin birth, walking on water, raising people from the dead, feeding thousands from next to nothing, knows in advance even plans and allows himself to be killed but forgets or thinks it unimportant to write one word or ask anyone to do it for him for this new Christian faith he is claimed to be dying for? And we are to believe that nonsense, really? How is that not seen as a self-revealing lie or a non-rationalization needing no more proof its ridiculous logic?

Do you want the truth or just truth devoid beliefs?

Before we get started on you I will address a common christian challenge to atheism, how did it come into existence?

There is only naturalism, so we have no reason to jump to there must be magic or some intelligent supernatural powers being(s). We don’t have to guess that hard to conclude only natural things are possible, as we know it’s only natural at every turn in every way that we can know. Therefore, the most likely to assume that what is currently unavailable for review would most likely be only nature to think it’s magic it’s ridiculous and baseless. To say we don’t yet understand is not mean magic is real. And not understanding nature, doesn’t make it not nature and just because nature can seem amazing doesn’t make it magic. I assume you are a strong theist not a weak somethingism god (an unspecified belief in some higher force something, maybe a deistic or pantheistic god) believer and most likely some well defined version of Christianity right? You are most likely not believing in a unknown magic possibility before the big bang god somethingism, no, you believe in a god only defined in myths in some holy book right? We arose from evolution not creationism wishful thinking: Creationism (pseudoscience). When you ask how did it come into existence you mostly mean what came before the big bang I am guessing? If so we do know naturalism and have scientific evidence to support it, religion has nothing of the sort for its creationistic myths. We don’t have an ability to see past the big bang yet and we may never be able to. As far as what I mean by natural is that the causation is definable with the components interaction with them selves in the real world e do and can know and is not something magical, intelligent, or external to reality. Science knows the big bang from background radiation, Cosmic Microwave Background, or CMB, which is radiation that fills the universe and can be detected in every direction. Microwaves are invisible to the naked eye so they cannot be seen without instruments. Created shortly after the universe came into being in the Big Bang, the CMB represents the earliest radiation that can be detected. Astronomers have likened the CMB to seeing sunlight penetrating an overcast sky. Looking out into deep space, and therefore back into deep time, astronomers see the CMB radiation saturating space beginning at about 378,000 years after the Big Bang. Before the creation of the CMB, the universe was a hot, dense and opaque plasma containing both matter and energy. Photons could not travel freely, so no light escaped from those earlier times. For more on cosmic microwave background and the big bang:

Quit Trying to Invent Your God From the Scraps of Science.

Now on to you bible believer, the god of the bible you believe in is a terrible monster myth not worthy of worship even if it was real. They can’t as of yet if ever be able to see before that. Axiological Atheism Morality Critique: of the bible god:

“Even the best thinking, beliefs, or ideas if not connected to action are but wasted words. Any claimed god or supreme power that threatens extreme suffering to those who are vulnerable and of lesser power is abusive. This is especially so, with the human horror of injustice that would be hell. Which once created means its creator cannot also be called or connected to something all loving or all just. Any reasonable person can know killing the entire planet in a flood if real which it is not would be the greatest act of mass murder, than that done by any other madman ever know in history.  Evil bible god? Bible believers like say the bible guides there morality but which morality offered in the bible are they using the good cop or the bad cop pseudo morality game. Christians love saying there god of the bible is all good and gives free will so any harm that humans endure is said to be their moral falling alone but is this biblically accurate? No, not at all. Because we have verses that say god harden the Egyptian Pharaoh’s heart against his will (removed his free will). Saying in the bible verse I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. -Exodus 4:21. And let’s address Exodus 7:3 and the reconfirmation of this hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was claimed to be good as then god can kill all the firstborn braking the faro who was such an afflicted prenatal victim of a child murdering god, who could have done anything with his unlimited power and…”

Again bible believer, the bible you believe if discredited by archeological sites, Archaeology Disproves the Bible:

“Archaeology disproves the all the beginning of the bible thus discredits all Abrahamic religions are based on it, so this includes Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Mormon, etc. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, involves leading scholars Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman who draw on recent archaeological research to present a dramatically revised portrait of ancient Israel and its neighbors. They argue that crucial evidence (or a telling lack of evidence) at digs in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon suggests that many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts. What they argue, in chapter after chapter, is that these books of the Bible make the most sense as coming out of a seventh-century (BC) context. A lot of the Bible is royal and elite propaganda to justify empire expanding through conquest. Overall the differing archaeology evidence and the complete lack of any confirming archaeology evidence is devastating to all the Abrahamic religions. Historians mostly agree that only the Kingdom of Israel and life in Jerusalem (roughly from King David onward) represents any actual possibility for history. Some stories in the Bible were meant to be history, others fiction. But modernity has obscured the original distinction between the two kinds of biblical writing, depriving readers of the depth of the text. Perhaps surprisingly, this confusion lies at the heart of the History Channel’s miniseries “The Bible,” which continues the pattern of…”

Moreover, bible believer, the jesus you worship even if real was not worthy of respect either, Debunking Jesus?:

“In this article I am going to just assume for the sake of argument such a man as jesus existed. This does not mean I am sure even some human person now thought of as jesus ever existed. Matthew 15:21-28  21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” 23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” 25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said. 26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” 27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” 28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment. My Commentary Matthew 15:21-28 Jesus all good? Some try to say this is a bad example. Read the next few passages. She pleads more and he then heals the girl. Wrong, this is a great example he does not heal the child out of love or because its ethical and demonstrates a lack of willingness because of different race of the child and does not do it when asked even gives a hate speech response its only after the woman’s continued begging after the hate response that he agrees to heal the child…”

In addition, bible believer, god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Contradictions and god cannot logically co-exist.:

“Can thoughts about the direction of a creator force with purpose be anymore perceptible or ascertainably different from our notions of purposeless non direction? For example, deities exhibits natural characteristics, the wind as science knows is a purposeless natural force, whereas gods are often attributed as being the force of purpose in wind such as seen in in the phrases, bhagavad-gita 10.21 commentary by Sri Sridhara Swami “Krishna is a lead wind”, bible: Exodus 10:13, “god brought wind”, and quran: Surat Al-Jāthiyah 45:5-6 mentions, “allah changing winds.” Likewise, deities exhibits human characteristics such as seen in in the phrase, “Krishna is  jealous” Holi festival Hinduism, “god is jealous” Exodus 20:5, and  “allah is jealous” Jami` at-Tirmidhi – Book 12, Hadith 1201. This fact of an undeniable anthropomorphic connection found in all creator deities, even in their most ethereal forms, can be easily addressed. For instance, if you say the “unknown/unknowable” origins of the universe involves an “it,” something with a beingness and humanness, can, in some form, then reasonably be seen as denoting some amount of anthropomorphism. The problem with this beingness god concept is with anthropomorphic reasoning that entails humans’ styled thinking, behavior, and beingness, which evokes a limited realm of personality, which is fixed in time, space, and place. So it can be assume from these references as well as many more that a reasonable conception of “deities” are ultimately an indirect beingness reference to anthropomorphism and an argument from analogy. Argument from analogy involves perceived similarities; such as an all-powerful designer being, a power attributed as infinite thing with somethingness as well as to unlimited possibilities (wind: nonbeingness; and thing with human…”

Again, bible believer, you believe in a nothingness god, The Empty God Box:

“The Empty God Box In scientific terms a “LACK OF EVIDENCE” is/can be proof of non-existence. As with all things as new evidence is discovered views can change. I can prove something does not exist by its lack of existence, the box is empty? Is a box empty? I can prove god is not in the box, but some say I can never prove the box is empty. But is it right to say the god Box is never empty even if we remove its needed contents. It’s an exercise in rhetoric with what we do know to say the god Box is not empty of all evidence and reason thus all it can be is empty of validity. And still today people say empty god boxes are possibly not empty? The god Box is was and will always “LACK OF EVIDENCE” thus empty proving the god concepts non-existence. Think I am wrong then you go and keep looking or trying to empty that already empty box labeled god devoid of all facts or reason.”

And again, bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is the only thing one could even hope to believe from nature or what could have come from all this. So, you and others and you create myths about this believed nature derived somthinginsm god, Mr. Potato Head god:

“The term god is an empty meaningless term outside of manmade myth unless one falls back to the circus of fallacies in the magic big top of fideism and the faith fallacy that you do not need anything but faith to validate, justify or prove any mystical belief you so desire. The god claim is like a clown car rolling in from out of nowhere and it seems like it is only one or possibly a few bad ideas, but no. No they, the proponents for the god claim, will act like the web of lies the god claim it tied to, can then somehow be woven into something real, if only they try hard enough. Therefore, they, the proponents for the god claim, will act as a person drowning, reaching out to anything they can grab, saying it is or could stick to their Velcro conception of god. Maybe it’s more like a Mr. Potato Head god concept, simply add or remove to suit the believer. For as we all know gods often think like the people who invent them. So everything not fast enough to get away will be claimed as god and the crazy clowns will just keep piling up even if the logical attachment to reason is nowhere to be found and the joke on reason stops being funny real quick. Therefore, we can say the term god is an unnecessary redundancy not an accurate explanation for anything.”

And yet again, again, bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is full of unreason, The God Fallacy:

“The God Fallacy is that there is no epistemically warranted or justifiably reliable evidence for god(s) existence; most ideas offered are stretches of unreason promoting seemingly implausible knowledge or reality claims. Moreover, beyond this is the self-evident realization that there is no reliable and /or verifiable evidence that could be used to define what god term actually is or could be assured to involve. Because it is never good to just randomly conceptualize or fabricate from bias trying to force connections into existence. epistemically warranted or justifiably reliable evidence or even a preset of proofs that do not hold gaps a believer want to fill with an arbitrary beliefs things need a god explanation and yet again what does god even mean. One his furthered nothing with god talk until they offer clear links to understand what could rightly make up the empty term g. o. d. (Group Originated Delusion). Any reasonable thinker should conclude that clear links to any knowledge are required to comprehend what to ask, where to look, or what to state is involved. This would seem especially important since what is on the line is the actual truth or falsehood of the great believed “IT” of somethingism. Do you wish to just assemble or make up your god thinking as you go, greedily forcing anything that seems slow enough to not get away or is the actual truth in reality you seek even if godless as finding the true is the main pursuit, as your aim is what true right, taken with the deepest integrity? One should desire such intellectual rigor in order to even…”

And to restate it again and especially loving god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Evidence Against a Caring God?:

“Evidence against a caring god? I will provides burden of proof. The following are some evidence against a caring god working in the world. A recent study of the current living conditions throughout Africa shows that more than one billion people do not have enough clean water to provide for their basic human needs. As a result, more than 2,500 children are dying each day. I guess it is that god gives us free will by keeping children from clean water in an unproportioned amount to the civilized science filled world. I ask you, does your god not hear their prayers? According to Missionaries of Africa (2008), there is a water crisis and diseases that are living in dirty water are wiping out entire villages and communities. Does god exist? Does the magic chanting of prayer seem to work? Suppose for a minute with the understanding of religious believe, if there was a loving god and it answered even some prayers, would not the most deserving be the non-sinning? Moreover, what living human could be said to be less sinning than a baby and thus the most deserving. In addition, babies or children are likely the ones religionists/fideists pray most often, for when they are in trouble. Belief changes nothing. Whatever circumstances you are in or not, has nothing to do with belief. If you are poor, belief does not make you not poor. If you are rich, you do not stay rich because of belief. You would think that poor people would have the benefit of the heavenly means and have god on their side, if anyone would,…”

And to even further restate again god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, It’s Not the Deity You See as Possible But How Many You Reject:

“If you are a believer or agnostic, it is not the one deity you see as possible but to notice how many gods or goddesses you reject. There are literally thousands of religions being practiced today and many others once were once thought true in history just to be reworked or rejected. Here are 20 of the most popular, along with an estimate of the number of followers: Christianity: 2.1 billion, Islam: 1.3 billion, Hinduism: 900 million, Chinese traditional religion: 394 million, Buddhism: 376 million, African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million, Sikhism: 23 million, Juche (a.k.a. Chuch’e and Kimilsungism): 19 million, Spiritism: 15 million, Judaism: 14 million, Baha’i: 7 million, Jainism: 4.2 million, Shinto: 4 million, Cao Dai: 4 million, Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million, Tenrikyo: 2 million, Neo-Paganism: 1 million, Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand, Rastafarianism: 600 thousand, Scientology: 500 thousand, [Source: Encyclopedia Britannica] If you can believe only in a possible God of Christianity, you have chosen to reject Allah, Vishnu, Lord Buddha, Waheguru, Ngame, Isis, Kali, Brigid, Kuan Yin, Europa, Aphrodite, Amaterasu, Aurora, Chicomecoatl, Ishtar, Antares, and all of the thousands of other gods or goddess that other people worship today or once held faith in. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods or goddesses without ever looking into their history, religions, reading or even learning about them. You may not even know some of the names listed or have heard much about them or the thousands of other deities and mythical beings people now or through time have put faith in. Most people believer or agnostic are singly indoctrinated all their life and simply have absorbed…”

And to yet again even further restate god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Humans are Prone to Thinking Errors, and Yes This Includes Theism.:

“Humans are prone to thinking errors, especially when they are uninformed and when they are limited to themselves and only a simple amount of knowledge about the world without science.  For instance if you are sitting or standing or lying down and not in motion you would say you are in a fixed place in time and space even common sense would seem to support thins thinking however, you are on a planet that is spinning on an axis and it is likewise hurling through space in a revolving pattern around the sun. so without science understanding one may be fooled into thinking things that in reality are just not true. Some people think I tell about the flaw in thinking theism is true as some ploy to convert people to atheism. But this thinking is in error I only want people to believe what is true it just so happens that truth of the real proven world is in line with atheism. Atheism is not looking for followers, it is a conclusion that the god claims are devoid of supporting evidence and are left with supported wishful thinking hopes of finite beings fearful of death and wanting to have control and hope in an often grubby often painful as much as pleasurable dangerous short life. You think looking honestly at the evidence available and not making things up needs to be promoted in some better way so people like it that sounds odd but how about the joy of intellectual honesty without myths devoid of reality for one. What I think is bizarre it to expect any intelligent…”

And finally to even further restate god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Doubt god(s)? No, I stopped believing Fairytales.:

“Religion is the thing you do when playing at really is more important than understanding or being in reality. And belief in god(s) is the thing you believe in when the truth of reality is not really a big concern, but the lies about it are: No Magic No gODs or “No gODs, No Masters” If anyone wants to say you are stupid because you are Atheist and not agnostic at all on the god question tell them about me. I am far from stupid and I actually think it’s the other way around as in one has to be very smart, well enough to construct a sturdy enough argument to reject all gods intellectually as it requires not just a powerful Hypothesis it requires it is rich with evidence as well which I have done as others like me have. It’s not an easy way to defend but don’t worry it is quite defendable: The God Fallacy I am a Realist in Many ways, 1) I have a positive epistemic attitude (belief) towards or in philosophical realism that there is a real external world and that is can be know or substantially approximated by humans objectively. 2) I have a positive epistemic attitude towards or in scientific realism that the content of the best scientific theories, models, and aspects of the world described by the sciences can be know or substantially approximated by humans objectively. 3) I have a positive epistemic attitude towards or in logical realism such as that logic is the means of discovering the structure of facts and its projection in the language such as the Law of Non-Contradiction or…”

Bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, Single God Religions (Monotheism) = Man-o-theism:

“Single God Religions (Monotheism) “could almost be called Man-o-theism” Why I say Monotheism could almost be called Manotheism is because almost all Monotheistic religions happen to have a male god and almost as often are also male centric. Probably the three oldest Monotheism commonly known are probably are ancient Egypt Atenism, Northeast Iran or Southwest Afghanistan Zoroastrianism and Israelite Judaism all having male gods. Then Hinduism’s version found in the Bhagavad Gita also having male god. Then Christianity monotheism the god is also a male god. Then Islam monotheism the god is also a male god. Then Sikhism monotheism the god is described as neither male nor female however the Guru Granth consistently refers to God as He, even in English. He is also predominantly referred to as Father. Then Bahá’í Faith monotheism the god is also a male god. The classic religions of Greece and Rome were in the main purely polytheistic, but in later times tendencies arose, partly stimulated by philosophy and later also by Judaism and Christianity, toward inclusive monotheism. The hymn to Zeus (male god) by the Stoic philosopher Cleanthes (c. 330–c. 230 bce) is the best-known document of this process. It praises Zeus as the essence of divinity in all gods, creator and ruler of the cosmos, omnipotent, the giver of every gift, and the father of humanity…”

And again bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, God the unethical father?:

“The ethics violations start before the eating of the so called tree of knowledge. Remember before eating it they DID NOT understand good and evil thus they did not commit a crime anymore then a baby who lacks understanding. But it’s worse god the father put this dangerous tree there to begin with not good parenting then allows a bad being influence them good parents don’t put defenseless children with harmful individuals and dangerous objects. So truly its god who a court of law would find negligence not the children. But it is even worse for god set it up to fail. Just think even if Adam and eve never ate nor did anyone for a thousand years it would only take one failure eating and all of humanity is doomed. Thus, it’s god’s booby trap forcing sin not man’s fall. So if the story was true which it is not god would be the one lacking any ethics and be a terrible father. It is easier to give without wanting to love then it is to love without wanting to give. To love moves us past self and enhances the desire to share and give both of things and of oneself. If one is without the desire to give likely they are not wanting to love.”

And yet again bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, Yes, Your Male God is Ridiculous:

“The question should not just be is there a god, but which gods we are to contemplate, the new ones or old ones. Not that it really matters much in the end, as they all eventually cease to exist or replaced for something new. If there were a true god deity, would he not make himself known as soon as hominoids could think or at least by around 100,000 years ago when the first confirmed human burial took place or at least, by around 50,000 years ago when it is thought we fully achieved modern behavioral and cognitive traits? However, this is not the case at all, instead the male god myths do not seem to exist for tens of thousands of years or must have held less status until around 6,000 or so years ago. What was prominent before the male god myths seems to be female goddesses and animals or aspects of nature, which were held as spirits or something like deities. Female goddesses and not male gods seemingly starting after 12,000 years ago for sure, but maybe go back to 40,000 years ago or even longer, who knows hypothetically in some fashion to possibly over 200,000 years ago, but maybe not. So not much credibility can be given prehistorically for the male gods, thus why add any credence to them now. Therefore, male gods prominent in the current religions of the world today have a self-life of only around 6,000 or so years ago, not much of a showing if it is a male god who supposedly created everything. Why wait through 95% of human existence…”

Bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks demonstrates any god, Bigfoots, Unicorns, and Gods?:

“Bigfoots, Unicorns, and Gods the rational conclusion using axiology So how do we form rational conclusions? More importantly how do we differentiate between the levels involved to establish a conclusions rational viability. It takes axiology or the value judgment the worthiness or lack thereof in relation to the available reason and evidence. So let’s start with the axiological viability of Bigfoots There is no available evidence for Bigfoots. But is their proposition outside of reason? Always start in reality from the evidence we do know, such as a primate/nonhuman hominid close to that of both humans and other nonhuman primates is not entirely outside all possibility of reason even though lacking all evidence. Therefore, belief is not warrant and the axiological worthiness of possibility is low enough to motivate disbelief. The axiological viability of Unicorns (ie. a horse with a single horn on its head) There is no evidence for Unicorns. But is their proposition outside of reason? As always start in reality from the evidence we do know, such as by looking at the evolution of the horse not once was there a horn on any of the several stages of animals to the horse we know today. So it is relatively outside of possibility though as it is still only claiming non fantastic attributes it is only somewhat ridiculous. Therefore, belief is not in any way warranted and the axiological worthiness is so low to highly support disbelief. Now the axiological validity of Gods There is no evidence for Gods. But is their proposition outside of reason? As always start in reality from the evidence we do…”

I was, Christian 36 years, read the bible twice, and took two religious classes before the conclusion of atheism.

We don’t know everything but we do know a lot, like we know that the god myth is man-made nonsense as we can know about what time male gods myths came along and a hypothesis for why. It’s around 5,500 to 6,000 years ago, with the birth of state cities (birth of masculinity worship). But female goddesses go back at least 12,000 years ago close to around the time of animal domestication and the cultivation of seed baring plants (fertility goddesses) or maybe to 40,000 years ago as fertility (female figurines) and hunting magic/protection (female items) of the peoples labels Aurignacian culture and the birth of developed art an it seams shamanism, totemism, and animism. It is the earliest modern human culture which like modern humans (like us) which started accruing around 50,000 years ago. But, we do know that the first worship and it was not likely a god or goddess just a reflection of nature worship by means of a stone shake around 70,000 years ago around the time of a supervolcano in Indonesia and humanity almost going extinct. This time was an ice age and smoke may have lingered in or on clouds possibly looking similar to snakes. And, at 100,000 language development begins around the time human burial begins, do language and magical thinking help each other? Yes, they sure do today and it is not so strange to think myth needs language too. So, it’s safe to say we worshiped nature long before the gods we thought created it, thus we know all gods and goddesses are made up lies.





And this is not even mentioning all the other science and philosophy that can be used to accumulatively finish the answer with we know that there is no gods as much as we relatively can claim to know anything.

What are the philosophical views of 1,972 contemporary professional philosophers?

“No God: atheism 72.8% and theism 14.6%”

Unlike untrustworthy religion, science is worth believing and one doesn’t have to believe in it upon empty assertion myths that have been discredited as unhistorical and inaccurate along with lies an full of pseudoscience. Science even if wrong will exchange old ideas for new and religion wishes to suppress new ideas for old. The bible proves nothing of substance, nor does it prove anything of worth but I guess other than more blind inaccurate beliefs continuing.

Please dont let more blind inaccurate beliefs continuing.

Religion is a Form of Malignant Inflated Egotistical Narcissism


It’s Not the Deity You See as Possible But How Many You Reject

If you are a believer or agnostic, it is not the one deity you see as possible but to notice how many gods or goddesses you reject. There are literally thousands of religions being practiced today and many others once were once thought true in history just to be reworked or rejected.

Here are 20 of the most popular, along with an estimate of the number of followers: Christianity: 2.1 billion, Islam: 1.3 billion, Hinduism: 900 million, Chinese traditional religion: 394 million, Buddhism: 376 million, African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million, Sikhism: 23 million, Juche (a.k.a. Chuch’e and Kimilsungism): 19 million, Spiritism: 15 million, Judaism: 14 million, Baha’i: 7 million, Jainism: 4.2 million, Shinto: 4 million, Cao Dai: 4 million, Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million, Tenrikyo: 2 million, Neo-Paganism: 1 million, Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand, Rastafarianism: 600 thousand, Scientology: 500 thousand, [Source: Encyclopedia Britannica]

If you can believe only in a possible God of Christianity, you have chosen to reject Allah, Vishnu, Lord Buddha, Waheguru, Ngame, Isis, Kali, Brigid, Kuan Yin, Europa, Aphrodite, Amaterasu, Aurora, Chicomecoatl, Ishtar, Antares, and all of the thousands of other gods or goddess that other people worship today or once held faith in. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods or goddesses without ever looking into their history, religions, reading or even learning about them. You may not even know some of the names listed or have heard much about them or the thousands of other deities and mythical beings people now or through time have put faith in. Most people believer or agnostic are singly indoctrinated all their life and simply have absorbed the dominant faith in your home or in the society you grew up in, thus you now see only it as the only possible truth.

In the same way, the followers of all these other religions have chosen to reject god or goddesses without reading or even learning about them as well and as many believers put faith over science facts. If you are a believer or agnostic only your possibility is true and you think their gods are imaginary, similarly, they think your god or goddess is imaginary. In other words, each religious person on earth today arbitrarily rejects thousands of gods or goddesses as imaginary.

A rational person armed with history, science, psychology, sociology, biology, and archeology rejects all human gods or goddess myths equally, because all of them are equally human inventions. How do we know that they are human inventions?

Show me a claimed god that is not limited to having to be promoted by people, only transferred by people who were told about this brand of god or it stays unknown or stops being known when it stops being talked about.

Sounds like these claimed all-powerful gods are not any power at all, instead, they are universally limited and as fragile as any lie, you know just stop telling a God-lie, it stops existing.

These god myths like all myths not only must be told and retold by humans to other humans they suffer another weakness all myths share in that they tend to be changed or altered as they are retold. Some say not my god (let’s say Christians) but this is pure delusion and undeserved self-confidence as the over 40,000 sects and denominations as well as the many different translations of one book the bible which easily has over 100 versions in English alone. And even using the same translation people differ how they view or believe the myth of the bible god, you can see why now right because it is only a myth that is limited to being believed and being told.

Still not convinced all gods are lies even the one god myth you may like or believe you choose or chose “more likely were raised in and forced to believe” then stop telling people about it and see if it keeps going as always gods have no more power than the believer gives them. God myths are week and fragile simply stop believing in them and stop talking about them and they stop existing.

Just think what claimed god if real requires you to talk about it or it stops being known. What real features of the world stop existing just because we stop talking about them or stop believing in them? Simply imagine that one of these god myths was actually real it would automatically be real not limited to being expressed to stay seen as real.

We know that all gods are myths as if one of these thousands of mythic gods were actually real, then its believers would be experiencing real, undeniable benefits. These undeniable benefits would not only be obvious to everyone they could be testable and demonstrable limited only to some of the believers in the one claimed real god. But spoiler alert no such evidence exists, not that it’s a real shocker as all gods are myths.

That right there is no special anything followers of a claimed one true god have others don’t have but an odd belief in a God myth as true when there is no proof of such claims not even in the lives of the ones doing the claiming.

Because if some myth god was real couldn’t we at least see actual proof in the lives of the ones believing that only occurred in the lives of the believers and was testable and demonstrable like have fewer diseases, or more so-called blessings like more money, etc. In fact, is belief in a god something that was nothing and never meant anything at all, if so there would be and I say must be, testable and demonstrable proofs, directly connected to, not special attributions only surrounding the lives followers, of some, claimed true god, or it’s just not anything true.

I know if you are a believer in some claimed god you may defensibly say well even if there are not any testable or demonstrable proofs you still should believe as you don’t want to go to hell if you are wrong, to which we all should say and that works for you? As in what a bunch of nonsense and simple reasoning supported only by fear. Stop this unjustified fear and live life free.

No God: No evidence, No intelligence, and No goodness = Valid Atheism Conclusion

1. No evidence, To move past the Atheistic Null Hypothesis: There is no God/Gods (in inferential statistics, a Null Hypothesis generally assumed to be true until evidence indicates otherwise. Thus, a Null Hypothesis is a statistical hypothesis that there is no significant difference reached between the claim and the non-claim, as it is relatively provable/demonstratable in reality in some way. “The god question” Null Hypothesis is set at as always at the negative standard: Thus, holding that there is no God/Gods, and as god faith is an assumption of the non-evidentiary wishful thinking non-reality of “mystery thing” found in all god-talk, until it is demonstratable otherwise to change. Alternative hypothesis: There is a God (offered with no proof: what is a god and how can anyone say they know), therefore, results: Insufficient evidence to overturn the null hypothesis of no God/Gods.

2. No intelligence, Taking into account the reality of the world we do know with 99 Percent Of The Earth’s Species Are Extinct an intelligent design is ridiculous. Five Mass Extinctions Wiped out 99 Percent of Species that have ever existed on earth. Therefore like a child’s report card having an f they need to retake the class thus, profoundly unintelligent design.

3. No goodness, Assessed through ethically challenging the good god assumptions as seen in the reality of pain and other harm of which there are many to demonstrates either a god is not sufficiently good, not real or as I would assert, god if responsible for this world, would make it a moral monster ripe for the problem of evil and suffering (Argument from Evil). God would be responsible for all pain as life could easily be less painful and yet there is mass suffering. In fact, to me, every child born with diseases from birth screams out against a caring or loving god with the power to do otherwise. It could be different as there is Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP), also known as congenital analgesia, in which a person cannot feel (and has never felt) physical pain.

I was asked how did I come to atheism, having once believed in Jesus?

“I was Christian for 35 years, read the bible twice,
and took two religious classes before realizing the conclusion of atheism.”

“Damien, I think it is difficult to jump from 100% theist to 100% atheist directly, and being agnostic is a comfortable place to examine the arguments. What about you? Weren’t you a theist at one time? Did you jump directly to 100% atheist, or were you “in between” for a time?” Questioner
My response, I was Christian for 35 years, read the bible twice, and took two religious classes before realizing the conclusion of atheism. I went from 100% belief in theism to 100% atheist though at first I also believed in a godless afterlife, ghosts, and called myself a spiritual atheist. the no god thing was easy the rationalism about woo-woo not so quickly. But now I reject all that. 

Atheism for me was a life freeing revelation as it was only after 35 that I became an atheist. Thus it was indeed a new awakening to self-mastery after a life of mental slavery to religion and the terroristic god damning me at birth in an original sin mindset. I was raised in non-denominational evangelical/pentecostal Christian. I was such until I was about 35 years old (2006), I never even doubted god and never had an atheist friend I knew of nor did I even want to know anything about atheism. How I changed was in college learning science and most of all taking a competitive religion class learning things about other religions I had never even cared to ask just beloved they where all wrong only Christian was right. Then I finally stopped believing in all religion with my class on understanding the bible. Halfway through that class, I stop all belief in god and though did not know it nor even understand the word I had become an atheist. I have been working hard at becoming informed since then.

My Atheism: “Axiological Atheism”

Yes, I was a undoubting Christian until the age of 35 years old, while in my second religious studies classes and so you know I have read the entire bible twice before I ever took the two college classes on religion and the bible before realizing I was an atheist; I was a very superstitious supernaturalist as well as a strong theist not even once did I think to doubt or even question. I am sad to say I was not much of a rationalist now that is my driving force. Now, I question everything and think through almost everything.

*One was a class on the top world religions using the book (Living Religions: A Brief Introduction)

Turning Atheist?

 In the middle of the class on the bible the things I learned assisted me in turning atheist. I was asked by a Christian, “for those 35 Christian years what Christian denomination did you belong to?” Well, I was raised in the local church the teachings of Witness Lee / Living Stream movement: until around 13. Then I was in Eagle’s Nest Ministries Gary Greenwald then other Christian churches. Mostly non denominational. I was then asked, “would you say that your faith was shaky from the start? Or, were you well grounded in your faith through the scriptures and later on engaged in research that led to you leave Christianity altogether?” I was a devout believer not always a great follower but I totally believed until learning facts in college especially on the devil.

The Devil?
The Bibles clear teaching is that the wages of sin is death. “He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning…” 1 John 3:8 It is impossible therefore to have an immortal being who can sin. If we attempted to suggest that the Devil was a mortal monster then how is it that he has supposedly lived for thousands of years and possesses the powers of disease, deception, death, pain and torment and is permitted by an almighty god to challenge his authority. The devil is not satin. It is interesting to note that in the detailed record of god’s dealings with Israel in the Old Testament, nowhere is there given an indication of a personal devil who goes around tempting people. The hebrew equivalent of the word devil is only used 4 times and is in connection with false worship and idols of wood and stone – not an immortal being. It is impossible for a rebellion to happen in Heaven, think about it? Jesus himself proclaims that god’s will is done in heaven when he teaches his followers to pray for god’s coming Kingdom to be on earth in what has become known as “the Lord’s prayer”:
“Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” Matthew 6:10
If god’s will is done in heaven then how is it that a rebellion was supposed to of taken place by the angels, one of which became the so called monster the Devil. So, if the bible teaches that man is responsible for his own sin and that this sin comes from within him, who or what is “the devil” or “Satan” which is spoken about in the bible scriptures? In essence the Devil and Satan is simply a “personification” of sinful desires of man’s rebellious lusts. There is nothing unusual about the scriptures using personification. For example:
Riches are personified (Matt 6:24)
Sin is personified (Romans 5:21, 6:16)
Death is personified (Revelation 6:8)
Nation of Israel personified (Jeremiah 31:4, 18)
Believers in Christ are personified (Ephesians 4:13, 1 Corinthians 12:27)
The Holy Spirit is personified (John 16:13)
Thus we shall see that the original words for “devil” and “satan” are descriptive and not titles and these words are simply used or personified to express this idea of sin in different forms.

And you should also need to know the serpent, Lucifer, and satan are not the same person. “The serpent was craftier than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made.” Genesis 3:1 Did you get that “wild animal” not supernatural being. And to one of the most popular misconceptions among bible believers which is that Satan also is designated as “Lucifer” also known as “the morning star” within the pages of the Bible. No… The name “Lucifer” is referring to the king of Babylon as “the morning star” not supernatural being and not the Devil or Satan. To read more on how “Lucifer” is not Satan: So, get this if I did not make it clear enough, even within the bible the serpent, devil, Satan, Lucifer, or whatever, as there is no supernatural being at all. lol

Losing My Religion?
I don’t know if I should be called a just an atheist as this is too limited to define my disbelief. Thus, I am best described as an Axiological atheist: (Ethical/Value theory Reasoned and Moral Argument driven) Atheism, Anti-theism, Anti-religionism, Secularism, and Humanism. I also value Ignosticism or igtheism. I was raised and forced to be Christian and for a time lived my whole life believing in the Christian faith. Though, I could have never have been touted as a holy person or a true follower of the Christian moral rules. My life more often resembled the sinner than the saint. However, I truly believed what was taught to me about Christianity was the truth. Though I nitpicked and had qualms with some of the philosophy, I still wholeheartedly was a believer and felt I was born again. I fully enjoy being a free thinker and a rationalist atheist who is fully free of religions and their magical thinking.

So what changed?
The beginning of the change was getting a bachelor of arts in Psychology, grasping critical thinking, rational analysis, universal ethics, and the need of proof. However, the true starting point was Biology. In essence, learning that we all begin as female and it takes specific processes to turn into a male. But what fully made me “change” was two classes on religion the first comparative religions the second understanding the bible halfway through that class I stopped believing.
So, I thought, if a woman was created first then the bible was starting with a biological lie!
Therefore, I thought if the Bible starts with a lie, how can it ever find full truth?
I started using a new rationale to analyze the bible and not accepting it as truth outright. I thought how positive would we view a parent who puts a 2 years old child next to a cookie jar and tells them not to eat any cookies. Then not only punish them for the rest of their life but to every generation to the end of time for an action they did not understand. No parent would be seen as just. Even the Bible says we should forgive after 7 years and how can it be justified to punish everyone who is guiltless for the action of one even if they did understand. That would not be convictable in any court anywhere in the world. Yet, we are taught to praise a god who did just that. I could go on and on about my views on the Bible and Christianity but I will end with one statement. The bible touts that the most important thing is the word. The word is so important that God himself wrote on stone with a lightening finger. Yet, we are to believe that Jesus comes to earth and does not write a word. Was he illiterate? If he was, how could he be God? Jesus never asked anyone to write anything more in the Torah. Maybe he just forgot since he was so busy or maybe he was not God. He had 12 disciples; why did not all of them author a book on his behalf? Instead, they too are silent. If Jesus and his disciples were silent, maybe he was not god. Of if he was God, maybe he was silent because the Torah was already perfect. That would make the Christian Bible heresy.
Jesus Christ “Wanted” for producing the hate and fear literature, the so-called “Holy Bible?”

This is like blaming Frankenstein’s monster for Mary Shelley writing Frankenstein. He had nothing whatsoever to do with the bible, even according to the traditional Christian account.

“The NT was not written by the time he allegedly died, so you can’t be referring to the NT. But just the Tanakh is not what people usually mean when they say “holy bible,” but rather Tanakh + NT, so this meme is inaccurate regardless of whether the historical Jesus supported the Tanakh. – Challenger

My response, And the Tanakh is rich with hate and fear literature, so yes he is indeed responsible for that so try again.

“You’re just repeating yourself now. I already specified why this meme is inaccurate. If you want to keep it up, that’s on your intellectual integrity to share false information, but I would delete it because I have intellectual integrity. And anyway, you didn’t say “WANTED: for SUPPORTING the Holy Bible,” but rather for “producing” it, which is just ridiculous. He did not write any of it either. This meme is just all kinds of falseness wrapped in a bundle. I see you criticize theists all the time for not being truthful. Do you not hold yourself to the same standard?” – Challenger

My response, See you still are the one inaccurate as the bible contains the old testament and jesus in only found in the new testament so your argument is beyond odd to say one cannot refer to the new testament the only place we would even know about the jesus character and in which irt is claimed to have not stayed dead and thus returned to the god state which was then claimed to continue to influence the bible so yes he is responsible by the bible itself. So, I need to hear a better argument from you than jesus id not responsible for the bible.

“Jesus could not have supported or “produced” the NT because every shred of it was written AFTER he allegedly died. That should be obvious, but your typo-filled run-on sentences do not establish the contrary. For someone who doesn’t think Jesus is god, this is just a dumb argument to suppose that he is in order to criticize him. It’s like giving something with one hand and taking it away with the other. Anyhow, you are not coming off as very intelligent here. Honestly, quite the contrary. Is it too much to ask that if you are going to produce antitheist memes, that you don’t inject the belief in god into them first (a very strange stance to take, but then you defend it)? You are a muddled mess, and it’s like you’ve never even pondered what it is you’re trying to accomplish on a pragmatic level.” – Challenger

My response, So no good argument to support your claim that the bible is not influenced by god/jesus?

“Produce a meme against the belief in god, but then inject the belief in god into it, so that it’s only construed to be accurate if god exists? That is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of in the atheist community, FYI. Yes, god and Jesus don’t exist. No need to have fictional characters produce or support or influence anything. If that’s not enough, then I have nothing more to offer.” – Challenger

My response, don’t you know you need more than empty claims that don’t prove your point that the general believers do not think the bible is not inspired by god/jesus?

“My estimation of your IQ just dropped by 35 points. How is it an empty claim if you also don’t believe god exists. Are you going to tell me that I need to somehow argue to you that god does not exist for this post to be inaccurate?” – Challenger

My response, This is one of the oddest things I have heard that someone would try to say that the general believers do not think the bible is not inspired by god/jesus. The meme is to address what bible believers believe its a visual added critique as one who talks of IQ would seem to be likely to know but here you are, asking how, “is it an empty claim if you also don’t believe god exists” trying to act as if you don’t get what is being offered in the meme. Rather it makes you mad because of some other reason than actually claiming Jesus believers don’t think he influenced most if not all of the bible. To jesus believers, jesus is god and influenced almost everything in the bible. I have a BA in Psychology with some sociology/addictions therapy as well as an Autodidact in Science, Archeology, Anthropology, and Philosophy.

“That is correct in terms of what Christians believe. They are, furthermore, comfortably ensconced in those beliefs in Jesus and god and the bible. The point of an atheist producing a meme against Christianity is to influence believers to not believe in Christianity as much, or otherwise, it’s a circle-jerk between atheists, if atheists are the only intended audience. But an atheist producing a meme which takes fundamental Christian tenets to be pre-suppositionally true is not going to be effective because it does not push Christians to go outside their comfort zones. Before the meme, they thought Jesus is god and god exists and the bible is true. And the meme MAKES this same argument and so after the meme they are going to think Jesus is god and god exists and the bible is true. This is basic pragmatics, which obviously Damien has not studied via his auto-didacticism. So, yes, it is just a big atheist circle-jerk. I guess it’s too much to ask for an atheist to create and share memes which don’t take fundamental Christian beliefs as accurate. I mean, what would the world have to come to for that obvious point to have to be implemented?” – Challenger

My response, It was to point out two truths you are seemingly not wishing to address, like how it’s a wanted poster so it’s pointing out jesus is missing and the intellectual joke in that if you miss it is that the jesus character is not coming back and the other if you missed it was to attach the remainder of the bible’s hate and fear and connecting t to the jesus character. And as we stand is you tried to do a red herring logical fallacy trying to turn it to my education, then your ad hominem attack just for fun I guess and yet with all your believed superior to me talk are inferior in an argument where it counts my friend. I must wonder if you now see you were wrong as still have not addressed your continual weak argument that is not yet supported as you still don’t have a support that jesus/god is not responsible for inspiring the bible.

jESUS (a fake story) explained as a real bigot but not a gOD
Matthew 15:21-28 “Proves the bible stories character jESUS who was not god but was a bigot”
21 Leaving that place, jESUS withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “lord,(yahweh) son of david, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” 23 jESUS did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” 25 The woman came and knelt before him. “lord, help me!” she said. 26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” 27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” 28 Then jESUS said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.
Ps. elohim occurs frequently as well as the later creation name yahweh, both are used throughout the Torah to mean gOD.
*My Commentary Matthew 15:21-28
jESUS all good? Some try to say this is a bad example. Read the next few passages. She pleads more and he then heals the girl. Wrong, this is a great example he does not heal the child out of love or because its ethical and demonstrates a lack of willingness because of different race of the child and does not do it when asked even gives a hate speech response its only after the woman’s continued begging after the hate response that he agrees to heal the child again not because children in need should be cared for or because he loves all children of the world nor because it’s the moral thing to do instead it’s because she had faith he could heal someone. A truly moral person would have simply healed the child the first time and not threw a racial slur at her. I do find it amusing that after she begs him, he conceded and referenced her faith for it? As opposed to her use of reason as she did. Jesus the so-called god or love for everyone was very disrespectful in his statement for no other reason than to be at the least thoughtless to the suffering of a child no evidence of love there. It was looking down on her as if she is a lowly sub-human and the child never mattered not even as a factor when he is said to finally become persuaded to heal the child. So, if we are gracious jESUS was heartless to the suffering of some but if we take it for what it looks like he was a hateful bigot that in no way cared about all the people of the world, not even the children.
Here are some more great examples of how jESUS is not all good, nor all loving neither does he care about everyone on earth other than the jews.
Luke 14:26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.” – jESUS
Matthew 10:34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” – jESUS Yes, you heard/read that right, jesus only came for the Israelites, stated in his own words and as stated undeniably already. Matthew 15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” – jESUS You believe you know jESUS. The lie called the bible is full of contradictions thousands of them so what you think you know depends on which lie you choose to remember. You do not know, you believe because of faith and think that feeling is knowing, but you are mistaken. You need to learn how to form justified beliefs, and faith is not it. If jESUS was gOD, he would have sought worship for himself would he not? Since he didn’t, instead he sought worship for God in the heavens, therefore, he was not gOD. Verses in the bible say Jesus is not gOD The bible says that Jesus denied he is gOD. jESUS spoke to a man who had called him ‘good,’ asking him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good except gOD alone.’ (Luke 18:19) And he said to him, ‘Why are you asking me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.’ (Matthew 19:17) jESUS did not teach people that he was gOD. If Jesus had been telling people that he was gOD, he would have complimented the man. Instead, Jesus rebuked him, denying he was good, that is, Jesus denied he was gOD.
*The Bible says that gOD is greater than jESUS?
‘My Father is greater than I’ (John 14:28)
‘My father is greater than all.’ (John 10:29)
*Jesus cannot be gOD, if gOD is greater than him. The christian belief that the father and son are equal is in direct contrast to the clear words from jESUS. jESUS never instructed his disciples to worship him.
‘When you pray, say our father which art in heaven.’ (Luke 11:2)
‘In that day, you shall ask me nothing. Whatsoever you ask of the Father in my name.’ (John 16:23)
‘The hour cometh and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him.’ (John 4:23)
*Is jESUS equal to or lesser than gOD?
JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.
JOH 14:28 I go unto the Father: for my father is greater than I.
How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the christ?
By a revelation from heaven (Matthew 16:17)
His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41)
*jESUS last words?
MAT 27:46,50: “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?” that is to say, “My gOD, my gOD, why hast thou forsaken me?” …jESUS, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.”
LUK 23:46: “And when jESUS had cried with a loud voice, he said, “Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:” and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.”
JOH 19:30: “When jESUS, therefore, had received the vinegar, he said, “It is finished:” and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”
*jESUS’ first sermon plain or mount?
MAT 5:1,2: “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying….”
LUK 6:17,20: “And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people…came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said…”
*Whom did they see at the tomb?
MAT 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
MAT 28:3-5 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: and for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek jESUS, which was crucified.
MAR 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
LUK 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
JOH 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of jESUS had lain.
*jESUS descended from which son of David?
Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
Nathan (Luke3:31)
*Would jESUS inherit David’s throne?
Yes. So said the angel of god (Luke 1:32)
No, since he is a descendant of Jehoiakim (see Matthew 1: I 1, I Chronicles 3:16). And Jehoiakim was cursed by God so that none of his descendants can sit upon Davids throne (Jeremiah 36:30)
*When jESUS met Jairus was Jairus daughter already dead?
Yes. Matthew 9:18 quotes him as saying, My daughter has just died.
No. Mark 5:23 quotes him as saying, My little daughter is at the point of death.
*Did Herod think that jESUS was John the Baptist?
Yes (Matthew 14:2; Mark 6:16)
No (Luke 9:9)
*Did John the Baptist recognize jESUS before his baptism?
Yes (Matthew 3:13-14)
No (John 1:32,33)
*Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus after his baptism?
Yes (John 1:32, 33)
No (Matthew 11:2)
*I could go on there is much more but some will say I am using man’s wisdom not god’s mysterious ways. So, is the bible in favour of wisdom? Is it folly to be wise or not?
PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.
ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.
1CO 1:19: “For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.” 

*I hear all the time but did you read the bible?*
Read the bible, you mean the book of dogmatic propaganda. Yes, sadly I have. I read two versions of the bible, the King James and the NIV. I have read history, anthropology, and archeology of world religions and understood right thinking because of philosophy. I know a lot, I don’t claim to know everything but certainly enough to firmly know religion and gods are myths. I could list countless scriptures to contradict the bible’s credibility (it has none) as I have listed some but true believers will believe as they wish (blind faith). The male god is an invented idea no more than 5,000 years the female goddess at least 12,000 but the first worship was and the world’s oldest ritual was of a large stone python 70,000 years ago: Stone Snake of South Africa: “first human worship” 70,000 years ago 

I am unplugged from the faith Matrix?
The matrix is all the biases, values, morals, stereotypes, beliefs, judgments, and requirements that society and religion mythologies force upon us. The faith matrix of religion tells us how to act, think, and behave, what is right or wrong, and good or bad. The religion matrix is often the heartstring of every culture. It forces upon us what it feels as right and never caring about what we really need. The matrix binds us and confines who we really are.
How did I unplug from the religious and god matrix?
The first and most crucial element that must be grasped and lived wholeheartedly to be removed from the matrix and stay unplugged is the unilateral valuing of women, the way they think, and their gift of being to the world. Without this understanding of women, one can never be removed from the matrix. The matrix is male-dominated in its width and breath and in the movie “The Matrix” movie all the agents were men. Equality in power in important and how men and women do this is often different. Women under stress are more prone to tend and befriend then fight or flight and in our modern society, this is of higher need. I am not saying this is only limited to women as there is some men who do this also but we need most men to move past the fight or flight as it would make a more humanistic world. When women lead it is more common everyone has largely rights and when men rule it is more common only men have the greatest rights. If you have a country or people who allow or support torture, mostly such a country is one that women are not equal or valued and are oppressed. It’s not the only factor but they do tend to go together. The greatest unused asset occurring in the world that is untapped and could help solve many of the world’s problems is women. I have and do value women and am an anarcho-feminist. Another key aspect is to remove religion. I started to unplug myself when I removed religion mythologies its pseudoscience, pseudohistory as well as its pseudo-morality and replaced them with real science, history, ethics, and axiology. An ethics and axiological value removed from god deluded morals and sin. I no longer have religious morals which are pseudo-moral judgments and sin which is a condemnation built on a judgment. I have axiological value driven ethics. I no longer follow good or bad handed down by some deity, culture, or family value. I have axiological value driven valuations of good or bad. I do what is healthy and pleasurable. I do not do what is harmful or causes pain. In this endeavor, I do not claim perfection. I am but a traveler and seeker of value, ethics, justice, and pleasure.

Reasons for or Types of Atheism

My college books where:

Understanding The Bible – By Stephen L. Harris – (7th Edition)

Living Religions – by Mary Pat Fisher – (6th Edition)

Promoting Religion as Real is Harmful?

Sometimes, when you look at things, things which seem hidden at first, only come clearer into view later upon reselection or additional information. So, in one’s earnest search for truth one’s support is expressed not as a onetime event and more akin to a life’s journey to know what is true. I am very anti-religious, opposing anything even like religion, including atheist church. but that’s just me. Others have the right to do atheism their way. I am Not just an Atheist, I am a proud antireligionist. I can sum up what I do not like about religion in one idea; as a group, religions are “Conspiracy Theories of Reality.” These reality conspiracies are usually filled with Pseudo-science and Pseudo-history, often along with Pseudo-morality and other harmful aspects and not just ancient mythology to be marveled or laughed at. I regard all this as ridiculous. Promoting Religion as Real is Mentally Harmful to a Flourishing Humanity To me, promoting religion as real is too often promote a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from who they are shaming them for being human. In addition, religion is a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from real history, real science or real morality to pseudohistory, pseudoscience, and pseudo-morality. Moreover, religion is a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from rational thought, critical thinking, or logic. Likewise, religion is a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from justice, universal ethics, equality, and liberty. Yes, religion is a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from loved ones, and religion is a toxic mental substance that can divide a person from humanity. Therefore, to me, promoting religion as real is too often promote a toxic mental substance that should be rejected as not only false but harmful as well even if you believe it has some redeeming quality. To me, promoting religion as real is mentally harmful to a flourishing humanity. Religion may have once seemed great when all you had or needed was to believe. Science now seems great when we have facts and need to actually know.

The art of know yourself, love yourself, be yourself?

The art of knowing yourself: this involves getting to the place of knowing oneself they, which they must first understand why knowing oneself is important, as well as how to comprehend they don’t already know themself or that most people don’t know themselves even if they think they do.

The art of loving yourself: this involves getting to the place of knowing oneself they, which they must first understand why knowing one’s self is important, as well as how to comprehend they don’t already know them self or that most people don’t know themselves even if they think they do. First one must think about what love looks like wouldn’t it be a growth-producing or would it build self-enlightenment and self-truth? Do you feel I or anyone can define your truth (about who you are)? If someone defined truth for you would you really own it? Wouldn’t it make more sense instead for me to broaden your ability to see the question? First, would you think a question like this of such a personal relevance has right answers? To start thinking on what love is would we look at are fallible behavior or some philosophical definition? If we look at our relations with others could we be convicted of loving? If we wish for a philosophical definition of love what realities does it hold in our real lives? Is love a feeling or a behavior? If we look at love as feeling what emotional substance does it stem from? If we look at love as behavior is it fixed in the behaviors of others?

The art of being yourself: this involves getting to the place of being oneself, which they must first understand why knowing one’s self is important, as well as how to comprehend they don’t already know them self or that most people don’t know themselves even if they think they do. Be yourself; everyone else is already taken. Being yourself is celebrating you, as an individual – learning to express yourself and be happy with who you are. Define yourself by yourself: You can’t be yourself if you don’t know, understand, and accept yourself first. It should be your primary goal to find this out. Be YOU authentically: don’t put too much care about how other people perceive you including your parents or family. The fact is, it really doesn’t matter in the long run and lf love must be bought bartered for or molded to be received, is it a love worth having. It’s impossible to be yourself when you’re caught up in wondering “Do they like or accept me?” To be yourself, you’ve got to let go of these concerns and just let your behavior flow, with only your consideration of others as a lens to reference with not own as your own. Don’t Hide: everyone is unique has quirks as well as imperfections; we are all at different stages in life. Be honest with yourself, but don’t be too hard on yourself; apply this philosophy to others, as well. There is a difference between being critical and being honest; learn to watch the way you say things to yourself and others. Own who you are: if you’re always working to be someone you’re not, you’ll never be a happy person. Be yourself and show the world you’re proud of the way you are! Nobody knows you better than you and that’s how it should be. You deserve to be your own best friend, so start trying to figure out how you can do that. If you had to hang out with yourself for a day, what is the most fun type of person you could be, while still being yourself? What is the best version of you? Believe in this idea and use that as your starting point. And how we use this thinking to change how we interact with others is, Knowing society, Loving the Humanity of Society, and Being the Humanity in Society.

A Rational Mind Values Humanity and Rejects Religion and Gods

A truly rational mind sees the need for humanity, as they too live in the world and see themselves as they actually are an alone body in the world seeking comfort and safety. Thus, see the value of everyone around then as they too are the same and therefore rationally as well a humanistically we should work for this humanity we are part of and can either dwell in or help its flourishing as we are all in the hands of each other. You are Free to think as you like but REALITY is unchanged. While you personally may react, or think differently about our shared reality (the natural world devoid of magic anything), We can play with how we use it but there is still only one communal reality (a natural non-supernatural one), which we all share like it or not and you can’t justifiably claim there is a different reality. This is valid as the only one of warrant is the non-mystical natural world around us all, existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by superstitions like gods or other monsters to many sill fear irrationally.

Do beliefs need justification?

Yes, it all requires a justification and if you think otherwise you should explain why but then you are still trying to employ a justification to challenge justification. So, I still say yes it all needs a justification and I know everything is reducible to feeling the substation of existence. I feel my body and thus I can start my justificationism standard right there and then build all logic inferences from that justified point and I don’t know a more core presupposition to start from. A presupposition is a core thinking stream that, like how a tree of beliefs always has a set of assumed sets of presuppositions or a presupposition is relatively a thing/thinking assumed beforehand at the beginning of a line of thinking point, belief projection, argument or course of action. And that, as well as everything, needs justification to be concluded as reasonable. Sure, you can believe all kinds of things with no justification at all but we can’t claim them as true, nor wish others to actually agree unless something is somehow and or in some way justified. When is something true that has no justification? If you still think so then offer an example, you know a justification. Sure, there can be many things that may be true but actually receiving rational agreement that they are intact true needs justification.

No god Claims have Justification, Challenge?

“Damien, (responding to me saying no god claims have justification) there are problems thinking everything you believe needs a justification.” – Challenger

My response, So, are you saying something can be claimed as real but have no warrant to justify why one should agree or even entertain it?

“The idea that Induction is reliable can be claimed and seems like an important assumption, but arguments for it are fallacious. There are similar issues with thinking an external world exists.” – Challenger

My response, Ok, and how do we discern any of it, if nothing has a need for justification? Because to me, I see you’re saying something is fallacious as asserting a justification stance and thus, is similar to what I think, which is valid, that there is a rationalistic need for justification. You are telling me I am wrong and that needs a justification, just as me showing your thinking wrong took a justification. If not then tell me how I am wrong utilizing no justification at all. So, try to prove me wrong because even if you do you will have provided a justification so then further proving my assertion of the need for justification.

“You are missing part of the conversation. Can you prove every belief needs a justification? Let’s say every belief needs a justification. Then you have to argue for every premise of every argument. That requires infinite arguments. What exactly is your argument that all beliefs require a justification?  I am not challenging the importance of justification. I am challenging the idea that every belief has to have a justification. The example above is induction. Hume showed why arguments for induction will be fallacious. I did not just make the claim. Go ahead and prove induction is reliable if you can. It would revolutionize philosophy. In response to >>sure you can believe all kinds of things with no justification at all but we can’t claim them as true not wish others to actually agree unless something is somehow and or in some way justified. I already said every challenged claim in a debate has to be argued for. Every claim has a burden of proof anyway. Most beliefs that do not require justification are things basically everyone already agrees with. But if you debate someone who rejects the existence of an external world or the reliability of induction, you can’t prove that they have to agree as far as I can tell. In response to >>When is something true that has no justification? Lots of things are true and we don’t know they are true. To claim to know something is true is another issue. But maybe we know induction is reliable. Maybe we know there is an external world. If so, it’s not clear how we know those things. I already mentioned induction above and you never talked about it.” – Challenger

My response, Sure, there can be many things that may be true but actually receiving rational agreement that they are intact true needs justification.”

“Right, I think we might have talked past one another a bit. I don’t expect agreement without a good argument.” – Challenger

My response, So you, like me, want a justification?

“Of course, it is a very important thing to me in general.” – Challenger

“Damien, you are evil.” – Attacker

My response, I am only evil, in your pseudomorality.

“Good luck bro lol Hell is waiting.” – Attacker

My response, Tell me, what kind of thinking is it that has such joy, at the thought of others suffering? I will tell you not a humanistic one nor an ethical one, more proof of your pseudomorality is affecting your honest care as a human and still you don’t see it. 

Without Nonsense, Religion Dies

I am against ALL Pseudoscience, Pseudohistory, and Pseudomorality. And all of these should openly be debunked, when and where possible. Of course, not forgetting how they are all highly represented in religion. All three are often found in religion to the point that if they were removed, their loss would likely end religion as we know it. I don’t have to respect ideas. People get confused ideas are not alive nor do they have beingness, Ideas don’t have rights nor the right to even exist only people have such a right. Ideas don’t have dignity nor can they feel violation only people if you attack them personally. Ideas don’t deserve any special anything they have no feelings and cannot be shamed they are open to the most brutal merciless attack and challenge without any protection and deserve none nor will I give them any if they are found wanting in evidence or reason. I will never respect Ideas if they are devoid of merit I only respect people. And are you a good person? What proves your goodness?

I Hear Theists?

I hear what theists say and what I hear is that they make assertions with no justification discernable of or in reality just some book and your evidence lacking faith. I wish you were open to see but I know you have a wish to believe. I, however, wish to welcome reality as it is devoid of magic which all religions and gods thinkers believe. I want to be mentally free from misinformed ancient myths and free the minds of those confused in the realm of myths and the antihumanism views that they often attach to. So, I do have an agenda of human liberation from fears of the uninformed conception of reality. Saying that some features of reality are not fully known is not proof of god myth claims. II’s not like every time we lack knowledge, we can just claim magic and if we do we are not being intellectually honest to the appraisal of reality that is devoted of anything magic. Theists seem to have very odd attempts as logic, as they most often start with some evidence devoid god myth they favor most often the hereditary favorite of the family or culture that they were born into so a continuous blind acceptance generation after generation of force indicated faith in that which on clear instinctually honest appraisal not only should inspire doubt but full disbelief until valid and reliable justification is offered. Why are all gods unjustified? Well, anything you claim needs justification but no one has evidence of god claim attributes they are all unjustified. All god talk as if it is real acts as if one can claim magic is real by thinking it is so or by accepting someone’s claim of knowing the unjustifiably that they understand an unknowable, such as claims of gods being anything as no one has evidence to start such fact devoid things as all knowing (there is no evidence of an all-knowing anything). Or an all-powerful (there is no evidence of an all-powerful anything). Or the most ridiculous an all-loving (there is no evidence of an all-loving anything). But like all god claims, they are not just evidence lacking, the one claiming them has no justified reason to assume that they can even claim them as proof (it’s all the empty air of faith). Therefore, as the limit of all people, is to only be able to justify something from and that which corresponds to the real-world to be real and the last time I checked there is no magic of any kind in our real-world experiences. So, beyond the undefendable magical thinking not corresponding to the real-world how much more ridicules are some claimed supreme magical claimed being thus even more undefendable to the corresponding real-world, which the claimed god(s) thinking is a further and thus more extremely unjustified claim(s). What is this god you seem to think you have any justification to claim?

God: “antihumanism thinking”

God thinking is a superstitiously transmitted disease, that usually is accompanied with some kind of antihumanism thinking. Relatively all gods, in general, are said to have the will and power over humans. Likewise, such god claims often are attributed to be the ones who decide morality thus remove the true morality nature in humans that actually assist us in morality. So, adding a god is to welcome antihumanism burdens, because god concepts are often an expression. This is especially so when any so-called god somethingism are said to make things like hells is an antihumanism thinking.  A general humanism thinking to me is that everyone owns themselves, not some god and everyone is equal. Such humanism thinking to me, requires a shunning of coercion force that removes a human’s rights or the subjugation of oppression and threats for things like requiring belief or demanding faith in some other unjustified abstraction from others. Therefore, humanism thinking is not open to being in such beliefs, position or situations that violate free expression of one’s human rights which are not just relinquished because some people believed right or their removal is at the whims of some claimed god (human rights removing/limiting/controlling = ANTIHUMANISM). Humanism to me, summed up as, humans solving human problems through human means. Thus, humanism thinking involves striving to do good without gods, and not welcoming the human rights removing/limiting/controlling, even if the myths could somehow come to be true.

Theist Associate Professor of Philosophy, to me: 
“Damien, I found this book from Harvard UP and thought it might interest you. “The Meaning of Belief, Religion from an Atheist’s Point of View. – Tim Crane”
From the book: “The Meaning of Belief does not assess the truth or falsehood of religion. Rather, it looks at the meaning of religious belief and offers a way of understanding it that both makes sense of current debate and also suggests what more intellectually responsible and practically effective attitudes atheists might take to the phenomenon of religion. An atheist himself, Tim Crane writes that there is a fundamental flaw with most atheists’ basic approach: religion is not what they think it is. Atheists tend to treat religion as a kind of primitive cosmology, as the sort of explanation of the universe that science offers. They conclude that religious believers are irrational, superstitious, and bigoted. But this view of religion is almost entirely inaccurate. Crane offers an alternative account based on two ideas. The first is the idea of a religious impulse: the sense people have of something transcending the world of ordinary experience, even if it cannot be explicitly articulated. The second is the idea of identification: the fact that religion involves belonging to a specific social group and participating in practices that reinforce the bonds of belonging. Once these ideas are properly understood, the inadequacy of atheists’ conventional conception of religion emerges.”
My response, Thanks, all religions promote three things pseudoscience, pseudo-history, and pseudo-morality. And from reading the outline of the book, I would enjoy debating him on it. Lol As to why people most believe is often like they do is childhood indoctrination or culture indoctrination. Around 70% of all believers hold the religious beliefs of the dominant culture they grow up in.
“73% of the world’s people live in countries in which their religious group makes up a majority of the population.”
Theist Philosopher, “Strangely enough, the statistics demonstrate or support the claims for ALL religions. Sorry, that was meant to be a question, not a statement.”
My response, I have no problem if people believe to me it’s like a chosen sports team but unlike sports, they force children to think like them and often demand others do like their choice in sports team likes or believes.
Theist Philosopher, “I have found that there are few people that embrace the tenets of tolerance and love, but the ones who do, some are religious and some are spiritual and some are materialists.”
My response, Religion is not about truth but is sold as if it is. It’s a con. It’s fine to play make-believe but not forcing others to do it with you.
Theist Philosopher, “I try not to make blanket generalizations, yet I do fall into the trap when it comes to the Alt-Right. You’ve seemed to not have met the truly religious. They are full of doubts but see the goal of pursuing something greater than themselves without forcing it on others. The truly devout are not manipulative or power-hungry. Even if their metaphysics do not align with yours, they would love you and respect the uniqueness of you.”
My response, Yes, there are many who have religious beliefs and love but it’s not because of the truth of the religious beliefs it’s because they choose to. Religion can be done ethically but is also a common excuse to do that which is unethical as well. Lacking a religion is no guarantee of ethics, neither is religion.
Theist Philosopher, “I concur, but that is why we have to safeguard ourselves. I think it was Andre Gide who said, “If you meet someone searching for the truth, follow him. If you meet someone who claims to have found it, run away.”
My response, What do you mean by deeply devout? My family are fanatics about Jesus, yet are often better at hate than love.
Theist Philosopher, “Like everyone else, the religious are on the journey but are taking a different path. The truly devout? “No one can love God and hate one’s neighbor.” Love encompasses respect for autonomy and individuality.”
My response, We as ethically responsible thinkers regardless of beliefs should be ethical to others. Ethics doesn’t require god beliefs.
Theist Philosopher, “I concur. I am not an atheist but I respect and love them. I would never tell you that you have to walk on my journey. I would stand beside you and declare your right to believe and live as you do. Damien, I am enjoying this exchange but I have to get ready for my night class. Ironically, we are covering Divine Command Theory. It is not a theory I agree with, for it is an impious theory.”
My response, Many try to claim to love a god and use it as a reason to justify their hate of others. The claim of loving a god has as much variety to what that means as the god they may claim. The good old Divine Command Theory. “The view that morality is somehow dependent upon God, and that moral obligation consists in obedience to God’s commands.” Lol
Theist Philosopher“Variety or verity, judge each one not by their labels but by the results of their words and actions. Indeed. Good night, Damien. Keep fighting the good fight.”
My response, I appreciate ethical humans, regardless of their beliefs on gods or afterlives they value. Humanity has value.
Theist Philosopher“Agreed.” 

Do you support Human Rights, Are you a Humanist?

How can one claim to be a humanist and somehow not feel compelled to question all beliefs that oppose human values? Simply the world we live in requires that we care, for if we don’t we still live there but can hardly be thought of as a humanistic supporter.  Sometimes the greatest fight, in an unfair uncaring world, is not to let it change you for the worst. We should be our best and change the world instead. And not to let it stop us from wishing to be as fair and kind as we can. For the world is not only one we live in but one we help create. Let’s create a better world we can all be proud of together, one of freedom, equality, love, and care.

If you know of god, what Exemplary behaviors are you doing in the world?

Because I am told by you that God is love.

Just a heads up, one of my least favorite things is unkind people.

If your belief made you different would we not see it clearly?

Knowledge to Ponder: 


  • Possibly, around 30,000 years ago (in simpler form) to 6,000 years ago, Stars/Astrology are connected to Ancestors, Spirit Animals, and Deities.
  • The star also seems to be a possible proto-star for Star of Ishtar, Star of Inanna, or Star of Venus.
  • Around 7,000 to 6,000 years ago, Star Constellations/Astrology have connections to the “Kurgan phenomenon” of below-ground “mound” stone/wood burial structures and “Dolmen phenomenon” of above-ground stone burial structures.
  • Around 6,500–5,800 years ago, The Northern Levant migrations into Jordon and Israel in the Southern Levant brought new cultural and religious transfer from Turkey and Iran.
  • “The Ghassulian Star,” a mysterious 6,000-year-old mural from Jordan may have connections to the European paganstic kurgan/dolmens phenomenon.

“Astrology is a range of divinatory practices, recognized as pseudoscientific since the 18th century, that claim to discern information about human affairs and terrestrial events by studying the apparent positions of celestial objects. Different cultures have employed forms of astrology since at least the 2nd millennium BCE, these practices having originated in calendrical systems used to predict seasonal shifts and to interpret celestial cycles as signs of divine communications. Most, if not all, cultures have attached importance to what they observed in the sky, and some—such as the HindusChinese, and the Maya—developed elaborate systems for predicting terrestrial events from celestial observations. Western astrology, one of the oldest astrological systems still in use, can trace its roots to 19th–17th century BCE Mesopotamia, from where it spread to Ancient GreeceRome, the Islamicate world and eventually Central and Western Europe. Contemporary Western astrology is often associated with systems of horoscopes that purport to explain aspects of a person’s personality and predict significant events in their lives based on the positions of celestial objects; the majority of professional astrologers rely on such systems.” ref 

Around 5,500 years ago, Science evolves, The first evidence of science was 5,500 years ago and was demonstrated by a body of empirical, theoretical, and practical knowledge about the natural world. ref

Around 5,000 years ago, Origin of Logics is a Naturalistic Observation (principles of valid reasoning, inference, & demonstration) ref

Around 4,150 to 4,000 years ago: The earliest surviving versions of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, which was originally titled “He who Saw the Deep” (Sha naqba īmuru) or “Surpassing All Other Kings” (Shūtur eli sharrī) were written. ref


  • 3,700 years ago or so, the oldest of the Hindu Vedas (scriptures), the Rig Veda was composed.
  • 3,500 years ago or so, the Vedic Age began in India after the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization.


  • around 3,000 years ago, the first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew”
  • around 2,500 years ago, many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed

Myths: The bible inspired religion is not just one religion or one myth but a grouping of several religions and myths

  • Around 3,450 or 3,250 years ago, according to legend, is the traditionally accepted period in which the Israelite lawgiver, Moses, provided the Ten Commandments.
  • Around 2,500 to 2,400 years ago, a collection of ancient religious writings by the Israelites based primarily upon the Hebrew Bible, Tanakh, or Old Testament is the first part of Christianity’s bible.
  • Around 2,400 years ago, the most accepted hypothesis is that the canon was formed in stages, first the Pentateuch (Torah).
  • Around 2,140 to 2,116 years ago, the Prophets was written during the Hasmonean dynasty, and finally the remaining books.
  • Christians traditionally divide the Old Testament into four sections:
  • The first five books or Pentateuch (Torah).
  • The proposed history books telling the history of the Israelites from their conquest of Canaan to their defeat and exile in Babylon.
  • The poetic and proposed “Wisdom books” dealing, in various forms, with questions of good and evil in the world.
  • The books of the biblical prophets, warning of the consequences of turning away from God:
  • Henotheism:
  • Exodus 20:23 “You shall not make other gods besides Me (not saying there are no other gods just not to worship them); gods of silver or gods of gold, you shall not make for yourselves.”
  • Polytheism:
  • Judges 10:6 “Then the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of the LORD, served the Baals and the Ashtaroth, the gods of Aram, the gods of Sidon, the gods of Moab, the gods of the sons of Ammon, and the gods of the Philistines; thus they forsook the LORD and did not serve Him.”
  • 1 Corinthians 8:5 “For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords.”
  • Monotheism:
  • Isaiah 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

Around 2,570 to 2,270 Years Ago, there is a confirmation of atheistic doubting as well as atheistic thinking, mainly by Greek philosophers. However, doubting gods is likely as old as the invention of gods and should destroy the thinking that belief in god(s) is the “default belief”. The Greek word is apistos (a “not” and pistos “faithful,”), thus not faithful or faithless because one is unpersuaded and unconvinced by a god(s) claim. Short Definition: unbelieving, unbeliever, or unbelief.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Bronze Age migrants, the Kura-Araxes cultural 5,520 to 4,470 years ago, their DNA from the Caucasus Mountains traces to the Canaanites and then lives on in modern Arabs and Jews. A Study found most Arab and Jewish groups in the region owe more than half of their DNA to Canaanites and other peoples of the ancient Near East—an area encompassing much of the modern Levant, Caucasus, Turkey, and Iran. Before the Kura-Araxes period of cultural traditions, horse bones were not found in Transcaucasia/South Caucasus a geographical region of the southern Caucasus Mountains on the border of Eastern Europe and Western Asia. 

“The Kura–Araxes culture, also named Kur–Araz culture, or the Early Transcaucasian culture was a civilization that existed from about 4000 BCE until about 2000 BCE or around 6,020 to 4,020 years ago, which has traditionally been regarded as the date of its end; in some locations, it may have disappeared as early as 2600 or 2700 BCE or around 4,620 to 4,720 years ago. The earliest evidence for this culture is found on the Ararat plain; it spread northward in Caucasus by 3000 BCE or around 5,020 years ago). Altogether, the early Transcaucasian culture enveloped a vast area and mostly encompassed, on modern-day territories, the Southern Caucasus (except western Georgia), northwestern Iran, the northeastern Caucasus, eastern Turkey, and as far as Syria. The name of the culture is derived from the Kura and Araxes river valleys. Kura–Araxes culture is sometimes known as Shengavitian, Karaz (Erzurum), Pulur, and Yanik Tepe (Iranian Azerbaijan, near Lake Urmia) cultures. Furthermore, it gave rise to the later Khirbet Kerak-ware culture found in Syria and Canaan after the fall of the Akkadian Empire. While it is unknown what cultures and languages were present in Kura-Araxes, the two most widespread theories suggest a connection with Hurro-Urartian and/or Anatolian languages.” ref

“The Kura-Araxes cultural tradition existed in the highlands of the South Caucasus from 3500 to 2450 BCE or 5,520 to 4,470 years ago. This tradition represented an adaptive regime and a symbolically encoded common identity spread over a broad area of patchy mountain environments. By 3000 BCE or around 5,020 years ago, groups bearing this identity had migrated southwest across a wide area from the Taurus Mountains down into the southern Levant, southeast along the Zagros Mountains, and north across the Caucasus Mountains. In these new places, they became effectively ethnic groups amid already heterogeneous societies. This paper addresses the place of migrants among local populations as ethnicities and the reasons for their disappearance in the diaspora after 2450 BCE.” ref

“DNA from the Bible’s Canaanites lives on in modern Arabs and Jews: A new study of ancient DNA traces the surprising heritage of these mysterious Bronze Age people. Tel Megiddo was an important Canaanite city-state during the Bronze Age, approximately 3500 to 1200 B.CE or 5,520 to 3,220 years ago. DNA analysis reveals that the city’s population included migrants from the distant Caucasus Mountains. They are best known as the people who lived “in a land flowing with milk and honey” until they were vanquished by the ancient Israelites and disappeared from history. But a scientific report published today reveals that the genetic heritage of the Canaanites survives in many modern-day Jews and Arabs. The study in Cell also shows that migrants from the distant Caucasus Mountains combined with the indigenous population to forge the unique Canaanite culture that dominated the area between Egypt and Mesopotamia during the Bronze Age. The team extracted ancient DNA from the bones of 73 individuals buried over the course of 1,500 years at five Canaanite sites scattered across Israel and Jordan. They also factored in data from an additional 20 individuals from four sites previously reported. “Individuals from all sites are highly genetically similar,” says co-author and molecular evolutionist Liran Carmel of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University.” ref

“So while the Canaanites lived in far-flung city-states, and never coalesced into an empire, they shared genes as well as a common culture. The researchers also compared the ancient DNA with that of modern populations and found that most Arab and Jewish groups in the region owe more than half of their DNA to Canaanites and other peoples who inhabited the ancient Near East—an area encompassing much of the modern Levant, Caucasus, and Iran. The study—a collaborative effort between Carmel’s lab, the ancient DNA lab at Harvard University headed by geneticist David Reich, and other groups—was by far the largest of its type in the region. Its findings are the latest in a series of recent breakthroughs in our understanding of this mysterious people who left behind few written records. Marc Haber, a geneticist at the Wellcome Trust’s Sanger Institute in Hinxton, United Kingdom, co-led a 2017 study of five Canaanite individuals from the coastal town of Sidon. The results showed that modern Lebanese can trace more than 90 percent of their genetic ancestry to Canaanites.” ref

“As Egyptians built pyramids and Mesopotamians constructed ziggurats some 4,500 years ago, the Canaanites began to develop towns and cities between these great powers. They first appear in the historical record around 1800 B.C., when the king of the city-state of Mari in today’s eastern Syria complained about “thieves and Canaanites.” Diplomatic correspondence written five centuries later mentions several Canaanite kings, who often struggled to maintain independence from Egypt. “The land of Canaan is your land and its kings are your servants,” acknowledged one Babylonian monarch in a letter to the Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten. Biblical texts, written many centuries later, insist that Yahweh promised the land of Canaan to the Israelites after their escape from Egypt. Jewish scripture says the newcomers eventually triumphed, but archaeological evidence doesn’t show widespread destruction of Canaanite populations. Instead, they appear to have been gradually overpowered by later invaders such as the Philistines, Greeks, and Romans.” ref

“Red and black pottery circa 2500 BCE or around 4,520 years old was found in the Caucasus Mountains, as well as at Canaanite sites far to the southwest. The Canaanites spoke a Semitic language and were long thought to derive from earlier populations that settled in the region thousands of years before. But archaeologists have puzzled over red-and-black pottery discovered at Canaanite sites that closely resembles ceramics found in the Caucasus Mountains, some 750 miles to the northwest. Historians also have noted that many Canaanite names derive from Hurrian, a non-Semitic language originating in the Caucasus. Whether this resulted from long-distance trade or migration was uncertain. The new study demonstrates that significant numbers of people, and not just goods, were moving around during humanity’s first era of cities and empires. The genes of Canaanite individuals proved to be a mix of local Neolithic people and the Caucasus migrants, who began showing up in the region around the start of the Bronze Age. Carmel adds that the migration appears to have been more than a one-time event, and “could have involved multiple waves throughout the Bronze Age.” One brother and sister who lived around 1500 B.C. in Megiddo, in what is now northern Israel, were from a family that had migrated relatively recently from the northeast. The team also noted that individuals at two coastal sites—Ashkelon in Israel and Sidon in Lebanon—show slightly more genetic diversity. That may be the result of broader trade links in Mediterranean port towns than inland settlements.” ref

“Glenn Schwartz, an archaeologist at Johns Hopkins University who was not involved in the study, said that the biological data provides important insight into how Canaanites shared a notable number of genes as well as cultural traits. And Haber from the Wellcome Trust noted that the quantity of DNA results is particularly impressive, given the difficulty of extracting samples from old bones buried in such a warm climate that can quickly degrade genetic material. Both Israeli and Palestinian politicians claim the region of Israel and the Palestinian territories is the ancestral home of their people, and maintain that the other group was a late arrival. “We are the Canaanites,” asserted Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas last year. “This land is for its people…who were here 5,000 years ago.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, said recently that the ancestors of modern Palestinians “came from the Arabian peninsula to the Land of Israel thousands of years” after the Israelites. The new study suggests that despite tumultuous changes in the area since the Bronze Age, “the present-day inhabitants of the region are, to a large extent, descended from its ancient residents,” concludes Schwartz—although Carmel adds that there are hints of later demographic shifts. Carmel hopes to soon expand the findings by collecting DNA from the remains of those who can be identified as Judean, Moabite, Ammonite, and other groups mentioned in the Bible and other texts. “One could analyze ‘Canaanite’ as opposed to ‘Israelite’ individuals,” adds archaeologist Mary Ellen Buck, who wrote a book on the Canaanites. “The Bible claims that these are distinct and mutually antagonistic groups, yet there’s reason to believe that they were very closely related.” ref

“As reported from genome-wide DNA data for 73 individuals from five archaeological sites across the Bronze and Iron Ages Southern Levant. These individuals, who share the “Canaanite” material culture, can be modeled as descending from two sources: (1) earlier local Neolithic populations and (2) populations related to the Chalcolithic Zagros or the Bronze Age Caucasus. The non-local contribution increased over time, as evinced by three outliers who can be modeled as descendants of recent migrants. We show evidence that different “Canaanite” groups genetically resemble each other more than other populations. We find that Levant-related modern populations typically have substantial ancestry coming from populations related to the Chalcolithic Zagros and the Bronze Age Southern Levant. These groups also harbor ancestry from sources we cannot fully model with the available data, highlighting the critical role of post-Bronze-Age migrations into the region over the past 3,000 years.” ref

“The Bronze Age (ca. 3500–1150 BCE) was a formative period in the Southern Levant, a region that includes present-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, and southwest Syria. This era, which ended in a large-scale civilization collapse across this region (Cline, 2014), shaped later periods both demographically and culturally. The following Iron Age (ca. 1150–586 BCE) saw the rise of territorial kingdoms such as biblical Israel, Judah, Ammon, Moab, and Aram-Damascus, as well as the Phoenician city-states. In much of the Late Bronze Age, the region was ruled by imperial Egypt, although in later phases of the Iron Age it was controlled by the Mesopotamian-centered empires of Assyria and Babylonia. Archaeological and historical research has documented major changes during the Bronze and Iron Ages, such as the cultural influence of the northern (Caucasian) populations related to the Kura-Araxes tradition during the Early Bronze Age (Greenberg and Goren, 2009) and effects from the “Sea Peoples” (such as Philistines) from the west in the beginning of the Iron Age (Yasur-Landau, 2010). The inhabitants of the Southern Levant in the Bronze Age are commonly described as “Canaanites,” that is, residents of the Land of Canaan. The term appears in several 2nd millennium BCE sources (e.g., Amarna, Alalakh, and Ugarit tablets) and in biblical texts dating from the 8th–7th centuries BCE and later (Bienkowski, 1999, Lemche, 1991, Na’aman, 1994a). In the latter, the Canaanites are referred to as the pre-Israelite inhabitants of the land (Na’aman, 1994a). Canaan of the 2nd millennium BCE was organized in a system of city-states (Goren et al., 2004), where elites ruled from urban hubs over rural (and in some places pastoral) countryside. The material culture of these city-states was relatively uniform (Mazar, 1992), but whether this uniformity extends to their genetic ancestry is unknown. Although genetic ancestry and material culture are unlikely to ever match perfectly, past ancient DNA analyses show that they might sometimes be strongly associated. In other cases, a direct correspondence between genetics and culture cannot be established. We discuss several examples in the Discussion. Previous ancient DNA studies published genome-scale data for thirteen individuals from four Bronze Age sites in the Southern Levant: three individuals from ‘Ain Ghazal in present-day Jordan, dated to ∼2300 BCE (Intermediate Bronze Age) (Lazaridis et al., 2016); five from Sidon in present-day Lebanon, dated to ∼1750 BCE (Middle Bronze Age) (Haber et al., 2017); two from Tel Shadud in present-day Israel, dated to ∼1250 BCE (Late Bronze Age) (van den Brink et al., 2017); and three from Ashkelon in present-day Israel, dated to ∼1650–1200 BCE (Middle and Late Bronze Age) (Feldman et al., 2019). The ancestry of these individuals could be modeled as a mixture of earlier local groups and groups related to the Chalcolithic people of the Zagros Mountains, located in present-day Iran and designated in previous studies as Iran_ChL (Haber et al., 2017, Lazaridis et al., 2016). The Bronze Age Sidon group could be modeled as a major (93% ± 2%) ancestral source for present-day groups in the region (Haber et al., 2017). A study of Chalcolithic individuals from Peqi’in cave in the Galilee (present-day Israel) showed that the ancestry of this earlier group included an additional component related to earlier Anatolian farmers, which was excluded as a substantial source for later Bronze Age groups from the Southern Levant, with the exception of the coastal groups from Sidon and Ashkelon (Feldman et al., 2019, Harney et al., 2018). These observations point to a degree of population turnover in the Chalcolithic-Bronze Age transition, consistent with archaeological evidence for a disruption between local Chalcolithic and Early Bronze cultures (de Miroschedji, 2014). Addressing three issues: First, we sought to determine the extent of genetic homogeneity among the sites associated with Canaanite material culture. Second, we analyzed the data to gain insights into the timing, extent, and origin of gene flow that brought Zagros- and Caucasus-related ancestry to the Bronze Age Southern Levant. Third, we assessed the extent to which additional gene flow events have affected the region since that time. To address these questions, we generated genome-wide ancient DNA data for 71 Bronze Age and 2 Iron Age individuals, spanning roughly 1,500 years, from the Intermediate Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age. Combined with previously published data on the Bronze and Iron Ages in the Southern Levant, we assembled a dataset of 93 individuals from 9 sites across present-day Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon, all demonstrating Canaanite material culture. We show that the sampled individuals from the different sites are usually genetically similar, albeit with subtle but in some cases significant differences, especially in residents of the coastal regions of Sidon and Ashkelon. Almost all individuals can be modeled as a mixture of local earlier Neolithic populations and populations from the northeastern part of the Near East. However, the mixture proportions change over time, revealing the demographic dynamics of the Southern Levant during the Bronze Age. Finally, we show that the genomes of present-day groups geographically and historically linked to the Bronze Age Levant, including the great majority of present-day Jewish groups and Levantine Arabic-speaking groups, are consistent with having 50% or more of their ancestry from people related to groups who lived in the Bronze Age Levant and the Chalcolithic Zagros. These present-day groups also show ancestries that cannot be modeled by the available ancient DNA data, highlighting the importance of additional major genetic effects on the region since the Bronze Age.” ref

Their Results

DNA from the bones of 73 individuals from 5 archaeological sites in the Southern Levant (Table S1; STAR Methods; Figure 1A):

  • Thirty-five individuals from Tel Megiddo (northern Israel), most of whom date to the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age, except for one dating to the Intermediate Bronze Age and one dating to the Early Iron  Age
  • Twenty-one individuals from the Baq‛ah in central  Jordan (northeast of Amman), mostly from the Late Bronze Age
  • Thirteen individuals from Yehud (central Israel), dating to the Intermediate Bronze Age
  • Three individuals from Tel Hazor (northern Israel) dating to the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age
  • One      individual from Tel Abel Beth Maacah (northern Israel), dating to the Iron Age ref

“For all analyzed samples but one, DNA was extracted from petrous bones. The DNA was converted to double-indexed half Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG)-treated libraries that we enriched for about 1.2 million single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) before sequencing (see STAR Methods). The median number of autosomal SNPs covered was 288,863 (range 4,883–945,269). In addition to genetic data, we measured values of strontium isotopes for 12 individuals (and for 8 additional individuals that did not produce DNA) (STAR Methods; Methods S1A), and generated accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dates for 20 individuals (Table S1). We combined our newly generated data with published data for 13 Bronze Age Southern Levant individuals from ‘Ain-Ghazal, Sidon, Tel Shadud, and Ashkelon (van den Brink et al., 2017, Feldman et al., 2019, Haber et al., 2017, Lazaridis et al., 2016), and 7 Iron Age Southern Levant Individuals from Ashkelon (Feldman et al., 2019). The projected the autosomal genetic data onto the plane spanned by the first two principal components of 777 present-day West Eurasian individuals genotyped for roughly 600,000 SNPs on the Affymetrix Human Origins SNP array (Lazaridis et al., 2014). The reserchers restricted the plot to 68 individuals represented by at least 30,000 autosomal SNPs (Figure 1B), a coverage threshold where the ability to infer ancestry was robust to sampling noise (Methods S1B). All Bronze and Iron Age Levant individuals (blue and green shapes) form a tight cluster, except for three outliers from Megiddo, and previously identified outliers from the Ashkelon population known as Iron Age I (IA1) (Feldman et al., 2019). We also ran ADMIXTURE on a set of 1,663 present-day and ancient individuals (see STAR Methods; Figure S1). The ADMIXTURE results are qualitatively consistent with the principal component analysis (PCA), suggesting that all individuals but the outliers from Megiddo and the Ashkelon IA1 population have similar ancestry (Figure 1C). The method described in (Olalde et al., 2019) to identify 17 individuals as being first-, second-, or third-degree relatives of other individuals in the dataset. They fall within seven families: five in Tel Megiddo and two in the Baq‛ah. In most families, we used only the member with the highest SNP coverage in subsequent analyses (Table S1). Two of the three Megiddo outliers are a brother and a sister (Family 4, I2189 and I2200), leaving in the final dataset two individuals marked as outliers. After removing low-coverage individuals and closely related family members, 62 individuals were left for further analysis (Table S1). High Degree of Genetic Affinities between Multiple Sites: The reserch divided the 26 high-coverage individuals from Tel Megiddo into the following groups, on the basis of geographic location, archaeological period, and genetic clustering in PCA (Table S1): Intermediate Bronze Age (Megiddo_IBA, a single individual), Middle-to-Late Bronze Age (Megiddo_MLBA, 22 individuals), Iron Age (Megiddo_IA, a single individual), as well as the two outliers, Megiddo_I2200 and Megiddo_I10100, which were each treated as a separate group. We compared these groups and the other populations in our dataset to previously published data from other sites in the broader region and from earlier periods, including the Early Bronze Age Caucasus (Armenia_EBA), the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age Caucasus (Armenia_MLBA), the Chalcolithic Zagros Mountains (Iran_ChL), the Chalcolithic Caucasus (Armenia_ChL), the Neolithic of the Southern Levant (Levant_N), the Neolithic of the Zagros Mountains (Iran_N), and the Neolithic of Anatolia (Anatolia_N) (Lazaridis et al., 2016).” ref

“To test for variation in ancestry proportions among the Levant Bronze and Iron Age groups, we used qpWave. qpWave tests whether each possible pair of groups (Testi, Testj) is consistent with descending from a common ancestral population—that is, consistent with being a clade—since separation from the ancestors of a set of outgroup populations. qpWave works by computing symmetry test statistics of the form f4(Testi, Testj; Outgroupk, Outgroupl), which have an expected value of zero if (Testi, Testj) form a clade with respect to the outgroups. qpWave then generates a single p value corrected for the empirically measured correlation among the statistics (Reich et al., 2012). Using a distantly related set of outgroups, we found that with the exception of the outliers from Megiddo, Ashkelon IA1, and Sidon, all Bronze and Iron Age Levant groups are consistent with being pairwise clades with respect to the outgroups (Figure 2). We discuss each of qpWave’s findings of significant population substructure in turn. The Megiddo outliers not only fail to form a clade with the other populations, but also with each other. Ashkelon IA1 has previously been reported to harbor European ancestry, and so our finding that it is genetically differentiated from contemporary groups is unsurprising (Feldman et al., 2019). The significant differentiation of the Sidon individuals in qpWave—despite the fact that they roughly cluster with the other Southern Levant Bronze Age groups in PCA and ADMIXTURE—is notable, especially because we find that they are consistent with forming a clade with the two groups from coastal Ashkelon that do not have European-related admixture (the Bronze Age and later Iron Age groups ASH_LBA and ASH_IA2). Speculatively, this observation could be related to the fact that both Sidon and Ashkelon were port towns with connections to other Mediterranean coastal groups outside the Southern Levant, which could have introduced ancestry components that are absent from inland Levantine Bronze Age groups, although it is difficult to test this hypothesis in the absence of high resolution ancient DNA sampling from the eastern Mediterranean rim. The genetic distinctiveness of the Sidon individuals is also compatible with previous findings that Chalcolithic Levantine individuals from Peqi’in Cave are consistent with contributing some ancestry to the Sidon individuals, but not to the ‘Ain Ghazal ones (Harney et al., 2018). We considered the possibility that the significantly different genetic patterns we detect in the Sidon individuals could reflect their different experimental treatment compared with that of the other individuals in this study (shotgun sequencing of non-UDG-treated libraries compared with enrichment of UDG-treated libraries). To test this, we repeated the analyses by using only transversion SNPs, which are less prone to characteristic ancient DNA errors, but found no indication of systematic bias (Wang et al., 2015). However, we did find evidence of substructure within the Sidon individuals, and some but not all were consistent with forming a clade with inland Southern Levant populations, a finding that could reflect substantial cosmopolitan nature of this coastal site (Methods S1C, see Discussion).” ref

“To reveal subtler population structure, we repeated the qpWave analysis adding outgroups that are genetically closer to the test groups, such as Armenia_MLBA and Natufian (Figure 3). With this more powerful set of outgroups, Baq‛ah and Megiddo_IBA also provide evidence of not being pairwise clades with the remaining groups. Thus, beyond the broad observation of genetic affinities between sites, we also observe subtle ancestry heterogeneity across the region during the Bronze Age (see Discussion). Gene Flow into the Southern Levant During the Bronze Age: Two previous studies of Bronze Age individuals from ‘Ain Ghazal and Sidon modeled them as derived from a mixture of earlier local groups (Levant_N) and groups related to peoples of the Chalcolithic Zagros mountains (Iran_ChL) (Haber et al., 2017, Lazaridis et al., 2016). These groups were estimated to harbor around 56%±±3% and 48%±±4% Neolithic Levant-related ancestry for ‘Ain Ghazal (Lazaridis et al., 2016) and Sidon (Haber et al., 2017), respectively. We used qpAdm to estimate that Bronze and Iron Age Ashkelon (ASH_LBA and ASH_IA2) carry 54%±±5% and 42%±±5% Neolithic Levant-related ancestry, respectively. Next, we used qpAdm to test the same model for the data reported here and found that most Middle-to-Late Bronze Age groups fit the model, with point estimates of 48%–57% Levant_N ancestry. These ancestry proportions are statistically indistinguishable (Bonferroni-corrected z test), which corroborates the fact that they are consistent with forming pairwise clades in qpWave (Table S2; Methods S1D). The only group that failed to fit this model was Baq‛ah (p = 0.0003), even when using a wide range of outgroup populations (Table S2). This might be a result of ancestry heterogeneity across the Baq‛ah individuals. To obtain insight into the Zagros-related ancestry component, we focused on two questions: what is the likely origin of this ancestry component and what is its likely timing? Although people of the Chalcolithic Zagros are so far the best proxy population for this ancestry component, there is no archaeological evidence for cultural spread directly from the Zagros into the Southern Levant during the Bronze Age. In contrast, there is archaeological support for connections between Bronze Age Southern Levant groups and the Caucasus (Greenberg and Goren, 2009), a term we use to represent both present-day Caucasus, as well as neighboring regions such as eastern Anatolia (see Discussion). With regard to the timing of these events, archaeology points to cultural affinities between the Kura-Araxes (Caucasus) and Khirbet Kerak (Southern Levant) archaeological cultures in the first half of the 3rd millennium BCE (Greenberg and Goren, 2009), and textual evidence documents a number of non-Semitic, Hurrian (from the northeast of the ancient Near East) personal names in the 2nd millennium BCE, for example in the Amarna archive of the 14th century BCE (Na’aman, 1994b). The reserchers, therefore, reasoned that the Chalcolithic Zagros component might have arrived into the Southern Levant through the Caucasus (and even more proximately the northeastern areas of the ancient Near East, although we have no ancient DNA sampling from this region). This movement might not have been limited to a short pulse, and instead could have involved multiple waves throughout the Bronze Age. To test whether the origin of the gene flow was from the Caucasus, rather than directly from the Zagros region, we ran qpAdm, replacing Iran_ChL with Early Bronze Age Caucasus (Armenia_EBA). We found that the Caucasus model received similar support to that of the Zagros model (Table S2; Methods S1E). Next, we modeled Armenia_EBA as a mixture of an earlier Caucasus population (Chalcolithic Armenia, Armenia_ChL) and Iran_ChL and found that indeed Armenia_EBA is compatible with this model (Table S2). Altogether, we conclude that our data are also compatible with a model in which Zagros-related ancestry in the Southern Levant arrived through the Caucasus, either directly or via intermediates.” ref

“To study the timing of the admixture of Zagros-related ancestry in the Southern Levant, we leveraged the large time span of individuals in our dataset, extending across roughly 1,500 years, from the Intermediate Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age. Using qpAdm-based ancestry estimates for each of the individuals, we found that almost all are compatible with being an admixture of groups related to the Neolithic Levant and Chalcolithic Zagros. One exception to this is an individual in Megiddo_MLBA that is weakly compatible with the model. Another exception is three individuals in the Baq’ah (Table S2), which suggests that the difficulty in modeling individuals from this site as a mixture of Neolithic Levant and Chalcolithic Zagros might reflect ancestry heterogeneity (Figure 3). These results do not change qualitatively when we used a larger set of outgroup populations (Table S2). We observed that the oldest individuals in our collection, from the Intermediate Bronze Age, already carried significant Zagros-related ancestry, suggesting that gene flow into the region started before ca. 2400 BCE. This is consistent with the hypothesis that people of Kura-Araxes archaeological complex of the 3rd millennium BCE might have affected the Southern Levant not only culturally, but also through some degree of movement of people. Our data also imply an increase in the proportion of Zagros-related ancestry after the Intermediate Bronze Age, as reflected in a significantly positive slope in a linear regression of the Chalcolithic-Zagros-related ancestry over the calendar year (β=1.4⋅104±0.4⋅104β=1.4⋅104±0.4⋅104, Jackknife), amounting to an increase of ∼14% per thousand years (Figures 4 and S2A). However, we caution that the number of individuals and their time span are insufficient to determine whether the increase in the Zagros-related ancestry happened continuously during the Middle and Late Bronze Ages, or whether there were multiple distinct migration events. The two outliers from Megiddo (three including the sibling pair) provide additional evidence for the timing and origin of gene flow into the region. The three were found in close proximity to each other at Level K-10, which is radiocarbon dated to 1581–1545 BCE (domestic occupation) and 1578–1421 BCE (burials; both ± 1 s) (Martin et al., 2020, Toffolo et al., 2014), whereas the bone of one of the three (I10100) was directly dated (1688–1535 BCE, ± 2Σ). The reason these individuals are distinct from the rest is that their Caucasus- or Zagros-related genetic component is much higher, reflecting ongoing gene flow into the region from the northeast (Table S2; Figure S2B). The Neolithic Levant component is 22%–27% in I2200, and 9%–26% in I10100. These individuals are unlikely to be first generation migrants, as strontium isotope analysis on the two outlier siblings (I2189 and I2200) (Methods S1A) suggests that they were raised locally. This implies that the Megiddo outliers might be descendants of people who arrived in recent generations. Direct support for this hypothesis comes from the fact that in sensitive qpAdm modeling (including closely related sets of outgroups), the only working northeast source population for these two individuals is the contemporaneous Armenia_MLBA, whereas the earlier Iran_ChL and Armenia_EBA do not fit (Table S2). The addition of Iran_ChL to the set of outgroups does not change this result or cause model failure. Finally, no other Levantine group shows a similar admixture pattern (Table S2). This shows that some level of gene flow into the Levant took place during the later phases of the Bronze Age and suggests that the source of this gene flow was the Caucasus. Altogether, our analyses show that gene flow into the Levant from people related to those in the Caucasus or Zagros was already occurring by the Intermediate Bronze Age, and that it lingered, episodically or continuously, at least in inland sites, during the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age.” ref

Further Change in Levantine Populations Since the Bronze Age

“To develop a sense of population changes in the Levant since the Bronze Age, we attempted to model groups that have a tradition of descent from ancient people in the region (Jews) as well as Levantine Arabic-speakers as mixtures of various ancient source populations. qpAdm assumes no admixture between groups related to the outgroups and the source populations, but almost all present-day Levantine and Mediterranean populations have significant sub-Saharan-African-related admixture that the ancient groups did not. This eliminates many key outgroups for qpAdm and reduces the utility of the method in this context. In particular, we were not able to apply qpAdm to get a single working model for the majority of present-day West Eurasian populations. As an alternative, we developed a methodology we call LINADMIX, which relies on the output of ADMIXTURE (Alexander et al., 2009) and uses constrained least-squares to estimate the contribution of given source populations to a target population (see STAR Methods). As a complementary approach, we developed a tool we call pseudo-haplotype ChromoPainter (PHCP), which is an adaptation of the haplotype-based method ChromoPainter (Lawson et al., 2012) to ancient genomes (see STAR Methods; Methods S1F). We first established that these methods provide meaningful estimates of ancestry in the context of this study by using them to re-compute the ancestry proportions that we were able to model with qpAdm. Both LINADMIX and PHCP (Table S3; Figure S3; Methods S1F) produce qualitatively similar estimates as qpAdm (Table S2). To further establish the methods, we performed simulations that were designed to test the methods’ abilities to infer ancestry proportions in present-day populations in a setup similar to the current study (Methods S1H). For this, we generated present-day populations as a mixture of two closely related ancient populations with and without a third, more distant, population. Both methods estimated the ancestry proportion of the distant source population with errors of up to 4% and the proportions of the closely related source populations with errors of up to 10%. Thus, although ADMIXTURE, the basis of LINADMIX, is known to have certain pitfalls as a tool for quantifying ancestry proportions (Lawson et al., 2018), in the case of individuals with ancestry sources similar to those we have analyzed here, our results suggest that both LINADMIX and PHCP are highly informative. For the LINADMIX analysis of present-day populations, we used a background dataset of 1,663 present-day and ancient individuals from 239 populations genotyped by using SNP arrays and focused our analysis on 14 Jewish and Levantine present-day populations, along with modern English, Tuscan, and Moroccan populations that were used as controls. We used LINADMIX to model each of the 17 present-day populations as an admixture of four sources: (1) Megiddo_MLBA (the largest group) as a representative of the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age component; (2) Iran_ChL as a representative of the Zagros and the Caucasus; (3) Present-day Somalis as representatives of an Eastern African source (in the absence of genetic data on ancient populations from the region); and (4) Europe_LNBA as a representative of ancient Europeans from the Late Neolithic and Bronze Age (Methods S1I; Table S4; Figure S4). We also applied PHCP to these 17 present-day populations (Methods S1G; Table S4; Figure S4). Comparison of PHCP and LINADMIX shows that they agree well with respect to the Somali and Europe_LNBA component, and therefore also for the combined contribution of Iran_ChL and Megiddo_MLBA (Methods S1G; Figure S4). However, they deviate regarding the respective contributions of Iran_ChL and Megiddo_MLBA (Figure S4), likely because of the fact that the Megiddo_MLBA and Iran_ChL are already very similar populations (Table S3). To only consider results that are robust and shared by LINADMIX and PHCP, we have combined Megiddo_MLBA and Iran_ChL to a single source population representing the Middle East for our main results (Figure 5). We further verified these conclusions, as well as the robustness of the estimations, by using a different representative for the Bronze Age Levantine groups as a source (Tables S4 and S5; Methods S1J) and using perturbations to the ADMIXTURE parameters (Table S4; Methods S1K). Combined, these results suggest that modern populations related to the Levant are consistent with having a substantial ancestry component from the Bronze Age Southern Levant and the Chalcolithic Zagros. Nonetheless, other potential ancestry sources are possible, and more ancient samples might enable a refined picture (Table S4).” ref

The results show that since the Bronze Age, an additional East-African-related component was added to the region (on average ∼10.6%, excluding Ethiopian Jews who harbor ∼80% East African component), as well as a European-related component (on average ∼8.7%, excluding Ashkenazi Jews who harbor a ∼41% European-related component). The East-African-related component is highest in Ethiopian Jews and North Africans (Moroccans and Egyptians). It exists in all Arabic-speaking populations (apart from the Druze). The European-related component is highest in the European control populations (English and Tuscan), as well as in Ashkenazi and Moroccan Jews, both having a history in Europe (Atzmon et al., 2010, Carmi et al., 2014, Schroeter, 2008). This component is present, although in smaller amount, in all other populations except for Bedouin B and Ethiopian Jews. As expected, the English and Tuscan populations have a very low Middle-Eastern-related component. Whereas LINADMIX and PHCP have high uncertainty in estimating the relative contributions of Megiddo_MLBA and Iran_ChL, the results and simulations nevertheless suggest that additional Zagros-related ancestry has penetrated the region since the Bronze Age (Methods S1I). Except for the populations with the highest Zagros-related component, PHCP estimates lower magnitudes of this component (Figure S4A), and therefore detection by PHCP of a Zagros-related ancestry is likely an indication for the presence of this component. Indeed, examining the results of LINADMIX and PHCP on all four source populations (Figure S4), we observe a relatively large Zagros-related component in many Arabic-speaking groups, suggesting that gene flow from populations related to those of the Zagros and Caucasus (although not necessarily from these specific regions) continued even after the Iron Age (Methods S1I). Altogether, the patterns of the present-day populations reflect demographic processes that occurred after the Bronze Age and are plausibly related to processes known from the historical literature (Methods S1I). These include an Eastern-African-related component that is present in Arabic-speaking groups but is lower in non-Ethiopian Jewish groups, as well as Zagros-related contribution to Levantine populations, which is highest in the northernmost population examined, suggesting a contribution of populations related to the Zagros even after the Bronze and Iron Ages. The results provide a comprehensive genetic picture of the primary inhabitants of the Southern Levant during the 2nd millennium BCE, known in the historical record and based on shared material culture as “Canaanites.” We carried out a detailed analysis aimed at answering three basic questions: how genetically homogeneous were these people, what were their plausible origins with respect to earlier peoples, and how much change in ancestry has there been in the region since the Bronze Age? Earlier genetic analyses modeled the genomes of Middle-to-Late Bronze Age people of the Southern Levant as having almost equal shares of earlier local populations (Levant_N) and populations that are related to the Chalcolithic Zagros (Feldman et al., 2019, Haber et al., 2017, Lazaridis et al., 2016), suggesting a movement from the northeast into the Southern Levant. Here, we provide more details on this process, taking into account evidence from both archaeology and our temporally and geographically diverse genetic data. Because there is little archaeological evidence of a direct cultural connection between the Southern Levant and the Zagros region in this period, the Caucasus is a more likely source for this ancestry. We used our data to compare these two scenarios and concluded that the genetic data are compatible with both.” ref

“The Megiddo outliers, which we inferred to be relative newcomers to the region, are particularly important in demonstrating that the gene flow continued throughout the Bronze Age and that at least some of the gene flow likely came from the Caucasus rather than the Zagros. These two individuals have the highest proportions of Zagros- or Caucasian-related ancestry in our dataset. Analysis of these outliers gave significantly stronger evidence of a Caucasus source compared with a Zagros one, although this conclusion might be revised once ancient DNA data from the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age in the Zagros region become available. The two Megiddo individuals with the next lowest Neolithic Levant component (I10769 and I10770, brothers) were found near the monumental tomb that was likely related to the palace at Megiddo, raising the possibility that they might be associated with the ruling caste. Indeed, a ruler of Taanach (a town located immediately to the south of Megiddo) mentioned in a 15th century BCE cuneiform tablet found at the site and the rulers of Megiddo and Taanach mentioned in the 14th century BCE Amarna letters (found in Egypt) carry Hurrian names (a language spoken in the northeast of the ancient Near East, possibly including the Caucasus) (Na’aman, 1994b). This provides some evidence—albeit so far only suggestive—that at least some of the ruling groups in these (and other) cities might have originated from the northeast of the ancient Near East. The Caucasus is represented in this study by ancient groups from the present-day country of Armenia, but the region known to have had cultural ties with the Southern Levant is much broader. Evidence of cultural effects on the Southern Levant is mainly focused on the Kura-Araxes culture during the Early Bronze Age (archaeology) and on the Hurrians during the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age (linguistic testimony). These two complexes were spread over the Caucasus, Eastern Anatolia, and neighboring regions. The Armenian sites we analyzed are the best representatives to date of these cultures. The Early Bronze Age individuals from Armenia (Armenia_EBA) come from an Early Bronze Age Kura-Araxes burial ground, and the later Middle-to-Late Bronze Age individuals (Armenia_MLBA) come from the Aragatsotn Province in northwestern Armenia. It is important to note that the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Anatolian individuals analyzed in this study come from the northwestern part of Anatolia, which is not part of the Caucasus. The Chalcolithic Zagros individuals come from the Kangavar Valley in Iran, which is located on the border of the Kura-Araxes influence.” ref

“The term “Canaanites” is loosely defined, referring to a collection of groups (which in the Bronze Age were organized in a city-state system) and thus in principle could lack genetic coherence. The individuals examined here cover a wide geographic span—coming from nine sites in present-day Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan. Our analyses revealed that, with the exception of Sidon (and to a smaller extent the individuals of the Baq‛ah), they are homogeneous in the sense of being closer to each other than to other contemporary and neighboring populations. This suggests that the archaeological and historical category of “Canaanites” correlates with shared ancestry (Eisenmann et al., 2018). This resembles the pattern observed in the Aegean basin during the 2nd millennium BCE, where the cultural categories of “Minoan” and “Mycenaean” show evidence of genetic homogeneity across multiple sites albeit with potentially subtle ancestry differences within these groupings (Lazaridis et al., 2017). Another example is the “Yamnaya” pastoralists of late 3rd and early 2nd millennium BCE in the western Eurasian Steppe (Allentoft et al., 2015, Haak et al., 2015). This contrasts with the pattern seen in other places, such as for the Bell Beaker cultural complex of the 2nd millennium BCE (Olalde et al., 2018), where people sharing similar cultural practices had widely varying ancestry. In any case, the detection of such associations—as we do here—cannot by itself prove that group identities in the past were related to genetics. From the groups we have examined, the only one that is somewhat diverged from the rest is Sidon. We provide evidence against the possibility that this observation is a batch effect (Methods S1C). Rather, we suggest that the relative remoteness of Sidon stems from the fact that this population is genetically heterogeneous and has different individuals showing resemblance to different Southern Levantine groups (Methods S1C). During the 2nd millennium BCE, Sidon was a major port city and was connected in trading relations with the eastern Mediterranean basin, which could have led to a significant genetic inflow, making its population more heterogeneous than that of inland cities. This might also be the reason that the site that most resembles Sidon is Ashkelon, which is another coastal site. The only inland population that resembles Sidon is Abel Beth Maacah, perhaps because of its geographic proximity (Figures 1A and 2). Apart from Sidon, Baq‛ah also shows some minor deviations from the rest when taking a richer set of outgroup populations (Figure 3). The Baq‛ah is located on the fringe of the Syrian desert, therefore this population might be admixed with more eastern groups, which are not yet genetically sampled. This might be reflected by the fact that the individuals of the Baq‛ah also show some degree of variability in their ancestry patterns (Table S2).” ref

“Although this study focuses on the Bronze Age, it also reports two new samples from the Iron Age—one from Megiddo and the other from Abel Beth Maacah. These two individuals show ancestry patterns that are very similar to those observed in the Middle and Late Bronze Age individuals (Figure 4), suggesting that the destruction at the end of the Bronze Age in the region did not necessarily lead to genetic discontinuity in each and every site. Notably, both Abel Beth Maacah and Megiddo are inland cities, and their genetic continuity throughout the transition from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age might not be representative of other sites in the region. For example, one of the two Iron Age populations in the Philistine coastal city of Ashkelon (ASH_IA1) showed evidence of mobility of populations related to southern Europe around the Bronze Age to Iron Age transition (Feldman et al., 2019). Estimating the ancestry proportions in present-day Middle Eastern populations with substantial sub-Saharan African admixture (as well as multiple sources of admixture from different parts of the Mediterranean), is difficult. We addressed the problem by developing two statistical techniques and then testing the robustness of our inference on the basis of a comparison between these methods, simulations, and perturbations of the input (see STAR Methods; Methods S1F–S1K). We examined 14 present-day populations that are historically or geographically linked to the Southern Levant and tested the contributions of East Africa, Europe, and the Middle East (combining Southern Levant Bronze Age populations and Zagros-related Chalcolithic ones) to their ancestry. We found that both Arabic-speaking and Jewish populations are compatible with having more than 50% Middle-Eastern-related ancestry. This does not mean that any these present-day groups bear direct ancestry from people who lived in the Middle-to-Late Bronze Age Levant or in Chalcolithic Zagros; rather, it indicates that they have ancestries from populations whose ancient proxy can be related to the Middle East. The Zagros- or Caucasian-related ancestry flow into the region apparently continued after the Bronze Age. We also see an Eastern-African-related ancestry entering the region after the Bronze Age with an approximate south-to-north gradient. In addition, we observe a European-related ancestry with the opposite gradient (north-to-south). Given the difficulties in separating the ancestry components arriving from the Southern Levant and the Zagros, an important direction for future work will be to reconstruct in high resolution the ancestry trajectories of each present-day group, and to understand how people from the Southern Levant Bronze Age mixed with other people in later periods in the context of processes known from the rich archaeological and historical records of the last three millennia.” ref

“The Kura-Araxes cultural tradition is reflected in the mountains north, east and west of Mesopotamia from the mid-fourth to mid-third millennia BC. Originating in the Armenian Highlands and its subset the South Caucasus, it developed over that period, and also spread across a wide area of the Taurus and Zagros mountains, down into the Southern Levant, and north beyond the Caucasus Mountains. Despite many decades of excavation of sites relating to this cultural tradition, we know surprisingly little about the societies of the homelands and their relationship to their migrant diaspora. This paper looks at one aspect of those cultures, ritual practice and ideology, to see if it is possibly better to define the nature of and changes in Kura-Araxes societies within the homelands, and their possible relationship to migrant communities.” ref

“Excavation of the early 3rd millennium levels at Arslantepe-Malatya, which reveal substantial changes following the collapse of the Late Chalcolithic centralized system in connection with the establishment of new groups linked to the Kura-Araxes culture . The new data show that these early 3rd millennium settlements, besides marking a break with respect to the earlier Chalcolithic period and a radically new organization, interestingly also show more elements of continuity than previously thought in the maintenance of a central role for Arslantepe in the Malatya region and in the continuation of some traditions such as those related to metallurgy. Rather than a momentary intrusion of pastoral communities of Transcaucasian origin, the new picture suggests the temporary appropriation of the site by mobile, probably transhumant groups moving in a wide area around the plain and already well-rooted in the region; after the destruction of the 4th millennium (4000 through 3000 BCE or around 6,020 to 5,020 years ago) palace, they used Arslantepe as their power center and landmark, probably competing with the local rural population for the control of the site and the region. This article presents the main results obtained during the recent excavation of levels from the beginning of the 3rd millennium in Arslantepe-Malatya, levels which revealed profound changes after the collapse of the centralized system of the Late Chalcolithic, in connection with the installation. on the site new population groups linked to the Kura-Araxe culture. Besides the fact that they mark a break with the Chalcolithic and testify to a radically new organization, recent data show that these occupations of the beginning of the 3rd millennium also present more elements of continuity than previously thought in the maintenance of the central role d’Arslantepe in the region of Malatya and in the pursuit of certain traditions such as those related to metallurgy. The image that is emerging now suggests the temporary appropriation of the site by mobile groups, probably transhumant, moving over a large area around the [Malatya] plain and already well established in this region, more than a temporary intrusion. pastoral communities from Transcaucasia. After the destruction of the 4th millennium palace.” ref

The formative processes of the Kura-Araxes cultural complex, and the date and circumstances of its rise, have been long debated. Shulaveri-Shomu culture preceded the Kura–Araxes culture in the area. There were many differences between these two cultures, so the connection was not clear. Later, it was suggested that the Sioni culture of eastern Georgia possibly represented a transition from the Shulaveri to the Kura-Arax cultural complex. At many sites, the Sioni culture layers can be seen as intermediary between Shulaver-Shomu-Tepe layers and the Kura-Araxes layers. This kind of stratigraphy warrants a chronological place of the Sioni culture at around 4000 BCE. Nowadays scholars consider the Kartli area, as well as the Kakheti area (in the river Sioni region) as key to forming the earliest phase of the Kura–Araxes culture. To a large extent, this appears as an indigenous culture of Caucasus that was formed over a long period, and at the same time incorporating foreign influences. There are some indications (such as at Arslantepe) of the overlapping in time of the Kura-Araxes and Uruk cultures; such contacts may go back even to the Middle Uruk period. Some scholars have suggested that the earliest manifestation of the Kura-Araxes phenomenon should be dated at least to the last quarter of the 5th millennium BC. This is based on the recent data from Ovçular Tepesi, a Late Chalcolithic settlement located in Nakhchivan by the Arpaçay river.” ref

Kura-Araxes Cultural Expansion

“They proceed westward to the Erzurum plain, southwest to Cilicia, and to the southeast into the area of Lake Van, and below the Urmia basin in Iran, such as to Godin Tepe. Finally, it proceeded into present-day Syria (Amuq valley), and as far as Palestine. Its territory corresponds to large parts of modern Armenia, Azerbaijan, Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgia, Ingushetia, North Ossetia, and parts of Iran and Turkey. At Sos Hoyuk, in Erzurum Province, Turkey, early forms of Kura-Araxes pottery were found in association with local ceramics as early as 3500-3300 BC. During the Early Bronze Age in 3000-2200 BC, this settlement was part of the Kura-Araxes phenomenon. At Arslantepe, Turkey, around 3000 BCE, there was widespread burning and destruction, after which Kura-Araxes pottery appeared in the area. According to Geoffrey Summers, the movement of Kura-Araxes peoples into Iran and the Van region, which he interprets as quite sudden, started shortly before 3000 BC, and may have been prompted by the ‘Late Uruk Collapse’ (end of the Uruk period), taking place at the end of Uruk IV phase c. 3100 BC.” ref

“Archaeological evidence of inhabitants of the Kura–Araxes culture showed that ancient settlements were found along the Hrazdan river, as shown by drawings at a mountainous area in a cave nearby. Structures in settlements have not revealed much differentiation, nor was there much difference in size or character between settlements, facts that suggest they probably had a poorly developed social hierarchy for a significant stretch of their history. Some, but not all, settlements were surrounded by stone walls. They built mud-brick houses, originally round, but later developing into subrectangular designs with structures of just one or two rooms, multiple rooms centered around an open space, or rectilinear designs. At some point, the culture’s settlements and burial grounds expanded out of lowland river valleys and into highland areas. Although some scholars have suggested that this expansion demonstrates a switch from agriculture to pastoralism and that it serves as possible proof of a large-scale arrival of Indo-Europeans, facts such as that settlement in the lowlands remained more or less continuous suggest merely that the people of this culture were diversifying their economy to encompass crop and livestock agriculture. Shengavit Settlement is a prominent Kura-Araxes site in present-day Yerevan area in Armenia. It was inhabited from approximately 3200 BC cal to 2500 BC cal. Later on, in the Middle Bronze Age, it was used irregularly until 2200 BC cal. The town occupied an area of six hectares, which is large for Kura-Araxes sites.” ref

Kura-Araxes Ritual Mounds

“In the 3rd millennium B.C., one particular group of mounds of the Kura–Araxes culture is remarkable for their wealth. This was the final stage of culture’s development. These burial mounds are known as the Martqopi (or Martkopi) period mounds. Those on the left bank of the river Alazani are often 20–25 meters high and 200–300 meters in diameter. They contain especially rich artefacts, such as gold and silver jewelry. Inhumation practices are mixed. Flat graves are found but so are substantial kurgan burials, the latter of which may be surrounded by cromlechs. This points to a heterogeneous ethno-linguistic population. Analyzing the situation in the Kura-Araxes period, T.A. Akhundov notes the lack of unity in funerary monuments, which he considers more than strange in the framework of a single culture; for the funeral rites reflect the deep culture-forming foundations and are weakly influenced by external customs. There are non-kurgan and kurgan burials, burials in-ground pits, in stone boxes and crypts, in the underlying ground strata, and on top of them; using both the round and rectangular burials; there are also substantial differences in the typical corpse position. Burial complexes of Kura–Araxes culture sometimes also include cremation. Here one can come to the conclusion that the Kura–Araxes culture developed gradually through a synthesis of several cultural traditions, including the ancient cultures of the Caucasus and nearby territories.” ref

‘Origin of Early Transcaucasian Culture (aka Kura-Araxes culture)

From the paper:

Akhundov (2007) recently uncovered pre-Kura-Araxes/Late Chalcolithic materials  from the settlement of Boyuk Kesik and the kurgan necropolis of Soyuq Bulaq in  northwestern Azerbaijan, and Makharadze (2007) has also excavated a pre-Kura-Araxes  kurgan, Kavtiskhevi, in central Georgia. Materials recovered from both these recent  excavations can be related to remains from the metal-working Late Chalcolithic site  of Leilatepe on the Karabakh steppe near Agdam (Narimanov et al. 2007) and from  the earliest level at the multi-period site of Berikldeebi in Kvemo Kartli (Glonti and Dzavakhishvili 1987). They reveal the presence of early 4th millennium raised burial  mounds or kurgans in the southern Caucasus. Similarly, on the basis of her survey work  in eastern Anatolia north of the Oriental Taurus mountains, C. Marro (2007)likens chafffaced wares collected at Hanago in the Sürmeli Plain and Astepe and Colpan in the eastern  Lake Van district in northeastern Turkey with those found at the sites mentioned above  and relates these to similar wares (Amuq E/F) found south of the Taurus Mountains in  northern Mesopotamia

The new high dating of the Maikop culture essentially signifies that there is no
chronological hiatus separating the collapse of the Chalcolithic Balkan centre of
metallurgical production and the appearance of Maikop and the sudden explosion of  Caucasian metallurgical production and use of arsenical copper/bronzes.
 More than  forty calibrated radiocarbon dates on Maikop and related materials now support this high  chronology; and the revised dating for the Maikop culture means that the earliest kurgans  occur in the northwestern and southern Caucasus and precede by several centuries those of the Pit-Grave (Yamnaya) cultures of the western Eurasian steppes (cf. Chernykh and Orlovskaya 2004a and b). The calibrated radiocarbon dates suggest that the Maikop ‘culture’ seems to have had a formative influence on steppe kurgan burial rituals and what now appears to be the later development of the Pit-Grave (Yamnaya) culture on the Eurasian steppes (Chernykh and Orlovskaya 2004a: 97).

In other words, sometime around the middle of the 4th millennium BCE or slightly subsequent to the initial appearance of the Maikop culture of the NW Caucasus, settlements containing proto-Kura-Araxes or early Kura-Araxes materials first appear across a broad area that stretches from the Caspian littoral of the northeastern Caucasus in the north to the Erzurum region of the Anatolian Plateau in the west. For simplicity’s sake these roughly simultaneous developments across this broad area will be considered as representing the beginnings of the Early Bronze Age or the initial stages of development of the KuraAraxes/Early Transcaucasian culture.

The ‘homeland’ (itself a very problematic concept) of the Kura-Araxes culture-historical community is difficult to pinpoint precisely, a fact that may suggest that there is no single well-demarcated area of origin, but multiple interacting areas including northeastern Anatolia as far as the Erzurum area, the catchment area drained by the Upper Middle Kura and Araxes Rivers in Transcaucasia and the Caspian corridor and adjacent mountainous regions of northeastern Azerbaijan and southeastern Daghestan. While broadly (and somewhat imprecisely) defined, these regions constitute on present evidence the original core area out of which the Kura-Araxes ‘culture-historical community’ emerged.

Kura-Araxes materials found in other areas are primarily intrusive in the local sequences. Indeed, many, but not all, sites in the Malatya area along the Upper Euphrates drainage of eastern Anatolia (e.g., Norsun-tepe, Arslantepe) and western Iran (e.g., Yanik Tepe, Godin Tepe) exhibit— albeit with some overlap—a relatively sharp break in material remains, including new forms of architecture and domestic dwellings, and such changes support the interpretation of a subsequent spread or dispersal from this broadly defined core area in the north to the southwest and southeast. The archaeological record seems to document a movement of peoples north to south across a very extensive part of the Ancient Near East from the end of the 4th to the first half of the 3rd millennium BCE. Although migrations are notoriously difficult to document on archaeological evidence, these materials constitute one of the best examples of prehistoric movements of peoples available for the Early Bronze Age.” ref

Origins, Homelands and Migrations: Situating the Kura-Araxes Early Transcaucasian ‘Culture’ within the History of Bronze Age Eurasia

“This paper summarizes the current understanding of the emergence, nature and subsequent southwestern and southeastern spread of the early Transcaucasian (eTC) or Kura-Araxes ‘culture-historical community’ (Russian: obshchnost’) and then places this complex cultural phenomenon in the context of the larger early Bronze Age world of the Ancient Near East and the western Eurasian steppes.” ref

Early Bronze Age migrants and ethnicity in the Middle Eastern mountain zone

“This analysis shows the complex interaction of ethnic groups in antiquity, adapting to new locations and adopting and ultimately, assimilating into a majority culture. It occurs in a background of mountain valleys and highland plains, where ever-shifting populations carve out a living and an identity.” ref


“The Kura-Araxes cultural tradition existed in the highlands of the South Caucasus from 3500 to 2450 BCE (before the Christian era). This tradition represented an adaptive regime and a symbolically encoded common identity spread over a broad area of patchy mountain environments. By 3000 BCE, groups bearing this identity had migrated southwest across a wide area from the Taurus Mountains down into the southern Levant, southeast along the Zagros Mountains, and north across the Caucasus Mountains. In these new places, they became effectively ethnic groups amid already heterogeneous societies. This paper addresses the place of migrants among local populations as ethnicities and the reasons for their disappearance in the diaspora after 2450 BCE.” ref

Kura-Araxes Case

“The societies of the so-called Kura-Araxes cultural tradition that emerged in the highlands during the fourth millennium and continued into the early third millennium BCE (before the Christian era)—Shengavitian, Karaz, Pulur, Yanik, Early Transcaucasian, and Khirbet Kerak are some of its other names—present scholars of the Greater Middle East and Eurasia with a laboratory for studying the evolution of human cultures and the societies that they spawned in highland zones, a topic much studied in ethnography and less so in archaeology.” ref

Kura-Araxes as a Cultural Tradition.

“How do we know that we are dealing with groups of ethnic migrants? The commonly cited answer is that the Kura-Araxes groups are marked by distinctive pottery styles (911) (Fig. 2). This pottery corpus consists of very distinctive handmade, black burnished pottery, often with incised or raised designs. In the latter, a thick layer is added, and then, all but the design is removed, like a faux appliqué. The cultural importance of this pottery style is that it dominates the area of the earliest appearance of the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition for a millennium or more. In areas out of the homeland of the South Caucasus [the current nation-states of Georgia, Armenia, Azerbijan (specifically Nachiçevan), and northeastern Turkey], the same pottery begins to appear, most prominently in the late fourth and early third millennia BCE. Its contrast with the local buff, wheel-made pottery makes the Kura-Araxes black ware seem out of place. Based on this fact, archaeologists have argued that this pottery represents migrants, who became, in effect, ethnic groups within the areas of the Taurus Mountains (12), the Zagros Mountains (13), the Amuq, Galilee (14), and north of the Caucasus Mountains (15). Whereas the idea that pottery style alone can define social groups—pots equal peoples (4, 11, 16)—is suspect and was used by many 19th and early 20th century archaeologists to reach rather unsophisticated and frankly, wrong conclusions about social process, in this case, it may be valid (11, 17). More than simple style is evident. Based on studies of the inclusions in the fabric of pottery bodies—pure clay cannot be used to make stable pottery without the addition of tempering materials—petrographers who study the makeup of pottery fabric determined that the residents of Bet Yeraḥ (Khirbet Kerak) in the Southern Levantine Early Bronze III (2650 BCE) were using the same techniques as those of Kura-Araxes sites hundreds of years earlier and as many kilometers away in Armenia (18, 19). The Kura-Araxes/Khirbet Kerak people and the local Early Bronze III people did not even use the same clay sources, except for some cooking pot wares.” ref

“In addition, a repeated pattern of migration is evident. In the Muş Province west of Lake Van, new sites appeared in the mountainous areas with early Kura-Araxes pottery followed by the appearance of greater population (determined by number of sites and total hectares) in the valley bottom. In the latest phases, residents were using pottery that was a fusion of Kura-Araxes and local Late Chalcolithic techniques (20). Farther west in the Taurus and the Levant, another pattern appeared. Archaeologists found small percentages of Kura-Araxes pottery first at central (or town) sites followed by the appearance of small sites dominated entirely by people using Kura-Araxes–styled pottery (12). At the same time, Frangipane and Palumbi (21) argue that, in the Upper Euphrates area near Arslantepe (Fig. 1), the fourth millennium BCE black burnished ware is not the same as the Kura-Araxes ware, deriving instead from central Anatolia to the west. In the Zagros, Kura-Araxes wares, often with design techniques different from those farther west, appear in newly founded and central sites, whereas neighboring areas lack any evidence of Kura-Araxes presence (pottery) (13).” ref

“This ethnic identity is not, however, limited to pottery style. Archaeologists found remains of a common religious ritual that spans large areas of the South Caucasian homeland and the immigrant diaspora. This common religious practice is represented by a type of ritual emplacement with decorated fireplaces (either ceramic or a free-standing andiron) (22, 23). House construction and layouts are also distinct. These practices indicate common structures of social groups (family) and activities (13). Metals items also share common design patterns, especially in decorative objects. Spiral earrings and pins with two spiral ends occur across the range of the Kura-Araxes (11, 24). Taken together, these different kinds of data suggest that there were Kura-Araxes ethnic groups within a large expanse of the upper Middle East, mostly in mountainous zones. To the west of the homeland, they were, in most cases, a minority within their new homelands and did not dominate or replace the local populations. In the Zagros to the east, they seem to be more dominant (see below). According to definitions of ethnicity by Barth (2) and Gross (3), they had the key elements of ethnic groups. They shared a symbolic identity, which was distinct and recognizable from their surrounding populations, and maintained a field of communication and interaction that extended all of the way back to their homeland. If the ritual practices are widespread—we have only a few excavated examples—their common religious ritual certainly represents a common set of values (23).” ref

“Furthermore, Anthony (25) relates these kinds of common ideological and ethnic identifiers through style (in this case, pottery, architecture, and metals) to language, one of the most prominent components of ethnographically and historically documented ethnic groups. Anthony (25) correlates distinctive regional languages and dialects to what he calls “Material-Culture Frontiers” (25). These frontiers are created by different sources of immigration and also, different ecological boundaries. The more self-sufficient that a group is in a particular environment, the more likely that they will tend toward a local language and a local, more homogeneous cultural style. This pattern may explain, in part, the many local variations in Kura-Araxes pottery designs and shapes, even in the homeland (26). However, in less certain environments or ones that require resources from a broad set of ecological niches, greater variability in language will exist. The latter describes, in part, the highland domain of the Kura-Araxes.” ref

Kura-Araxes in Broader Ecological Context.

“Issues of ecology and adaptation to local conditions within a broader geographical context are important in understanding ethnic identity and change. The Kura-Araxes homeland and the vast majority of its diaspora were mountainous environments. These environments go from the narrow valleys of the higher elevations in areas, like Shida Kartli (27), to the broader lower elevation plains, like Ararat (28, 29). All are in fairly marginal zones for agricultural, although rich in pastureland (30). One of the largest issues remaining to be resolved is the nature of the broader effect of intercultural interaction on reasons for migration (see below) and the comparison of the lowland and highland cultural structures. Archaeologists are still investigating direct relationships between the South Caucasian homeland and its adjoining regions. The raw materials for metal production north of the Caucasus (the Maikop) certainly were mined in the South Caucasus (15). Whether the Kura-Araxes societies were the source of metal technology—this possibility has long been a supposition of archaeologists—is now being questioned (31). Certainly, the Taurus and Zagros, where Kura-Araxes migrants went, are the key resources areas for the developing state societies of Mesopotamia (3234). The “supercities” of the Ukraine in the fourth millennium BCE, which are thought to be a result of exchange through the Mesopotamian Uruk expansion trading network (15, 35), had to pass through the South Caucasus. Archaeologists found fourth millennium BCE northern Mesopotamian pottery styles in the Kura-Araxes area of Georgia, and the precursors of the Kura-Araxes exhibit Mesopotamian-related styles (11, 31).” ref

“However, from what we know of the effects of the trading relationship with Mesopotamia on local societal development in other parts of the mountain zone (21, 36), such effects are not evident in the Kura-Araxes homeland. Societies and ethnic groups exhibiting the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition are a contrast to contemporary Mesopotamian societies. They were not urban societies, and as far as we can tell, they initially had subsistence economies. They had greater reliance on pastoral than agricultural products. Their productive technologies seem to have been tied to local resources, such as obsidian and flint; copper ores; semiprecious stones, like carnelian; and indigenous plants, such as wheat, barley, and grapes. Their social organization exhibited less centralization and less social differentiation than in Mesopotamia (23).” ref

Causes of Migration.

“To understand the role and the fate of ethnic groups in the diaspora, four questions need to be addressed. (i) Why did they emigrate in the first place? (ii) How does that reflect their place in the local societies? (iii) How did their new setting get reflected in their societies? (iv) In this case, why did they, in effect, disappear after 2500 B.C. as a distinct ethnic group? The first question, after evidence of a migration has been established, is to ask why it took place in enough numbers that we find their remains in mounded sites. However, “while it is often difficult to identify specific causes of particular migrations, even with the help of documentary data, it is somewhat easier to identify general structural conditions that favor the occurrence of migrations. Moreover, particular structural conditions favor migrations of particular types” (37). In other words, we need to understand the natural, cultural, and sociopolitical environments in their homeland and outside in areas of migration at the time that we are studying, and then, if there were significant movements of human groups, goods, or information, we can begin to understand how that changed the adaptations of all of the societies involved (38, 39).” ref

“The natural environments and presumably, the local conditions of émigré starting points varied. I have come to see roughly seven environmental zones with populations exhibiting the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition: (i) the higher mountain valleys of the South Caucasus, such as Shida Kartli; (ii) the lower broad areas of the South Caucasus comprising the Ararat Plains into Erzurum and the area north of Lake Van; (iii) Iran east and south of Lake Urmia; (iv) the Taurus zone from the western side of Urmia to the eastern part of Elaziğ; (v) the area of Malatya near the Euphrates, including Arslantepe; (vi) Daghestan into the northern Caucasus; and (vii) the Amuq and Khirbet Kerak of the Levant. These zones tend to elicit somewhat different symbolic languages and somewhat different adaptations. For example, styles in pottery within the overall Kura-Araxes corpus varied among these zones (9). Economically, the more northern, higher elevation societies within the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition tended to have a higher percentage of domesticated cattle than sheep compared with societies in the lower elevation environmental zones. Like dialects in language, these variations were based on the degree of interaction of people in each of these zones (26) and their particular local customs and institutions. On a continuum, they are much more similar to the styles of other peoples of the mountains than those of lowland Mesopotamia.” ref

“So, why did they leave as emigrants from their homeland? Following the suggestion by Anthony (25), what we know of the social and economic organization of these societies is that they were small scale, were nonurban, and had subsistence economies in the fourth millennium BCE but may have intensified production through irrigation in some places during the third millennium BCE (40). Areshian (29) posits a population growth in the Ararat Plain at that time. As I have argued (17, 26), the Kura-Araxes migrations did not take the form of a wave like what Ammerman and Cavalli-Sforza (41) proposed for the spread of agriculture and language into Europe from the Middle East during the Neolithic Period. I see it rather as a series of vectors of movements by small groups, perhaps clans, from place to place. Some have tried to match areas within the Kura-Araxes homeland with some variation in local pottery style within the environmental and style zones that I have listed above (9, 13, 42). As we gain more data, however, this proposed pattern does not seem to work all that well. Rather, a kind of crisscross pattern of groups moving and settling long enough to create mounded sites occurred (these people are not purely nomadic people, although they could be transhumant pastoralists). In northwestern Iran, for example, some small sites are dominated by pottery typical of that in the Shida Kartli highlands in Georgia, and others are dominated by pottery typical of that in the lower mountains of the Ararat Plain of Armenia (43).” ref

“So why did they move? Demographers speak of a push and a pull in all migrations (4446). There must be some reason to be pushed out of an earlier homeland, but there must also be something that pulls the mobile population in a particular direction. Burney and Lang (10) and Areshian (29) have proposed that there was a sharp rise in population in the homeland in the early third millennium BCE. Primogeniture or other customs favoring one family member, kinship segment, or class over another, for example, may cause the less economically fortunate to emigrate. However, was it enough of a rise in population to exceed the carrying capacity of the homeland? If it was not primarily a push, was it a pull? Moch (47) writes of modern migrations that “I argue that the primary determinants of migration patterns consist of fundamental structural elements of economic life: labor force demands in countryside and city, deployment of capital, population patterns (rates of birth, death, marriage), and landholding regimes. Shifts in those elements underlie changing migration itineraries” (47). At the same time, Moch (47) admits that configurations of political economy—this factor is what anthropologists would call social organization—underlie all of the different possible itineraries. As Anthony (46) points out, “[m]igration is a social strategy, not an automatic response to crowding” (46). In this case, environmental conditions were, in fact, propitious in the homeland, and therefore, a forced exit seems less necessary (30).” ref

“Therefore, it is possible that there was a push, not so much from demographic stress but from changes in social organization and access to resources, especially arable land and pasture. There are indications of intensification of agricultural production by the construction of irrigation systems to either feed more people or support the wishes of emerging leadership groups (29). At the same time, little evidence of the kind of authority necessary to control resources and the concomitant social stratification is in evidence (23). The beginning of mobile populations, marked by kurgans and the contemporaneous building of walls at Shengavit, Mokhra Blur (23, 28, 29), and Ravaz (48), is already evident in the early third millennium BCE. Ultimately, in the homeland, the Kura-Araxes adaptation would be displaced by a more mobile and militaristic one associated with the so-called Kurgan Cultures (15, 49). Is that a significant cause? Also, as the more mobile, militaristic organization of the homeland evolved after the end of the Kura-Araxes adaptation, the black burnished pottery continued (50), indicating some continuity of the cultural tradition.” ref

“The evidence, although still slim, suggests that emigration was catalyzed more by a pull than a push (17, 13, 51). If so, the likelihood is that some economic opportunities presented themselves in the diaspora. Three productive activities are possible: animal meat or byproducts (wool), metals and metallurgical skills, or viticulture. To trace these possible pulls, I will take a more detailed look at a few of the migration sites. The first is Godin Tepe in the Kangavar Valley of the central western Zagros (13). Kura-Araxes migrants had entered the Zagros Mountains in the fourth millennium BCE. Archaeologists at Gijlar Tepe west of Lake Urmia uncovered 10 m of occupation with Kura-Araxes artifacts. Considerable time depth is also evident at Yanik Tepe on the eastern side of Lake Urmia (10) and Sangalan Tepe in Hamadan (the last destroyed by modern villagers in the 1970s). The story of Kura-Araxes people at Godin began in the late fourth millennium, when contact between the Mesopotamian lowland and the western Zagros along the High Road (later called the Silk Road) was established. Excavators recovered a few clearly Kura-Araxes potsherds in the oval-walled compound of late fourth millennium BCE Godin VI:1.” ref

“What would have pulled these Kura-Araxes people, who never went south of Kangavar or west into the Mahi Dasht, to Godin? The traditional answer has been metallurgy. Sagona (31) suggests that metallurgical work may not have been extensive enough to produce a regular flow of export products. However, there is a significant smelting installation in the third millennium BCE occupation of Godin IV:1a (13). There are, however, two alternatives. One is wine (52). Areshian et al. (53) have shown that the full process of winemaking was already known and practiced in Armenia in the fifth millennium BCE. The first clear evidence of wine at Godin Tepe occurred in VI:1 (54), just when the few Kura-Araxes potsherds appeared. Another less visible product is wool. Woolen cloth was supposed to be one of the major exports of Mesopotamia societies in the Uruk expansion (35). However, Anthony (25) points out that highland sheep had thick wool with long strands best for making yarn as opposed to the lowland sheep. After the end of VI:1 and a hiatus of about a century around 2900 BCE, significant numbers of Kura-Araxes migrants reappear at Godin Tepe. Now, rather than a small minority, they dominate Godin and the other medium-sized site in Kangavar, although the overall population of the valley remained the same as during VI:1. Sheep and goats in Godin IV tended to be killed at 4–6 y of age, old for their use as primarily meat sources but right for wool or milk production (13). The distribution of the Zagros variant of Kura-Araxes–styled pottery follows an old, inner-Zagros Mountain route that swings to the east south of the Caspian Sea. Exactly what was passed along that route we do not know, although lapis lazuli in the late fourth and early third millennia BCE followed a route to Susa (55).” ref

“For a period from 2900 to 2700 BCE, Kura-Araxes people seem to dominate the Kangavar Valley. No evidence exists of a mass departure of the local population, and some sites seem to use the older pottery. Others seem to adopt Kura-Araxes styles. However, by 2600 BCE, although the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition is still active in homeland South Caucasus, a transition occurred. Now, only 10% of the pottery was black ware, and it was undecorated. The architectural form and hypothetically, the family structure changed. As the Awan highland empire took over the Kangavar Valley (56), all vestiges of the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition disappeared. They had created a unique variant of the Kura-Araxes ethnicity in the Zagros ecological zone and then, could be conquered and assimilated by organized forces that were part of the ethnic mix all along.” ref

“To the west, the situation is quite different (12). The pattern is of small numbers of Kura-Araxes pottery and also, some ritual items, like ceramic decorated hearths at larger sites, like Korucutepe and Norşuntepe (57). This area between the Taurus massifs along the Murat River in Elaziğ Province consisted, however, of small clusters of largely decentralized communities (26). The key might be one of seeking new lands for pasture, or it might be related to Arslantepe. Arslantepe was a primate center during the fourth millennium BCE with a large temple/palace center (36). Its location at the nexus of routes from the northeast, east, west, and south made it a natural center for trade with Mesopotamia, just as Godin was but on a much smaller scale. The site was also near the largest copper mine south and west of the Caucasus, Zagros, and high Taurus at Ergani Maden. Frangipane and Palumbi (21) see the fourth millennium BCE black burnished wares at Arslantepe VIA as typical of central Anatolia, but after the collapse of the temple/palace organization, a combined population of people using a distinct variant of Kura-Araxes wares and local Plain Simple Wares occupied the site. Houses in the third millennium B.C. town had either black burnished or local buff wares (58), and some leader’s house was part of a larger feasting center, like the one at Godin. The immigrants, once a small percentage of the population in the fourth millennium BCE, had become a more significant, although still ethnically identifiable group, in the third millennium. The third millennium BCE also saw a marked increase in population around the site of Arslantepe (5961), although many of these new sites seem to be short-term occupations on rocky outcrops. Perhaps these places are temporary sites for pastoralists, whom Frangipane and Siracusano (62) see as the Kura-Araxes migrants. An increase in the percentages of mobile sheep and goats at this time reinforces this theory (62). At the same time, a “royal” tomb over the remains of the abandoned temple/palace complex suggests closer cultural ties with the Kura-Araxes homeland and the Maikop cultures north of the Caucasus Mountains, especially in terms of metallurgy (63). We tend to want each ethnic or cultural group to be homogeneous, but because I believe that the zones of Kura-Araxes occupation are environmentally distinct, there is no reason to assume that they all shared the same economic adaptation in the diaspora. Some may have been primarily pastoralists; others may have been farmers and herders, who were more likely to settle for a longer time. Either group could have served as transmitters of goods and technologies.” ref

“A pull, again, for opportunities (perhaps metals and metallurgy, the byproducts of sheep and goat, or viniculture and winemaking) drew Kura-Araxes migrant clans over a few hundred years into the Elaziğ and Malatya areas. There is little indication that the interactions were at all violent. Ethnic communities over time integrated into these populations while keeping their identity. As in the Zagros, over time, these populations began to assimilate into the local populations. At Norşuntepe, the symbolic designs continued (57) but appeared as painted designs on buff wares rather than incised or raised designs on handmade black burnished wares. By the end or past the end of when the Kura-Araxes adaptation described the lives of people in the South Caucasus, the people at Norşuntepe built a Mesopotamian-style public building (“Palas”), and signs of the Kura-Araxes ethnic identity all but disappeared. Those same symbols of pottery style, despite the radical change in the lifeway of people in the South Caucasus, continued in the homeland.” ref


“This paper looked at the creation through migration of ancient populations related to the Kura-Araxes cultural tradition. The creation of distinct ethnic groups outside the homeland seems to have been based on a pull of population into areas where there were new opportunities to market skills in viniculture, metallurgy, and wool production. The migrants formed an identifiable ethnic group within local populations, as Barth (2) suggests, sharing values, identity, and communication networks while slowly integrating and ultimately, assimilating into local cultures. Only in the homeland, where a density of homogeneous cultural practices existed, did these same cultural traditions continue. This pattern was so, despite a major change in their lives from relatively peaceful, largely settled agropastoral and locally directed craft production practices to a mobile and military lifestyle. In many ways, this same pattern is evident historically, such as in the United States, where people of distinct and strong ethnic identities migrated for opportunity and to fill needed productive and labor roles. Over the less than two centuries since the high point of US immigration, a similar process of assimilation and slowly losing the elements of ethnic identity or incorporating them (like pizza, Chinese food, or participation in St. Patrick Day parades) into a new common, nonethnic social order continues to occur.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art


By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.

  • By day the “Bible God” was in a cloud pillar.
  • By night the “Bible God” was in a fire pillar.

Volcano deity

“A volcano deity is a deification of a volcano, including:

Nature deity

“In nature worship, a nature deity is a deity in charge of forces of nature, such as a water deity, vegetation deity, sky deity, solar deity, fire deity, or any other naturally occurring phenomena such as mountains, trees, or volcanoes. Accepted in panentheism, pantheism, deism, polytheism, animism, totemism, shamanism, and paganism, the deity embodies natural forces and can have various characteristics, such as that of a mother goddess, “Mother Nature“, or lord of the animals.” ref

Volcano Gods?

VOLCANO GODS……and their commonalities…..


Pagan Volcano Gods

Anganju‘s significance in Cuba in the past is most probably due in part to the fact that he was said to have delivered people out of bondage and helped one to carry the heaviest of burdens.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Exodus 20:2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“When the gods seem restless, believers make offerings of vegetables, money, chickens, and even goats to appease them as well as to bring prosperity. Oldoinyo Lengai is also a holy mountain for the Maasai people, just like Namibia’s Ovahimba people believe in their holy fire. He said the Maasai people use the mountain as a site to conduct rituals such as sacrifices and prayers.” ref

“The (Inca) children were sacrificed as part of a religious ritual, known as capacocha. They walked hundreds of miles to and from ceremonies in Cuzco and were then taken to the summit of Llullaillaco (yoo-yeye-YAH-co), given chicha (maize beer), and, once they were asleep, placed in underground niches, where they froze to death. Only beautiful, healthy, physically perfect children were sacrificed, and it was an honor to be chosen. According to Inca beliefs, the children did not die, but joined their ancestors and watched over their villages from the mountaintops like angels.” ref

“The name “Fuji” most likely derives from an Ainu word meaning “fire” or “deity of fire”. The Japanese believed that the god was very powerful, so it needed to be placated. A shrine was built at the foot of the volcano in AD 806 in order to keep the mountain from erupting. Masaya (Mayan volcano god). The Chorotega people used to sacrifice virgins by throwing them into the volcano, hoping that the Goddess would provide divine oracles in return for the sacrifice.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

If the offering to the LORD is a burnt offering of birds, he is to offer a dove or a young pigeon. Leviticus 1:14″ ref


Monadalkni flew into a rage and called down the Curse of Fire. The top of Moy-Yaina exploded. Five great bursts sent ash, boulders, and fire high into the sky. A devastating flood of flame and hot stones swept across the forests. Gmok’am’c, the Good Chief who made his dwelling on Mt. Shasta, heard their prayers and was moved by their sacrifice. He came down to battle the Chief of the World Below. The battle was terrible. The two mountains threw fire and rocks at each other. At last, the Good Chief thrust Monadalkni under Moy-Yaina, jamming debris down the entrance to the underworld to seal it.” ref

Christians of Europe saw Hekla as a doorway to the underworld and as one of two known entrances to Hell or Purgatory. When people would see lava bombs and other projectiles fly from the volcanoes crater, they believed the fragments were actually spirits. These bombs often hissed as they flew (due to the cooler temperature of the air) and these noises were interpreted as the souls screaming out in pain. Because Hekla was associated with the underworld, people abroad also thought that it was a meeting place for witches and magicians, and patrons of dark magic. Still, others saw Iceland’s jagged lava flows and rugged mountains as an ancient battlefield. It was on this battlefield where immortal gods had once waged war against one another. As they fought, they had shaped the land with blows of fists and swords. Nearly every myth and legend about the volcano is in some way connected to evil and the demonic.” ref

The Klamath Indians of the Pacific Northwest tell a legend about a fight between two chiefs. Llao was the chief of the Below World and was at Mount Mazama in Oregon. Skell was the chief of the Above World and stood at the summit of Mount Shasta in northern California. The two mountains are only a hundred miles apart. As darkness covered the land the two chiefs threw rocks and flames at each other. Llao, injured, fell back inside of Mount Mazama and was never seen again.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“They believe that when it expels hot lava, Merapi is really sending golden carriages to the South Sea, the kingdom of Nyai Ratu Kidul (Queen of the South Sea), for the feast. However, he (Agni) is feared by nature. When he gets angry he can burn trees with his fire and burns the grass with his chariot’s wheels while raging thru the forest.” ref

Pele is a skilled rider of the holua, a wooden sled that slides down steep stone ramps. Papalauahi and other chiefs challenged Pele to see who was the best holua rider. Papalauahi proved by far to be the most skilled. Pele lost her temper. She produced a great flood of lava which overran many of the other chiefs and onlookers.” ref

“MOUNT Cameroon, also called Mount Fako, also called Buea Mountain but most fondly called “The chariot of the gods” is the only mountain in Cameroon which has also been recorded as a volcanic mountain, with a horrifying eruption record Cameroonians have been trying to erase from memory for over 10 years. Mount Fako is believed to be guarded against erupting again by a man-eater god named Epasa Moto. Efasa-Moto is the folkloric god of the Fako Mountain.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Isaiah 66:15 See, the LORD is coming with fire, and his chariots are like a whirlwind; he will bring down his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.

Psalm 104:3 and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind. 

Jeremiah 4:13 Look! He advances like the clouds, his chariots come like a whirlwind, his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe to us! We are ruined! ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“According to Javanese culture expert Suryanto Sastroatmodjo, in Javanese culture, a volcano occupies an important position. It is also referred to as the Sang Hyang Dahana Giri, a representation of the possessor of the universe, God the Almighty.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“Centuries ago, the people living in this area believed that Vulcano was the chimney of the forge of Vulcan – the blacksmith of the Roman gods. When Hephaestus got angry he would heat up his furnace until the volcanoes would erupt.  When he works, sparks and flames fly out of the volcanoes that he works in.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Matthew 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

1 Kings 8:51 For they be thy people, and thine inheritance, which thou broughtest forth out of Egypt, from the midst of the furnace of iron.

Deut. 4.11, 12 and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“Goddess Pele was and still is famous for the different forms she can be and for the fiery rage she would go into when her temper got high. Some Hawaiians believe that Pele can cause earthquakes by stamping her feet and volcanic eruptions by striking the ground with a stick. The chain of volcanoes in Hawaii were formed when Pele and her older sister Namakaokahai had a fight.” ref

Mt. Fuji is the source of many myths, underscoring its importance in Japanese society; it has been the home of multiple deities, including the goddess Sengen, also known as the Goddess of Fuji, whose temple was once said to reside on the summit of the mountain (1). In the days of religious pilgrimages to Mt. Fuji, it is said that Sengen would throw from the mountain any pilgrims that were impure of heart (1).” ref

“Many interpret an eruption on Merapi as a sign that the volcano deity has been disrespected by improper behavior or thought. He said when the mountain (Oldoinyo Lengai) erupts the Maasai people believe that their God is angry and they have to go to the mountain to placate him with prayers. The Klamath stories say that quarrels began, and war broke out between Llao and Skell. of Mount Mazama.” ref

There are two myths involving the recent eruption of Mount Tarawera in 1886. One of these legends blames the eruption on the people of Te Ariki village for eating forbidden honey. Those in the village that ate the honey were killed, while people in nearby villages who did not eat it were allowed to live.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Lamentations 4:11 The LORD has given full vent to his wrath; he has poured out his fierce anger. He kindled a fire in Zion that consumed her foundations.

Numbers 16:35 And there came out a fire from the LORD, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense.

Hebrews 12:29 for our “God is a consuming fire.”

Exodus 15:7 In the greatness of your majesty you threw down those who opposed you. You unleashed your burning anger; it consumed them like stubble.

Psalm 97:3 Fire goes before him and consumes his foes on every side.

Hebrews 10:27 but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.

Numbers 11:1 Now the people complained about their hardships in the hearing of the LORD, and when he heard them his anger was aroused. Then fire from the LORD burned among them and consumed some of the outskirts of the camp.

Psalm 78:49 He unleashed against them his hot anger, his wrath, indignation, and hostility–a band of destroying angels. ref


Konohana Sakuya Hime, Goddess of Mt. Fuji …There special ceremonies celebrate her miraculous pregnancy and the birth of her son in the midst of a fire.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

Pompeii – Casa de Centenario

“At the center of each patio, families built small shrines consisting of mountains modeled from clay, stone, and potsherds crowned with crudely carved heads humans, or serpents. Some are clearly effigies of Popocatépetl. Beneath each carved stone head is a chimney that leads to a charcoal-filled chamber dug in the patio floor. Smoke would have puffed out from under each head in imitation of the ash and vapor plumes expelled from the crater during volcanic activity.  The most fascinating part of Sahagún’s account is that the mountain models are given human faces. In fact, the Spanish text indicates that each mountain was given two faces, one human and one serpent.” ref

“Behaviors attributed to Wy’east include hurtling of hot rocks from gaping holes, sending forth streams of liquid fire, loss of formerly high summits, and choking of valleys with rocks. (Aztecs) In fact, the Spanish text indicates that each mountain was given two faces, one human and one serpent. The dual nature of the mountains described in the Florentine Codex recalls the human and serpent images that crown the volcano effigies of the village shrines and suggests a conceptual continuity that spans some 1,500 years.” ref

“Because Erciyes was always snow-covered, the Hittites (second millennium to 1200 BCE) called it “Harkasos” or “White Mountain.” The Hittite pantheon included a number of mountain gods, including Erciyes. From the region of Imamkulu in Cappadocia, a 1300 BCE Hittite rock carving depicting a storm god above three mountain gods, furnishes proof of the Hittite veneration of Cappadocian volcanoes. A Hittite bas-relief from Malatya dating from 1000 BCE portrays the weather god (prototype of Zeus) slaying a coiled serpent. Flames and volcanic bombs issue from the serpent’s body, which might symbolize volcanoes.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Daniel 7:10 A river of fire was flowing, coming out from before him. Thousands upon thousands attended him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The court was seated, and the books were opened. ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“The most fascinating part of Sahagún’s account (on Popocatepetl) is that the mountain models are given human faces. In fact, the Spanish text indicates that each mountain was given two faces, one human and one serpent. The Gikuyu people believe their god, Ngai or Mwene Nvaga, lived on the top of Mount Kenya when he came down from the sky. They believed the mountain is the earthly throne of their god. The father of the tribe, Gikuyu, was said to meet with god on the top of the mountain. Source.” ref

The farmers who live on the flanks of Popocatépetl today see the volcano in human terms.

A male being with long wavy hair, (Popocatepetl) thought by some to represent the smoke tendrils that unfurl from the crater.

In 1993, the carbonatite has extruded forming the white top of Oldoinyo Lengai and this white peak in the heart of the Maasailand is thought to represent the beard of the Maasai God, which is why the Maasai people call it the Mountain of God (Oldoinyo Lengai is the world’s only active volcano).

THE OUREA were the Protogenoi (primeval gods) or rustic Daimones (spirits) of the mountains. Each and every Mountain was said to have its own ancient bearded god. Mountains were occasionally depicted in classical art as bearded old men rising up from between their craggy peaks.

Pele is the Hawaiian goddess of volcanoes and fire. Pele had long thin strands of hair – which are supposed to represent the very runny lava produced by the volcano Kilauea, where she lives.

They made the images of each one of them in human form, from the dough which is called tzoalli, and they laid offerings before these images in veneration of these same mountains.” The most fascinating part of Sahagún’s account is that the mountain models are given human faces. (Aztec Popocatépetl). The farmers who live on the flanks of Popocatépetl today see the volcano in human terms. To them he is Gregorio. Since the eruption, the name Don Gregorio and the nickname Don Goyo have come into general usage. A male being with long wavy hair, thought by some to represent the smoke tendrils that unfurl from the crater.

Masaya (Mayan volcano god) is depicted as an old crone with black skin, drooping breasts, and white wispy hair, similar to the gases that rise from the volcano in Nicaragua that is named for her.

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

Isaiah 30:27 See, the Name of the LORD comes from afar, with burning anger and dense clouds of smoke; his lips are full of wrath, and his tongue is a consuming fire.

Isaiag 30:30 And the LORD shall cause his glorious voice to be heard, and shall show the lighting down of his arm, with the indignation of his anger, and with the flame of a devouring fire, with scattering, and tempest, and hailstones.

PSA 18:8 There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth devoured: coals were kindled by it.

Daniel 7:9 “As I looked, “thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. His throne was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze.

Revelation 1:14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; :15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“Tradition requires that he (Popocatepetl) be venerated with offerings placed in sacred caves high on the slopes of the mountain. The poet Virgil claimed that Mount Etna, in Sicily, is the place where the gods buried the giant Enceladus. (Aztec Popocatépetl). Tradition requires that he be venerated with offerings placed in sacred caves high on the slopes of the mountain, an example of the general Mesoamerican metaphor of caves on mountains and temples on pyramids.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

Popocatapetl was a warrior who fell in love with Iztaccihuatl (they were two adjacent volcanoes). Iztaccihuatl’s father, however, did not favor the match and sent Popocatapetl to war, promising Iztaccihuatl as his bride when he returned. Iztaccihuatl’s father lied to her and told her that Popocatapetl was dead, and she died from grief. When Popocatapetl returned to find his love dead, he carried her up to the top of a mountain and climbed to the top of an adjacent mountain, carrying a torch to keep watch over her. As time passed, snow-covered the lovers and formed the two mountains Iztaccihuatl (which resembles a woman lying on her side) and Popocatapetl. Popocatepetl’s torch smokes to this day. Another tale tells the story of a quarrel between Pele and her older sister Namakaokahai, which led to the creation of the volcanic Hawaiian islands.” ref

“Filipino legend has it that the moon god, Apung Mallari, angered the sun god, Apung Suku. Apung Suku flung boulders at Apung Mallari’s home, Mt Pinatubo. Apung Mallari’s daughter tried to stop her uncle from destroying her home, but was struck down by a boulder. In grief and despair, Apung Mallari hid himself deep inside Mt Pinatubo, never to be heard from again until the day of June 15, 1991, when Mt Pinatubo erupted catastrophically.” ref

Legend has it that the great Tengger Crater was dug out with just half a coconut shell by an ogre smitten with love for a princess. When the king saw that the ogre might fulfill the task he had set, which was to be completed in a single night, he ordered his servants to pound rice. This caused the cocks to start crowing, thinking the dawn had broken. The coconut that the ogre flung away became Gunung Batok, and the trench became the Sand Sea – and the ogre died of exhaustion.” ref

In another myth, the volcanoes Tongariro, Taranaki, and Ruapehu were all giants. Taranaki and Ruapehu fell in love with Tongariro and proceeded to fight for her. Taranaki threw himself at Ruapehu, but Ruapehu sprayed scalding water from his lake one Taranaki. In retaliation, Taranaki threw stones at Ruapehu destroying his once beautiful summit. Ruapehu was able to swallow the fragments of his cone, melt them, and spit them back at Taranaki. Taranaki retreated up the coast to where he lives now, plotting his revenge (Vitaliano, 1973). The Maoris also have a legend involving two extinct volcanic cones made of basalt named Kakepuku and Kawa. Kakepuku loved Kawa but had to fight several opponents in order to win her over.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano Gods ‘Yahweh’

“According to a British theologian, who says the Almighty, also known as ‘Yahweh’, had a wife – a goddess named ‘Asherah’. J. Edward Wright, president of The Arizona Center for Judaic Studies and The Albright Institute for Archaeological Research, supported Stavrakopoulou’s findings, saying several Hebrew inscriptions mention Yahweh and his Asherah.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

The Koryak believe that creation began when the great raven swooped over the sea and dropped a feather, thus creating Kamchatka. Once he established land he created men to inhabit his creation. After some time Kutkh created a woman and placed her within the land for the men to continue creation. She was very beautiful and all of the men fell in love with her, desiring her affection deeply. As the men died they became mountains, turning the originally flat land into mountains. The mountains turned to volcanoes as the hearts of the men with in each mountain still burnt with fiery love for the woman. It is the hearts of these original men that created the mountains, which shaped the peninsula into what it is today.” ref

The creation of Mt. Fuji is itself a matter of legend in Japan – the tale goes that the mountain was born in a single day. The Modoc Indians of northern California have lived in the area a long time and have seen the volcano erupt. Their oral tradition explains how the volcano formed. The Chief of the Sky Spirits was cold in the Above World. One day he used a rotating stone to drill a hole in the sky. Once the hole was finished he pushed in snow and ice. The snow and ice piled up and almost reached the sky. Then, the Chief of the Sky Spirits stepped down to the Earth. He created the trees, rivers, animals, fish, and birds.” ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“The Balinese sleep with their heads toward nearby volcanoes. And when the residents of Flores, the Nage, die they’re usually buried with their feet pointing in the direction of the ocean and their head toward Mount Ebulobo.” ref

Abrahamic Volcano God ‘Yahweh’

The deceased is laid in the grave (without a coffin if permitted by local law) on his or her right side, facing Mecca Source. The traditional Christian method of positioning the coffin or shroud-covered body in the grave was to have the body with the head to the west, feet to the east. The body was placed face up. When it was not practical to use the west-east position for the grave, a north-south positioning was the next best option. There the body would then be laid on its side, head to the north and facing east. Source. Jews are buried facing – that is, with toes facing – Jerusalem’s Temple Mount. Source.” ref


The Ancient Egyptians buried their dead in tombs in the hills. ref


Pagan Volcano Gods

“A number of taboos also surround Merapi. One includes a prohibition on mentioning the volcano by name. Locals believe that to do so could bring them bad luck. When referring to Mt. Merapi they, therefore, prefer to use the words “”Si Mbah“” instead. Si Mbah means “”elderly person”” or “”respected figure””, used for the volcano as an expression of respect.
For a long time, they kept Giiwaas — their name for Crater Lake — a secret, fearing and revering it, visiting it only for spirit quests.” ref

There are some modern scholars who have suggested that the elements seen in the Ten Commandments were likely modeled on Hittite and Mesopotamian laws as well as treaties. in the Ten Commandments were likely modeled on Hittite and Mesopotamian laws as well as treaties.

Ten Commandments

“The Ten Commandments (Hebrew: עֲשֶׂרֶת הַדִּבְּרוֹת‎, Aseret ha’Dibrot; Arabic: وصايا عشر‎, Alwasaya Aleashr), also known as the Decalogue, are a set of biblical principles relating to ethics and worship that play a fundamental role in Judaism and Christianity. The text of the Ten Commandments appears twice in the Hebrew Bible: at Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21. Scholars disagree about when the Ten Commandments were written and by whom, with some modern scholars suggesting that the Ten Commandments were likely modeled on Hittite and Mesopotamian laws and treaties. According to the book of Exodus in the Torah, the Ten Commandments were revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai. In Biblical Hebrew, the Ten Commandments, called עשרת הדיברות‎ (transliterated aseret ha-dibrot), are mentioned at Exodus 34:28, Deuteronomy 4:13 and Deuteronomy 10:4. In all sources, the terms are translatable as “the ten words”, “the ten sayings”, or “the ten matters”.” ref

“In the Septuagint (or LXX), the “ten words” was translated as “Decalogue”, which is derived from Greek δεκάλογος, dekalogos, the latter meaning and referring to the Greek translation (in accusative) δέκα λόγους, deka logous. This term is also sometimes used in English, in addition to the Ten Commandments. The Tyndale and Coverdale English biblical translations used “ten verses”. The Geneva Bible used “ten commandments”, which was followed by the Bishops’ Bible and the Authorized Version (the “King James” version) as “ten commandments”. Most major English versions use the word “commandments”. The stone tablets, as opposed to the ten commandments inscribed on them, are called לוחות הברית‎, Lukhot HaBrit, meaning “the tablets of the covenant“.” ref

“The biblical narrative of the revelation at Sinai begins in Exodus 19 after the arrival of the children of Israel at Mount Sinai (also called Horeb). On the morning of the third day of their encampment, “there were thunders and flashes of lightning and a thick cloud upon the mountain hat we all climbed up on, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud”, and the people assembled at the base of the mount. After “the LORD came down upon mount Sinai”, Moses went up briefly and returned with stone tablets and prepared the people, and then in Exodus 20 “God spoke” to all the people the words of the covenant, that is, the “ten commandments” as it is written. Modern biblical scholarship differs as to whether Exodus 19–20 describes the people of Israel as having directly heard all or some of the decalogue, or whether the laws are only passed to them through Moses.” ref

“The people were afraid to hear more and moved “afar off”, and Moses responded with “Fear not.” Nevertheless, he drew near the “thick darkness” where “the presence of the Lord” was to hear the additional statutes and “judgments”, all which he “wrote” in the “book of the covenant” which he read to the people the next morning, and they agreed to be obedient and do all that the LORD had said. Moses escorted a select group consisting of Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and “seventy of the elders of Israel” to a location on the mount where they worshipped “afar off” and they “saw the God of Israel” above a “paved work” like clear sapphire stone.

“And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tablets of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them. 13 And Moses rose up, and his minister Joshua: and Moses went up into the mount of God.— First mention of the tablets in Exodus 24:12–13.” ref

“The mount was covered by the cloud for six days, and on the seventh day Moses went into the midst of the cloud and was “in the mount forty days and forty nights.” And Moses said, “the LORD delivered unto me two tablets of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the LORD spake with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.” Before the full forty days expired, the children of Israel collectively decided that something had happened to Moses, and compelled Aaron to fashion a golden calf, and he “built an altar before it” and the people “worshipped” the calf.” ref

“After the full forty days, Moses and Joshua came down from the mountain with the tablets of stone: “And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tablets out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount.” After the events in chapters 32 and 33, the LORD told Moses, “Hew thee two tablets of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tablets the words that were in the first tablets, which thou brakest.” “And he wrote on the tablets, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me.” These tablets were later placed in the ark of the covenant.” ref


“Though both the Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls show the passages of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 divided into ten specific commandments with spaces between them, many Modern English Bible translations give the appearance of more than ten imperative statements in each passage. Different religious traditions divide the seventeen verses of Exodus 20:1–17 and their parallels in Deuteronomy 5:4–21 into ten commandments in different ways, shown in the table below. Some suggest that the number ten is a choice to aid memorization rather than a matter of theology.” ref


Further information: Law given to Moses at Sinai

“The Ten Commandments form the basis of Jewish law,[60] stating God’s universal and timeless standard of right and wrong – unlike the rest of the 613 commandments in the Torah, which include, for example, various duties and ceremonies such as the kashrut dietary laws, and now unobservable rituals to be performed by priests in the Holy Temple. Jewish tradition considers the Ten Commandments the theological basis for the rest of the commandments. Philo, in his four-book work The Special Laws, treated the Ten Commandments as headings under which he discussed other related commandments. Similarly, in The Decalogue he stated that “under [the “commandment… against adulterers”] many other commands are conveyed by implication, such as that against seducers, that against practisers of unnatural crimes, that against all who live in debauchery, that against all men who indulge in illicit and incontinent connections.” Others, such as Rabbi Saadia Gaon, have also made groupings of the commandments according to their links with the Ten Commandments.” ref

“According to Conservative Rabbi Louis Ginzberg, Ten Commandments are virtually entwined, in that the breaking of one leads to the breaking of another. Echoing an earlier rabbinic comment found in the commentary of Rashi to the Songs of Songs (4:5) Ginzberg explained—there is also a great bond of union between the first five commandments and the last five. The first commandment: “I am the Lord, thy God,” corresponds to the sixth: “Thou shalt not kill,” for the murderer slays the image of God. The second: “Thou shalt have no strange gods before me,” corresponds to the seventh: “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” for conjugal faithlessness is as grave a sin as idolatry, which is faithlessness to God. The third commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain,” corresponds to the eighth: “Thou shalt not steal,” for stealing results in a false oath in God’s name. The fourth: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” corresponds to the ninth: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor,” for he who bears false witness against his neighbor commits as grave a sin as if he had borne false witness against God, saying that He had not created the world in six days and rested on the seventh day (the holy Sabbath). The fifth commandment: “Honor thy father and thy mother,” corresponds to the tenth: “Covet not thy neighbor’s wife,” for one who indulges this lust produces children who will not honor their true father, but will consider a stranger their father.” ref

“The traditional Rabbinical Jewish belief is that the observance of these commandments and the other mitzvot are required solely of the Jewish people and that the laws incumbent on humanity, in general, are outlined in the seven Noahide laws, several of which overlap with the Ten Commandments. In the era of the Sanhedrin transgressing any one of six of the Ten Commandments theoretically carried the death penalty, the exceptions being the First Commandment, honoring your father and mother, saying God’s name in vain, and coveting, though this was rarely enforced due to a large number of stringent evidentiary requirements imposed by the oral law.” ref

Two tablets

Main article: Tablets of Stone

“The arrangement of the commandments on the two tablets is interpreted in different ways in the classical Jewish tradition. Rabbi Hanina ben Gamaliel says that each tablet contained five commandments, “but the Sages say ten on one tablet and ten on the other”, that is, that the tablets were duplicates. This can be compared to diplomatic treaties of the ancient Near East, in which a copy was made for each party. According to the Talmud, the compendium of traditional Rabbinic Jewish law, tradition, and interpretation, one interpretation of the biblical verse “the tablets were written on both their sides”, is that the carving went through the full thickness of the tablets, yet was miraculously legible from both sides.” ref


“Hebron is a Palestinian city in the southern West Bank, 30 km (19 mi) south of Jerusalem. Nestled in the Judaean Mountains, it lies 930 meters (3,050 ft) above sea level. The name “Hebron” appears to trace back to two Semitic roots, which coalesce in the form ḥbr, having reflexes in Hebrew and Amorite, with a basic sense of ‘unite’ and connoting a range of meanings from “colleague” to “friend”. In the proper name Hebron, the original sense may have been alliance. The Arabic term derives from the Qur’anic epithet for Abraham, Khalil al-Rahman (إبراهيم خليل الرحمن) “Beloved of the Merciful” or “Friend of God”. Arabic Al-Khalil thus precisely translates the ancient Hebrew toponym Ḥebron, understood as ḥaber (friend).” ref

Bronze Age

“Archaeological excavations reveal traces of strong fortifications dated to the Early Bronze Age, covering some 24–30 dunams centered around Tel Rumeida. The city flourished in the 17th–18th centuries BCE before being destroyed by fire, and was resettled in the late Middle Bronze Age. This older Hebron was originally a Canaanite royal city. Abrahamic legend associates the city with the Hittites. It has been conjectured that Hebron might have been the capital of Shuwardata of Gath, an Indo-European (Canaanite) contemporary of Jerusalem’s regent, Abdi-Kheba, although the Hebron hills were almost devoid of settlements in the Late Bronze Age. The Abrahamic traditions associated with Hebron are nomadic. This may also reflect a Kenite element, since the nomadic Kenites are said to have long occupied the city, and Heber is the name for a Kenite clan.” ref

“In the narrative of the later Hebrew conquest, Hebron was one of two centers under Canaanite control. They were ruled by the three sons of Anak (benê/yelîdê hā’ănaq). or may reflect some Kenite and Kenizzite migration from the Negev to Hebron, since terms related to the Kenizzites appear to be close to Hurrian. This suggests that behind the Anakim legend lies some early Hurrian population. In Biblical lore, they are represented as descendants of the Nephilim. The Book of Genesis mentions that it was formerly called Kirjath-arba, or “city of four”, possibly referring to the four pairs or couples who were buried there, or four tribes, or four quarters, four hills, or a confederated settlement of four families. The story of Abraham’s purchase of the Cave of the Patriarchs from the Hittites constitutes a seminal element in what was to become the Jewish attachment to the land in that it signified the first “real estate” of Israel long before the conquest under Joshua. In settling here, Abraham is described as making his first covenant, an alliance with two local Amorite clans who became his ba’alei brit or masters of the covenant.” ref

Iron Age

The Hebron of the Israelites was centered on what is now known as Tel Rumeida, while its ritual center was located at Elonei Mamre.” ref

Hebrew Bible narrative

Samson removes gates of Gaza and brings them to Mount Hebron. Strassburg (1160–1170), Württemberg State Museum in Stuttgart. It is said to have been wrested from the Canaanites by either Joshua, who is said to have wiped out all of its previous inhabitants, “destroying everything that drew breath, as the Lord God of Israel had commanded”, or the tribe of Judah as a whole, or specifically Caleb the Judahite. The town itself, with some contiguous pasture land, is then said to have been granted to the Levites of the clan of Kohath, while the fields of the city, as well as its surrounding villages, were assigned to Caleb (Joshua 21:3–12; 1 Chronicles 6:54–56),[48] who expels the three giants, Sheshai, Ahiman, and Talmai, who ruled the city. Later, the biblical narrative has King David called by God to relocate to Hebron and reign from there for some seven years (2 Samuel 2:1–3).[49] It is there that the elders of Israel come to him to make a covenant before Elohim and anoint him king of Israel.[50] It was in Hebron again that Absalom has himself declared king and then raises a revolt against his father David (2 Samuel 15:7–10). It became one of the principal centers of the Tribe of Judah and was classified as one of the six traditional Cities of Refuge.” ref


“As is shown by the discovery at Lachish, the second most important Judean city after Jerusalem, of seals with the inscription lmlk Hebron (to the king Hebron), Hebron continued to constitute an important local economic centre, given its strategic position on the crossroads between the Dead Sea to the east, Jerusalem to the north, the Negev and Egypt to the south, and the Shepelah and the coastal plain to the west. Lying along trading routes, it remained administratively and politically dependent on Jerusalem for this period.” ref

“After the destruction of the First Temple, most of the Jewish inhabitants of Hebron were exiled, and according to the conventional view, some researchers found traces of Edomite presence after the 5th–4th centuries BCE, as the area became Achaemenid province, and, in the wake of Alexander the Great‘s conquest, Hebron was throughout the Hellenistic period under the influence of Idumea (as the new area inhabited by the Edomites was called during the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman periods), as is attested by inscriptions for that period bearing names with the Edomite God Qōs. Jews also appear to have lived there after the return from the Babylonian exile (Nehemiah 11:25). During the Maccabean revolt, Hebron was burnt and plundered by Judah Maccabee who fought against the Edomites in 167 BCE. The city appears to have long resisted Hasmonean dominance, however, and indeed as late as the First Jewish–Roman War was still considered Idumean. The present-day city of Hebron was settled in the valley downhill from Tel Rumeida at the latest by Roman times.” ref

Abraham’s family lived in Haran/Harran (Genesis 11:26–28)

“Abraham is told to leave his country and his people with ties to Sumeria region of Mesopotamia, so God could make him into a new nation, the eventual Israelites. His famaly are said to live in Haran, which is almost universally identified with Harran, a city whose ruins lie within present-day Turkey. Haran first appears in the Book of Genesis as the home of Terah father of Abraham, and as Abraham‘s temporary home. Most of what is told about Terah is recorded in Genesis 11:26–28.” ref

Abraham’s Wife Died

“Sarah died, and Abraham buried her in the Cave of the Patriarchs (the “cave of Machpelah”), near Hebron which he had purchased along with the adjoining field from Ephron the Hittite.” ref

The narrative in the Book of Genesis revolves around the themes of posterity and land. Abraham is called by God to leave the house of his father Terah and settle in the land originally given to Canaan but which God now promises to Abraham and his progeny. Various candidates are put forward who might inherit the land after Abraham; and, while promises are made to Ishmael about founding a great nation, Isaac, Abraham’s son by his half-sister Sarah, inherits God’s promises to Abraham. Abraham purchases a tomb (the Cave of the Patriarchs) at Hebron to be Sarah’s grave, thus establishing his right to the land; and, in the second generation, his heir Isaac is married to a woman from his own kin, thus ruling the Canaanites out of any inheritance. Abraham later marries Keturah and has six more sons; but, on his death, when he is buried beside Sarah, it is Isaac who receives “all Abraham’s goods”, while the other sons receive only “gifts” (Genesis 25:5–8).[4]

The Abraham story cannot be definitively related to any specific time, and it is widely agreed that the patriarchal age, along with the Exodus and the period of the judges, is a late literary construct that does not relate to any period in actual history.[5] A common hypothesis among scholars is that it was composed in the early Persian period (late 6th century BCE) as a result of tensions between Jewish landowners who had stayed in Judah during the Babylonian captivity and traced their right to the land through their “father Abraham”, and the returning exiles who based their counterclaim on Moses and the Exodus tradition.

Jewish Abraham

“According to Jewish tradition, Abraham was born under the name Abram in the city of Ur in Babylonia in the year 1948 from Creation (circa 1800 BCE). He was the son of Terach, an idol merchant, but from his early childhood, he questioned the faith of his father and sought the truth. He came to believe that the entire universe was the work of a single Creator, and he began to teach this belief to others. Abram tried to convince his father, Terach, of the folly of idol worship. One day, when Abram was left alone to mind the store, he took a hammer and smashed all of the idols except the largest one. He placed the hammer in the hand of the largest idol. When his father returned and asked what happened, Abram said, “The idols got into a fight, and the big one smashed all the other ones.” His father said, “Don’t be ridiculous. These idols have no life or power. They can’t do anything.” Abram replied, “Then why do you worship them?” ref

“Eventually, the one true Creator that Abram had worshipped called to him, and made him an offer: if Abram would leave his home and his family, then G-d would make him a great nation and bless him. Abram accepted this offer, and the b’rit (covenant) between G-d and the Jewish people was established. (Gen. 12). The idea of b’rit is fundamental to traditional Judaism: we have a covenant, a contract, with G-d, which involves rights and obligations on both sides. We have certain obligations to G-d, and G-d has certain obligations to us. The terms of this b’rit became more explicit over time, until the time of the Giving of the Torah. Abram was subjected to ten tests of faith to prove his worthiness for this covenant. Leaving his home is one of these trials.” ref

“Abram, raised as a city-dweller, adopted a nomadic lifestyle, traveling through what is now the land of Israel for many years. G-d promised this land to Abram’s descendants. Abram is referred to as a Hebrew (Ivri), possibly because he was descended from Eber or possibly because he came from the “other side” (eber) of the Euphrates River. But Abram was concerned, because he had no children and he was growing old. Abram’s beloved wife, Sarai, knew that she was past child-bearing years, so she offered her maidservant, Hagar, as a wife to Abram. This was a common practice in the region at the time.” ref

“According to tradition, Hagar was a daughter of Pharaoh, given to Abram during his travels in Egypt. She bore Abram a son, Ishmael, who, according to both Muslim and Jewish tradition, is the ancestor of the Arabs. (Gen 16) When Abram was 100 and Sarai 90, G-d promised Abram a son by Sarai. G-d changed Abram’s name to Abraham (father of many), and Sarai’s to Sarah (from “my princess” to “princess”). Sarah bore Abraham a son, Isaac (in Hebrew, Yitzchak), a name derived from the word “laughter,” expressing Abraham’s joy at having a son in his old age. (Gen 1718). Isaac was the ancestor of the Jewish people. Abraham died at the age of 175.” ref

New DNA tech traces origins of Yiddish to… Turkey

“Genetic data shows speakers of Jewish language came from ancient Silk Road crossroads and may have been traders, Israeli researcher says. DNA shows that Yiddish, the historic language of Ashkenazi Jews, may have originated in northeastern Turkey, according to a study by an Israeli-born researcher. The study by the University of Sheffield’s Dr. Eran Elhaik, which was published recently in scientific journal Genome Biology, used a Geographic Population Structure (GPS) tool to locate the origins of Yiddish speakers’ DNA.” ref

“We identified 367 people who claim they have two parents who are Ashkenazic Jews and we divided them into people whose parents only speak Yiddish and then everyone else,” Elhaik told WIRED. The researchers then used the GPS algorithms to analyze participants’ DNA and predict their most likely geographical origin. The results, Elhaik said, showed that many of them came from the vicinity of four ancient villages in northern Turkey whose names are conspicuously similar to “Ashkenaz” — Askenaz, Eskenaz, Ashanaz, and Ashkuz — and which are all located near a crossroads of the ancient Silk Road trade route.” ref

“The researchers have surmised that the language may have been invented by Iranian and Slavic Jews who traded on the Silk Road around the 9th century. “We were able to predict the possible ancestral location where Yiddish originated over 1,000 years ago — a question which linguists have debated over for many years,” Elhaik said. “Northeast Turkey is the only place in the world where these place names exist — which strongly implies that Yiddish was established around the first millennium at a time when Jewish traders who were plying the Silk Road moved goods from Asia to Europe wanted to keep their monopoly on trade.” ref

“They did this by inventing Yiddish — a secret language that very few can speak or understand other than Jews. Our findings are in agreement with an alternative theory that suggests Yiddish has Iranian, Turkish, and Slavic origins and explains why Yiddish contains 251 words for the terms ‘buy’ and ‘sell’. This is what we can expect from a language of experienced merchants.” ref

The study suggests that as Jews spread throughout Europe, their language acquired words from other languages in the continent, mainly German. “Yiddish is such a wonderful and complex language, which was inappropriately called ‘bad German’ by both its native and non-native speakers because the language consists of made-up German words and a non-German grammar,” Elhaik said. “Yiddish is truly a combination of familiar and adapted German words using Slavic grammar.” Elhaik told WIRED he hoped to be able to refine and improve the technology, which can currently analyze data from the last millennium or so. “We’re probably going to do a really good job for 2,000 to 10,000 years ago due to the availability of the DNA from these time periods,” he said.” ref

Scientists reveal Jewish history’s forgotten Turkish roots

Israeli-born geneticist believes the Turkish villages of Iskenaz, Eskenaz, and Ashanaz were part of the original homeland for Ashkenazic Jews

“Research suggests that the majority of the world’s modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey, rather than predominantly from elsewhere in the Middle East. The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe – normally known as Ashkenazic Jews – are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians, and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world’s largest Jewish communities. According to research carried out by the geneticist, Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield, over 90 percent of Ashkenazic ancestors come from that converted partially Greek-originating ancient community in north-east Turkey.” ref

“His research is based on genetic, historical, and place-name evidence. For his geographic genetic research, Dr Elhaik used a Geographic Population Structure computer modeling system to convert Ashkenazic Jewish DNA data into geographical information. Dr Elhaik, an Israeli-born geneticist who gained his doctorate in molecular evolution from the University of Houston, believes that three still-surviving Turkish villages – Iskenaz, Eskenaz, and Ashanaz – on the western part of an ancient Silk Road route were part of the original Ashkenazic homeland. He believes that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza – the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppe-land people, the Scythians. Referring to the names of the three Turkish villages, Dr Elhaik points out that “north-east Turkey is the only place in the world where these place-names exist”.” ref

“From the 690s AD onwards, anti-Jewish persecution by the Christian Byzantine Empire seems to have played a part in forcing large numbers of Jews to flee across the Black Sea to a more friendly state – the Turkic-ruled Khazar Empire with its large Slav and other populations. Some analyses of Yiddish suggests that it was originally a Slavic language, and Dr Elhaik and others believe that it was developed, probably in the 8th and 9th centuries AD, by Jewish merchants trading along some of the more northerly Silk Roads linking China and Europe. By the 730s, the Khazar Empire had begun to convert to Judaism – and more people converted to the faith.” ref

“But when the Khazar Empire declined in or around the 11th century, some of the Jewish population almost certainly migrated west into Central Europe. There, as Yiddish-speaking Jewish merchants came into contact with central European, often German-speaking, peoples, they began to replace the Slav words in Yiddish with large numbers of German and German-derived words, while retaining some of its Slav-originating grammar. Many Hebrew words also appear to have been added by that stage. The genetic modeling used in the research was based on DNA data from 367 Jews of northern and eastern European origin and more than 600 non-Jewish people mainly from Europe and western Asia. Dr Elhaik says it is the largest genomic study ever carried out on Ashkenazic Jews. His research will be published in the UK-based scientific journal, Genome Biology, and Evolution. Further research is planned to try to measure the precise size of the Semitic genetic input into Jewish and non-Jewish genomes.” ref

Did you know the God of the Bible once was known by bull symbolism?

· Bible God El in ancient pictographic Hebrew then in modern-day Hebrew.

· God El is seen 250 times in the Hebrew bible primarily describing the God of Israel (Isra-El).

· Bible God YHWH or Yahweh in ancient pictographic Hebrew, with upraised arms like “KA” an Egyptian (life-force or spirit after death) hieroglyph of upraised arms relating to the bull.

· Egyptian with upraised arms means High, Rejoice, or Support, which to me, is similar to both the hieroglyph KA with upraised arms and the people pictographic Hebrew symbols (meaning Lo, Behold, “The”) for Yahweh with upraised arms. 

· The KA statue, on the statue of pharaoh Awibre Hor, provided a physical place for the KA to manifest of the hieroglyph representing KA’s upraised arms. KA was sometimes depicted on top of the head of the statue to reinforce its intended purpose.

· Egyptian meaning “High, Rejoice, or Support” which to me, is similar to both the hieroglyph KA with upraised arms and the people in the pictograph Hebrew symbols for Yahewh with upraised arms.

· Sinai 357 reflects an Egyptian name to a Hurrian god “Teshub” using an inherited Northwest Semitic formula and a sacred bull was Teshub’s animal. So Canaanites payers to gods such as El in their own Proto-Sinaitic / Proto-Canaanite scripts that later inspired ancient pictographic Hebrew followed by Paleo-Hebrew. 

· 1. Egyptian Hieroglyphs 5,200 years ago 2. Proto-Sinaitic 3,850 years ago to Proto-Canaanite / Pictograph Hebrew 3,550 years ago 3. Phoenician 3,200 years ago to Paleo-Hebrew 3,000 years ago 4. Greek 2,800 years ago 5. Latin 2,700 years ago. ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

To have faith is to make a presumption of faith towards something and the most common use of faith is toward things that relate to concepts of gods such as their names. Another way to have faith would mean to understand why a god would change their name. In the Jewish and Christian religions, their god’s name was changed. In the beginning, god’s eternal name is El, Near East god is most holy, and the father of all gods. El is a Semitic word meaning “god” or may relate to multiple ancient Near Eastern deities such as Hebrew: el, Amorite: il, Arabic ilah, Akkadian and Ugaritic: ilu, Aramaic and Phoenician: l, and is the known name of the original god to the Abrahamic religions. ref, ref, ref 

In Judaism, the later Hebrew and Aramaic texts, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating around 2,408 to 1,700 years ago, used El or Elohim for the names of God and sometimes were in written paleo-Hebrew script dating about 3,000 years ago, and used in the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah, which shows that El was still treated as special. ref, ref 

In the first statement of the Muslim confession of faith in the Quran, it states that “There is no god (ilah) except God (al-Lah or Allah).” And al-ilah, “the god” relates to El and Elah, the Hebrew and Aramaic words for God. ref, ref 

Also what is interesting is that Hebrew is a Semitic language and according to a popular Israeli news source the Haaretz, the country Isra-El (Israel) expresses the relationship with the 3,300 years old Canaanite deity El who was the head of the Canaanite pantheon. ref 

However, El’s name changed in the human-made Bible to El Shaddai. El Shaddai was the Bible-God’s name as first seen in Genesis 17:1, “God appeared to Abram, saying I am El Shaddai.” Similarly, in Genesis 35:11, Bible-God says to Jacob, “I am El Shaddai.” And seen in Exodus 6:2–3, El Shaddai was God’s name known to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. All must follow El and Baal whose features were absorbed into the Yahweh religion. ref  

God El, the Semitic god, and the creator have a son named Baal “The Lord,” who is the governor of all adversaries to the fake god of the Jews, Yahweh or his other name El Shaddai. Bible-God, the Abrahamic god and the creator have a son named Jesus “The Lord.” It is interesting how people say that Jesus is “Lord” because Jesus is the son of Bible-God and without realizing they seem to be referencing Baal, which can mean “Lord” and is the son of El. No? Okay, let me try again! Why would a god go and change its name anyway? Some religious scholars have stated that the early Hebrews used the names Baʿal (“Lord”) and Baʿali (“My Lord”) to refer to the Lord of Israel, who is El and Yahweh. This use of Baʿal and Baʿali occurred both directly and as the divine element of some Hebrew theophoric names, which means consisting of the name of a deity and a verb. A few names that included the element Baʿal and presumably referring to Yahweh, including Saul’s son Eshbaʿal (“The Lord is Great”), and David’s son Beeliada (“The Lord Knows”). The name Bealiah is the combination of Baal and Yahweh (“The Lord is Jah” + “Yahweh is Baʿal” = “Yahweh is Lord”). ref 

To have faith would mean you would have to believe that you already know all of your god’s different names and believe you have the right god and not some other religions’ god or a combination of gods.

Heluan Ka-palette from the Early 1st Dynasty, Ancient Egypt. ref
“Ka, in ancient Egyptian religion, with the ba and the akh, a principal aspect of the soul of a human being or of a god. The exact significance of the ka remains a matter of controversy, chiefly for lack of an Egyptian definition; the usual translation, “double,” is incorrect. Written by a hieroglyph of uplifted arms, it seemed originally to have designated the protecting divine spirit of a person. The ka survived the death of the body and could reside in a picture or statue of a person.” ref

My thoughts on Religion Evolution with external links for more info:

“Religion is an Evolved Product” and Yes, Religion is Like Fear Given Wings…

Atheists talk about gods and religions for the same reason doctors talk about cancer, they are looking for a cure, or a firefighter talks about fires because they burn people and they care to stop them. We atheists too often feel a need to help the victims of mental slavery, held in the bondage that is the false beliefs of gods and the conspiracy theories of reality found in religions.

“Understanding Religion Evolution: Animism, Totemism, Shamanism, Paganism & Progressed organized religion”

Understanding Religion Evolution:

“An Archaeological/Anthropological Understanding of Religion Evolution”

It seems ancient peoples had to survived amazing threats in a “dangerous universe (by superstition perceived as good and evil),” and human “immorality or imperfection of the soul” which was thought to affect the still living, leading to ancestor worship. This ancestor worship presumably led to the belief in supernatural beings, and then some of these were turned into the belief in gods. This feeble myth called gods were just a human conceived “made from nothing into something over and over, changing, again and again, taking on more as they evolve, all the while they are thought to be special,” but it is just supernatural animistic spirit-belief perceived as sacred.


Quick Evolution of Religion?

Pre-Animism (at least 300,000 years ago) pre-religion is a beginning that evolves into later Animism. So, Religion as we think of it, to me, all starts in a general way with Animism (Africa: 100,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in supernatural powers/spirits), then this is physically expressed in or with Totemism (Europe: 50,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in mythical relationship with powers/spirits through a totem item), which then enlists a full-time specific person to do this worship and believed interacting Shamanism (Siberia/Russia: 30,000 years ago) (theoretical belief in access and influence with spirits through ritual), and then there is the further employment of myths and gods added to all the above giving you Paganism (Turkey: 12,000 years ago) (often a lot more nature-based than most current top world religions, thus hinting to their close link to more ancient religious thinking it stems from). My hypothesis is expressed with an explanation of the building of a theatrical house (modern religions development). Progressed organized religion (Egypt: 5,000 years ago)  with CURRENT “World” RELIGIONS (after 4,000 years ago).

Historically, in large city-state societies (such as Egypt or Iraq) starting around 5,000 years ago culminated to make religion something kind of new, a sociocultural-governmental-religious monarchy, where all or at least many of the people of such large city-state societies seem familiar with and committed to the existence of “religion” as the integrated life identity package of control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine, but this juggernaut integrated religion identity package of Dogmatic-Propaganda certainly did not exist or if developed to an extent it was highly limited in most smaller prehistoric societies as they seem to lack most of the strong control dynamics with a fixed closed magical doctrine (magical beliefs could be at times be added or removed). Many people just want to see developed religious dynamics everywhere even if it is not. Instead, all that is found is largely fragments until the domestication of religion.

Religions, as we think of them today, are a new fad, even if they go back to around 6,000 years in the timeline of human existence, this amounts to almost nothing when seen in the long slow evolution of religion at least around 70,000 years ago with one of the oldest ritual worship. Stone Snake of South Africa: “first human worship” 70,000 years ago. This message of how religion and gods among them are clearly a man-made thing that was developed slowly as it was invented and then implemented peace by peace discrediting them all. Which seems to be a simple point some are just not grasping how devastating to any claims of truth when we can see the lie clearly in the archeological sites.

I wish people fought as hard for the actual values as they fight for the group/clan names political or otherwise they think support values. Every amount spent on war is theft to children in need of food or the homeless kept from shelter.

Here are several of my blog posts on history:

I am not an academic. I am a revolutionary that teaches in public, in places like social media, and in the streets. I am not a leader by some title given but from my commanding leadership style of simply to start teaching everywhere to everyone, all manner of positive education. 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref

Hinduism around 3,700 to 3,500 years old. ref

 Judaism around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (The first writing in the bible was “Paleo-Hebrew” dated to around 3,000 years ago Khirbet Qeiyafa is the site of an ancient fortress city overlooking the Elah Valley. And many believe the religious Jewish texts were completed around 2,500) ref, ref

Judaism is around 3,450 or 3,250 years old. (“Paleo-Hebrew” 3,000 years ago and Torah 2,500 years ago)

“Judaism is an Abrahamic, its roots as an organized religion in the Middle East during the Bronze Age. Some scholars argue that modern Judaism evolved from Yahwism, the religion of ancient Israel and Judah, by the late 6th century BCE, and is thus considered to be one of the oldest monotheistic religions.” ref

“Yahwism is the name given by modern scholars to the religion of ancient Israel, essentially polytheistic, with a plethora of gods and goddesses. Heading the pantheon was Yahweh, the national god of the Israelite kingdoms of Israel and Judah, with his consort, the goddess Asherah; below them were second-tier gods and goddesses such as Baal, Shamash, Yarikh, Mot, and Astarte, all of whom had their own priests and prophets and numbered royalty among their devotees, and a third and fourth tier of minor divine beings, including the mal’ak, the messengers of the higher gods, who in later times became the angels of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Yahweh, however, was not the ‘original’ god of Israel “Isra-El”; it is El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, whose name forms the basis of the name “Israel”, and none of the Old Testament patriarchs, the tribes of Israel, the Judges, or the earliest monarchs, have a Yahwistic theophoric name (i.e., one incorporating the name of Yahweh).” ref

“El is a Northwest Semitic word meaning “god” or “deity“, or referring (as a proper name) to any one of multiple major ancient Near Eastern deities. A rarer form, ‘ila, represents the predicate form in Old Akkadian and in Amorite. The word is derived from the Proto-Semitic *ʔil-, meaning “god”. Specific deities known as ‘El or ‘Il include the supreme god of the ancient Canaanite religion and the supreme god of East Semitic speakers in Mesopotamia’s Early Dynastic Period. ʼĒl is listed at the head of many pantheons. In some Canaanite and Ugaritic sources, ʼĒl played a role as father of the gods, of creation, or both. For example, in the Ugaritic texts, ʾil mlk is understood to mean “ʼĒl the King” but ʾil hd as “the god Hadad“. The Semitic root ʾlh (Arabic ʾilāh, Aramaic ʾAlāh, ʾElāh, Hebrew ʾelōah) may be ʾl with a parasitic h, and ʾl may be an abbreviated form of ʾlh. In Ugaritic the plural form meaning “gods” is ʾilhm, equivalent to Hebrew ʾelōhîm “powers”. In the Hebrew texts this word is interpreted as being semantically singular for “god” by biblical commentators. However the documentary hypothesis for the Old Testament (corresponds to the Jewish Torah) developed originally in the 1870s, identifies these that different authors – the Jahwist, Elohist, Deuteronomist, and the Priestly source – were responsible for editing stories from a polytheistic religion into those of a monotheistic religion. Inconsistencies that arise between monotheism and polytheism in the texts are reflective of this hypothesis.” ref


Jainism around 2,599 – 2,527 years old. ref

Confucianism around 2,600 – 2,551 years old. ref

Buddhism around 2,563/2,480 – 2,483/2,400 years old. ref

Christianity around 2,o00 years old. ref

Shinto around 1,305 years old. ref

Islam around 1407–1385 years old. ref

Sikhism around 548–478 years old. ref

Bahá’í around 200–125 years old. ref

“Theists, there has to be a god, as something can not come from nothing.”

Well, thus something (unknown) happened and then there was something. This does not tell us what the something that may have been involved with something coming from nothing. A supposed first cause, thus something (unknown) happened and then there was something is not an open invitation to claim it as known, neither is it justified to call or label such an unknown as anything, especially an unsubstantiated magical thinking belief born of mythology and religious storytelling.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

While hallucinogens are associated with shamanism, it is alcohol that is associated with paganism.

The Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries Shows in the prehistory series:

Show one: Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses.

Show two: Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show tree: Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show four: Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show five: Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”

Show six: Emergence of hierarchy, sexism, slavery, and the new male god dominance: Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves!

Show seven: Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State)

Show eight: Paganism 4,000 years old: Moralistic gods after the rise of Statism and often support Statism/Kings: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism)

Prehistory: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” the division of labor, power, rights, and recourses: VIDEO

Pre-animism 300,000 years old and animism 100,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Totemism 50,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Shamanism 30,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism”: VIDEO

Paganism 12,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Pre-Capitalism): VIDEO

Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves: VIEDO

Paganism 5,000 years old: progressed organized religion and the state: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Kings and the Rise of the State): VIEDO

Paganism 4,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (First Moralistic gods, then the Origin time of Monotheism): VIEDO

I do not hate simply because I challenge and expose myths or lies any more than others being thought of as loving simply because of the protection and hiding from challenge their favored myths or lies.

The truth is best championed in the sunlight of challenge.

An archaeologist once said to me “Damien religion and culture are very different”

My response, So are you saying that was always that way, such as would you say Native Americans’ cultures are separate from their religions? And do you think it always was the way you believe?

I had said that religion was a cultural product. That is still how I see it and there are other archaeologists that think close to me as well. Gods too are the myths of cultures that did not understand science or the world around them, seeing magic/supernatural everywhere.

I personally think there is a goddess and not enough evidence to support a male god at Çatalhöyük but if there was both a male and female god and goddess then I know the kind of gods they were like Proto-Indo-European mythology.

This series idea was addressed in, Anarchist Teaching as Free Public Education or Free Education in the Public: VIDEO

Our 12 video series: Organized Oppression: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of power (9,000-4,000 years ago), is adapted from: The Complete and Concise History of the Sumerians and Early Bronze Age Mesopotamia (7000-2000 BC): by “History with Cy

Show #1: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Samarra, Halaf, Ubaid)

Show #2: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Eridu: First City of Power)

Show #3: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Uruk and the First Cities)

Show #4: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (First Kings)

Show #5: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Early Dynastic Period)

Show #6: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (King Lugalzagesi and the First Empire)

Show #7: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Sargon and Akkadian Rule)

Show #8: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Naram-Sin, Post-Akkadian Rule, and the Gutians)

Show #9: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Gudea of Lagash and Utu-hegal)

Show #10: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Third Dynasty of Ur / Neo-Sumerian Empire)

Show #11: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Amorites, Elamites, and the End of an Era)

Show #12: Mesopotamian State Force and the Politics of Power (Aftermath and Legacy of Sumer)

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

The “Atheist-Humanist-Leftist Revolutionaries”

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ Atheist Leftist @Skepticallefty & I (Damien Marie AtHope) @AthopeMarie (my YouTube & related blog) are working jointly in atheist, antitheist, antireligionist, antifascist, anarchist, socialist, and humanist endeavors in our videos together, generally, every other Saturday.

Why Does Power Bring Responsibility?

Think, how often is it the powerless that start wars, oppress others, or commit genocide? So, I guess the question is to us all, to ask, how can power not carry responsibility in a humanity concept? I know I see the deep ethical responsibility that if there is power their must be a humanistic responsibility of ethical and empathic stewardship of that power. Will I be brave enough to be kind? Will I possess enough courage to be compassionate? Will my valor reach its height of empathy? I as everyone, earns our justified respect by our actions, that are good, ethical, just, protecting, and kind. Do I have enough self-respect to put my love for humanity’s flushing, over being brought down by some of its bad actors? May we all be the ones doing good actions in the world, to help human flourishing.

I create the world I want to live in, striving for flourishing. Which is not a place but a positive potential involvement and promotion; a life of humanist goal precision. To master oneself, also means mastering positive prosocial behaviors needed for human flourishing. I may have lost a god myth as an atheist, but I am happy to tell you, my friend, it is exactly because of that, leaving the mental terrorizer, god belief, that I truly regained my connected ethical as well as kind humanity.

Cory and I will talk about prehistory and theism, addressing the relevance to atheism, anarchism, and socialism.

At the same time as the rise of the male god, 7,000 years ago, there was also the very time there was the rise of violence, war, and clans to kingdoms, then empires, then states. It is all connected back to 7,000 years ago, and it moved across the world.

Cory Johnston:  

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist (YouTube)

Cory Johnston: Mind of a Skeptical Leftist @Skepticallefty

The Mind of a Skeptical Leftist By Cory Johnston: “Promoting critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics by covering current events and talking to a variety of people. Cory Johnston has been thoughtfully talking to people and attempting to promote critical thinking, social justice, and left-wing politics.”

Cory needs our support. We rise by helping each other.

Cory Johnston ☭ Ⓐ @Skepticallefty Evidence-based atheist leftist (he/him) Producer, host, and co-host of 4 podcasts @skeptarchy @skpoliticspod and @AthopeMarie

Damien Marie AtHope (“At Hope”) Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist. Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Poet, Philosopher, Advocate, Activist, Psychology, and Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Historian.

Damien is interested in: Freedom, Liberty, Justice, Equality, Ethics, Humanism, Science, Atheism, Antiteism, Antireligionism, Ignosticism, Left-Libertarianism, Anarchism, Socialism, Mutualism, Axiology, Metaphysics, LGBTQI, Philosophy, Advocacy, Activism, Mental Health, Psychology, Archaeology, Social Work, Sexual Rights, Marriage Rights, Woman’s Rights, Gender Rights, Child Rights, Secular Rights, Race Equality, Ageism/Disability Equality, Etc. And a far-leftist, “Anarcho-Humanist.”

I am not a good fit in the atheist movement that is mostly pro-capitalist, I am anti-capitalist. Mostly pro-skeptic, I am a rationalist not valuing skepticism. Mostly pro-agnostic, I am anti-agnostic. Mostly limited to anti-Abrahamic religions, I am an anti-religionist.

To me, the “male god” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 7,000 years ago, whereas the now favored monotheism “male god” is more like 4,000 years ago or so. To me, the “female goddess” seems to have either emerged or become prominent around 11,000-10,000 years ago or so, losing the majority of its once prominence around 2,000 years ago due largely to the now favored monotheism “male god” that grow in prominence after 4,000 years ago or so.

My Thought on the Evolution of Gods?

Animal protector deities from old totems/spirit animal beliefs come first to me, 13,000/12,000 years ago, then women as deities 11,000/10,000 years ago, then male gods around 7,000/8,000 years ago. Moralistic gods around 5,000/4,000 years ago, and monotheistic gods around 4,000/3,000 years ago. 

To me, animal gods were likely first related to totemism animals around 13,000 to 12,000 years ago or older. Female as goddesses was next to me, 11,000 to 10,000 years ago or so with the emergence of agriculture. Then male gods come about 8,000 to 7,000 years ago with clan wars. Many monotheism-themed religions started in henotheism, emerging out of polytheism/paganism.

“Animism” is needed to begin supernatural thinking.
“Totemism” is needed for supernatural thinking connecting human actions & related to clan/tribe.
“Shamanism” is needed for supernatural thinking to be controllable/changeable by special persons.
Together = Gods/paganism

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Damien Marie AtHope (Said as “At” “Hope”)/(Autodidact Polymath but not good at math):

Axiological Atheist, Anti-theist, Anti-religionist, Secular Humanist, Rationalist, Writer, Artist, Jeweler, Poet, “autodidact” Philosopher, schooled in Psychology, and “autodidact” Armchair Archaeology/Anthropology/Pre-Historian (Knowledgeable in the range of: 1 million to 5,000/4,000 years ago). I am an anarchist socialist politically. Reasons for or Types of Atheism

My Website, My Blog, & Short-writing or QuotesMy YouTube, Twitter: @AthopeMarie, and My Email:

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This