As I said in my post, he's just one source.

Only? That's a very mild description!

@Antifred A ThD, i.e. Doctorate in Theology and Comparative Modern Religions is precisely what I studied for an achieved after 7 long years, AND, I studied as a DECLARED Atheist as well, Antifred.
You see, despite the illusions, etc, Christianity IS regarded among the numerous Academic Circles, the more enlightened ones that is, as a MODERN Religion since it only arose in the years C.E. and NOT in the B.C.E. periods such as did Hinduism, etc, etc.
My studies and Doctorate Degree were earned, NOT from a Religious Seminary BUT via a well respected University, one where, fortunately, BOTH sides of EVERY story are told, examined, questioned and then done over again and again.

@Antifred Oh shit a brick there, I see you've managed to purchase a whole new set of batteries once again.
So it looks very much like you'll be typing away ceaselessly until this supply runs out once more.

@Antifred The ACTUAL Hittites, a peoples who SETTLED in the mountainous regions of Anatolia ( Turkey) after MIGRATING from somewhere in Eastern Europe, built the impregnable walled, fortress city whose ruins were found some 50 years ago in those very same mountains.
A very war-like and hostile peoples living and warring at the time of the reign of King Ramses I, aka Ramses the Great, Pharaoh of Egypt, the Hittites attacked Babylon first and virtually destroyed the city and its people in a frenzy of slaughter, rape and pillaging, then turned their war-machine towards Egypt, fought against Ramses at Kadesh and won, even though Ramses claimed, falsely, it was an Egyptian victory, which resulted in Ramses and the Hittite King signing the first EVER recorded ( and actual evidence of it still exists to this day btw) Non-Aggression Peace Treaty in History and proclaiming the Hittite King as being a Great King, a title reserved ONLY for Ramses and 2 other reigning Kings of that time.
AFTER a dispute between the Hittite King and his nephew saw the Hittite King EXILED ( an unforgivable BREACH of the Hittite code of Brotherhood, Unity and Selfless Loyalty to the King unto Death) a civil war broke out, the civilization fell into ruin and the peoples disappeared, back to whence they had come from, taking everything, valuables, etc, EXCEPT clay tablet records, with them.

Ergo, the myth of the Hittites mentioned in the Goat-Herders Guide to the Galaxy (a.k.a the bible) WERE NEVER the True Hittites of ancient History or times since the REAL Hittite Empire was situated a very long way away from Palestine and the Hebrews ( Jews) of the time.

For further factual evidence see, DVD Documentary, "Lost Cities of the Ancients, The Dark Lords of Hattusha," released by the B.B.C. under the Authority of the National Geographic Society..

@Antifred "Biblical Archaeology" you have to joking, mixing those two words together is the same as Biblical History, i.e. neither of them truly exist except ONLY in the minds of those seeking to find imaginary evidence to support their belief in their totally Imaginary God.
There were NEVER any 'Neo-Hittites' in Ancient history, only those who built the Hittite Fortress city of Hattusha in the remote mountain region of Anatolia ( now known as Turkey) so your biblical 'history(????)' is once more, a always, proven 100% INCORRECT.

@Antifred As a Doctor of Theology who is also an Atheist and has degrees in both Ancient and Modern Histories plus a Degree in Ancient Languages, including Latin, Ancient Greek, Cuneiform and Aramaic, etc, I STATE clearly and succinctly that so-called Biblical History is very little more than a compendium of STOLEN Tales/Legends/Myths, twisted, contorted and bastardised by the Scribes under King Hezekiah ( A NON-Hebrew King who conquered the 13 Hebrew Tribes approx. 240 years prior to the Reign of the Mythical David) in an effort to combine and utilize the belligerencies and hostile natures of those 13 tribes to AUGMENT his own Armies.
As for the biblical 'blood-lines' well, considering that a) all blood-lines are Paternal Only, b) there were NO recorded/records kept of actual births during those eras and up until not so very long ago in historical times that is, therefore ANYONE with a mere ounce of Nous could easily FABRICATE a Paternal Blood-line and have it say whatever they wished, ergo Biblical 'blood-lines' are completely meaningless to everyone EXCEPT those who refuse to see that fact, such as you in my opinion.
And also, I see, in my honest opinion, that YOU are nowhere remotely either an Atheist or an Agnostic BUT a ' roach' (Troll) of the Christian ilk bent upon spreading your beliefs throughout this site.

@Triphid Antifred is a well established Troll here on Agnostic. From The Urban Dictionary: [Sealioning]A subtle form of trolling involving "bad-faith" questions. You disingenuously frame your conversation as a sincere request to be enlightened, placing the burden of educating you entirely on the other party. If your bait is successful, the other party may engage, painstakingly laying out their logic and evidence in the false hope of helping someone learn. In fact you are attempting to harass or waste the time of the other party, and have no intention of truly entertaining their point of view. Instead, you react to each piece of information by misinterpreting it or requesting further clarification, ad nauseum. The name "sea-lioning" comes from a Wondermark comic strip.

@GuyKeith I've realized, almost from day 1, that Antifred ( aka as I now lie to call him, FriarFred) is one of those religious Trolls ('roaches) with, in my opinion here, a very one tracked mind and on some occasions, Yes, I have responded to him, most sadly and regrettably, but they have been lapses of mind and very little more.

Yep, and they ALL breed like bloody rabbits as well.

"Just so long as the good do nothing, say nothing then worst will occur and eventually take control." - Author Unknow at this present time.

It's not safe to make such assumptions. There is precedent from history.

@evidentialist Just about every church is opposed to theocracy. He’s just one person.

@evidentialist, @Triphid Why do you think people would do nothing? If the democratic process were circumvented there would be a massive uprising.

@evidentialist after living in ALabama for 5 years the thought of people wanting a Christian theocracy does not seem so far fetched to me

@btroje it seems far-fetched and impossible to me. The largest religious organization in Alabama is probably the Southern Baptist Convention which continually over the years has reaffirmed its commitment to the principles of the separation of church and state. Baptists in Danbury Connecticut in fact were instrumental in having that separation enshrined in the constitution.

[sbc.net]

I guess it feels good to raise the alarm, but for me I’ll wait for real danger before I get excited about this theocracy business.

@WilliamFleming just talking to the average person. I am not talking about a take over, just what they may like

@WilliamFleming -- One can't help noticing that the Southern Baptist Convention avoided saying that in keeping with their agreement with separation of church and state they would henceforth forego the benefit of tax exempt status which is a form of state subsidy.

I need also point out to you that the majority of the fundamentalist evangelical community would not oppose in the slightest theocratic government and a large portion of them promote just such an idea.

@evidentialist You are right about the tax part, but I haven’t seen any polls showing that a large portion of the fundamentalist evangelical community favor theocratic government. Please provide links to such polls. I have never in my life heard such a thing said in person and I grew up in a Baptist Church.

So far as federal income tax, there’s really no profit to tax. Local property taxes maybe. I would think that any non-profit entity would not have to pay property tax, but that would be up to local government.

@WilliamFleming -- As you wish, but also understand that I am in no way suggesting that this tendency is actually moving toward making the US a theocracy with any degree of success. They have, thought, made of inroads in our political structure through legislation at local, state, and federal levels. Any fear of such a development I would consider paranoia approaching phobia. However, the fact is that we have a large percentage of people within our country who would at least on questioning favor a theocracy. What percentage of that percentage would actually act on their desire I wouldn't hazard a guess, but I'm sure the number is significant.

[newrepublic.com]

[theguardian.com]

[americanprogress.org]

[politicalresearch.org]

[thehumanist.com]

[prospect.org]

[huffpost.com]