practice and believe. You wrote, "What about you branch of Christianity 200 years ago. Is it pretty much the same as what your are practicing now? Has it evolved? Did you have it right back then, or right now? Or will your branch of Christianity have it right in 200 years from now?" There are only certain core beliefs which must be believed to be saved. There is much debate over what these beliefs encompass, and I deign to not enter that debate now, because it is fairly irrelevant to the question of whether or not I am an atheist (which, by the way, I am not). You wrote, "Finally, I think you are arguing semantics rather than the idea behind the statement..." Really? Then why call me an atheist? You wrote, "The statement is saying why are you so vain to believe that your little sect of Christianity has the cornerstone on "the truth" of creation and morality. Furthermore why do all those other religions have it wrong? Furthermore at what point did your incarnation of Christianity get it right? " I do not say they have it all right, but I do believe other religions have truths in them. Furthermore, saying that other religions are "wrong" does not make me an atheist to them. It is my own beliefs which define my worldview. That's what is at issue here. Calling me an atheist is the actual semantics game, and I'm not sure why atheists continue to try to