Contact About Disclaimer FAQ Updates Sitemap Inhoud Home
Wetenschap Legendes Archeologie Religie Societies Fraude Conclusies Artikelen Resources Media Forum Blog

Atheist Manual

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards Agnosticism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."

A. Fallacys in religion

1. Appeal to Tradition:

Also known as Appeal to antiquity - (Argumentum ad antiquitatem, or appeal to common practice, appeal to tradition is a common fallacy in which a thesis is deemed correct on the basis that it correlates with some past or present tradition. example: The appeal takes the form of "this is right because we've always done it this way."

An appeal to tradition essentially makes two assumptions that are not necessarily true:

- The old way of thinking was proven correct when introduced, i.e. since the old way of thinking was prevalent, it was necessarily correct. In actuality this may be false—the tradition might be entirely based on incorrect grounds.

- The past justifications for the tradition are still valid at present, when In actuality, the circumstances may have changed.

Appeal to novelty: (opposite of an appeal to tradition) example: claiming something is good because it is new.

2. Fallacy of accident - (Cum hoc ergo propter hoc): ("with this, therefore because of this"), or, in a slight variation, post hoc ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore because of this"). Both these names describe the mistake. This is the fallacy of assuming that A caused B simply because A happened along with B, or prior to B.

3. Appeal to logic - (Argumentum ad logicam): - Refuting a caricatured or extreme version of somebody's argument, rather than the actual argument they've made. example: Creationists are fond of saying that scientists think that complex life "just happened" or "fell together at random." That's a straw man argument.

4. Begging the question - (Petitio principii): - see circle reasoning

5. Fallacy of false cause - (Non sequitur): a conclusion based on insufficient or erroneous reason: example: "Statistics show juvenile delinquency is rising. Therefore, we need to post the Ten Commandments in public schools."

6. Special pleading: example: - "God moves in mysterious ways." "The lord reveals knowledge to the ignorant that he hides from the wise." or

"Everything that exists had a cause. The universe exists and therefore the universe had a cause. A thing cannot create itself and therefore something must have created the universe. That thing is God."

Then you ask, "Well then, what created God?"

And predictably, the response comes back: "God is eternal. He always existed. Nothing created him."

This is an example of special pleading: The believer is arguing that God is magically exempt from the previously stated axiom that everything that exists has a cause. If you want to be clever about it you can say, "Well, according to your own statement, it would seem that God doesn't exist. You just said everything that exists has a cause and you also said that God doesn't have one. So I guess he's out of luck then, huh?"

The fact is that the universe, though it had a beginning, is also eternal. It BOTH has always existed and began to exist about 13.8 billion years ago. The reason for this is that time itself is a property of the universe and began to exist at the moment of the Big Bang.

A more serious response, based on the fallacy, might be: "If God exists, according to what you said, God had a cause, too. If you are arguing that God is 'special' and doesn't NEED a cause, my question to you is, why don't we cut out the middle man and say the universe itself is 'special' and doesn't need a cause? Occam's Razor, also known as the rule of parsimony, dictates that, unless we have reasonable evidence suggesting otherwise, the simpler explanation is more likely to be right. In this case, if we're allowing the excuse that a thing can be exempt from the rule that everything that exists must have a cause, and it's simpler not to include an extra step in our timeline, then we're comfortably back where we started but without introducing an unnecessary element."

7. Excluded middle/false dichotomy fallacy: - Fallacy, which reduces complex situations to only two possibilities --example: "Love it or leave it;" "you're either part of the solution or part of the problem;" "who is not with me is against me" -- this last from Jesus himself, showing just how deeply it's engrained in Christian thinking.

Christians love dichotomy; it's rooted deep in their faith. Good-bad, Christ-Satan, heaven-hell.

8. Appeal to avoid the ''slippery slope'': - A variant is (Reductio ad absurdum), where one carries the opponent's position to its logical end, without mentioning that this is not the inevitable result of the opponent's viewpoint. example: "Atheists have no source for their morality; therefore, they have nothing to stop them from committing rape and murder." This ignores the fact that most atheists think long and hard about right and wrong and do have sources for their morality: Reason and an inherent sense of justice that lets them reject even the Judeo-Christian god when he tells his followers to rape and murder.

Irrelevant conclusion fallacys: - Where instead of proving the facts in question, the arguer seeks to divert attention to some extraneous fact.

9. Argument from personal considerations - (Argumentum ad hominem): - Attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. For a flood of examples, read any Christian literature on Madalyn Murray-O'Hair, John Dewey, or anyone else they don't like. They may have been genuinely ugly people. But that doesn't make their ideas or their causes wrong. Any more than the Inquisition's excesses invalidate all of Christianity.

10. Appeal to majority / Appeal to popular sentiment - (Argumentum ad populum): Is construed narrowly to designate an appeal to the opinions of people in the immediate vicinity, perhaps in hope of getting others to jump on the bandwagon.

Appeal to majority / Appeal to numbers - (Argumentum ad numeram): This amounts to attempting to prove something by showing how many people think that it's true. "According to a recent Gallup poll, 68 percent of Americans favor teaching creationism in public schools." Well, maybe 68% of Americans are stump-ignorant about science, education, and the Constitution. Used to designate appeals based purely on the number of people who hold a particular belief.

11. Appeal to ignorance - Argumentum ad ignorantium: - Example: " whatever has not been proved false must be true, and vice versa. Another creationist favorite.

12. Argument to fear / Argument from adverse consequences - (Argumentum ad baculum): - and the related Argument from adverse consequences: - "The court must impose the death penalty in this sensational case as a deterrent." For many people, this is the whole crux of the Christian faith: "Do what God tells me to tell you to do, or else you'll roast in Hell for all eternity." Except for the Calvinists, who say "Do whatever you damn well please, you're probably going to roast in Hell for all eternity anyhow and there's nothing you can do about it."

13. Naturalistic fallacy: - This is the fallacy of trying to derive conclusions about what is right or good (that is, about values) from statements of fact alone. No matter how many statements of fact you assemble, any logical inference from them will be another statement of fact, not a statement of value. If you wish to reach conclusions about values, then you must include among your assumptions (or axioms, or premises) a statement of value. Once you have an axiomatic statement of value, then you may use it in conjunction with statements of fact to reach value-laden conclusions.

Christians of a certain sort have a natural tendency to mistake their morality for the only morality, and their values for the facts of the universe.

14. Fallacy of many questions - (Plurium Interrogationum): - Several questions improperly grouped in the form of one, for which a direct categorical answer is demanded. Similar to fallacy of complex question, a favorite of a former girlfriend of mine, which implicitly assumes something to be true by its construction ("Why do you hate me?"), or the classic, "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

15. Observational selection: - counting the hits and forgetting the misses. A favorite of "Biblical prophecy" fans.

16. statistics of small numbers: - Carl Sagan summed it up something like this: "They say that one in five people in the world today is Chinese, well, I live in Indiana and I must know thousands of people and not one of them is Chinese."

17. Argument from conventional propriety - (Argumentum ad verecundiam): Closely related to "Argument from authority:" citing some person who agrees with you, even though that person may have no expertise in the given area -- Einstein on politics, for instance. This is also similar to Argumentum ad antiquitatem -- "Every great civilization in history has provided state subsidies for art and culture." But that fact does not justify continuing the policy.

18. Argument to the point of disgust (Argumentum ad nauseam): especially by repitition. Example: Trying to prove something by saying it again and again.

19. Fallacy of the consequent: - Arguing from a consequent to its condition: "drug addicts live in slums; therefore people who live in slums are drug addicts."

20. Secundum Quid: - Arguing erroneously from a general rule to a particular case without regarding special circumstances which vitiate the general rule; or the converse fallacy of arguing from a special case to a general rule.

21. Spoken simply: - The "sweeping generalization: dicto simpliciter, that is presumed to be true of every specific case -- in other words, stereotyping. Example: "Women are on average not as strong as men and less able to carry a gun. Therefore women can't pull their weight in a military unit."

22. Appeal On emotion: (Beroepen op de emoties van mensen)

23. Hearsay: Van horen zeggen Example ''He said it'' ''He said to me that Lucas told this and that''

24. Circle reasoning - (Circulus in probando, or circulus in demonstrando): - Arguing in a circle (circular arguments) demonstrating a conclusion by means of premises which presuppose that conclusion.
- Its true because its says in the bible.
- Its true or It is written in the bible (which inspired by God) therefore its true.
- "God is real." How do you know? - "Because the Bible says so."
- How do you know the Bible is correct? - "Because it was inspired by God."


25. Bare assertions. - (ipse dixit): - These are probably the most common tools used by believers when discussing belief. It's not a formal fallacy in that it's not an error in reasoning, but rather a failure to argue properly by not citing sources or providing evidence.

Often, you will hear believers say that they do not "need" evidence or that evidence/empiricism and faith are different "realms" or different "magisteria."

In Latin, a bare assertion is called an "ipse dixit," which just means "he [himself] said it."

Here's what it looks like in action:

Believer: Jesus died for your sins. If you open your heart to him and repent, you can be saved.

Atheist: I don't believe that. Why should I? Why do you?

B: Deep down you know it's true. It's written in your heart. You cannot deny the glory of God; all are without excuse.

A: You didn't even address my question. I'm not asking what you believe. I'm asking why you believe it.

B: Because it's the Truth. Jesus loves you and wants you to reach out to him.

etc, etc.

Notice that the believer is not giving any evidence for why he believes what he believes. Quoting the Bible, although a piss-poor way to convince someone who does not already believe the Bible is an authority on such matters, would be one way to resolve this. That moves the discussion from bare assertion to evidence-based/empirical reasoning. Just saying "You know in your heart" or "It is written in your heart" is simply a bare assertion unless the person quotes the accompanying Bible verses where these come from.

Similarly, saying "Jesus died for your sins" is a bare assertion. This can be resolved by the believer simply by changing it to "Jesus said that he died for your sins" or "The Bible says that..." etc. Again this moves the statement from a bare assertion into the territory of evidence, which can then be questioned and its validity or relevance examined.

Respond to "Jesus died for your sins" by saying, "So?" or "According to whom?" or, if I'm feeling cheeky, I quote Doug Stanhope and say, "How does one affect the other? It's like saying, I hit myself in the foot with a shovel for your mortgage."
''What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.''
- Christopher Hitchens - "Hitchens' Razor,"

B. Stokpaardjes

''It would be impossible for the whole world to believe in him unless he actually did exist.'' (appeal to majority / appeal to numbers!)

''Ja maar miljoenen geloven het dus..'' = (appeal to majority / appeal to numbers!) argumentum ad numeram

''Ja maar die of die (gelovige) geleerde zegt het ook en die man is toch niet dom ? '' = (appeal to popular sentiment / argumentum ad populum)

''God must have a reason for it.'' - ''God had er een reden voor''. (Hoe weet je dat ?) Waar staat dat ?

''God works in mysterious ways'' - ''Gods wegen zijn ondoorgrondelijk'' (Hoe weet je dat ?) Waar staat dat ?
"God moves in mysterious ways." fallacy known as special pleading.
"The lord reveals knowledge to the ignorant that he hides from the wise." = special pleading
''God said .... Jesus said.... God zei..... Jesus zei....'' (Hoe weet je dat ?) Waar staat dat ?

''But it is written in the bible'' - ''Ja maar het staat geschreven in de bijbel !'' (Dat is alleen maar interpretatie, ik kan ook een boek schrijven waarin staat dat God niet bestaat)

''Ja maar dat moet je anders zien, interpreteren, uitleggen.''

''Je moet de dingen niet uit de context halen. ''- Doen jullie zelf

''We komen er toch niet uit.'' ( - dus we kunnen beter stoppen met de discussie) = discussie stopper omdat ze zelf niet weten hoe het zit.

''We weten nog helemaal niets.'' = discussie stopper.

''Ik weet het niet en jij weet het ook niet.''

''Vele profetien zijn uitgekomen'' - Nee dat is alleen interpretatie.

''Jullie haten God en Jesus !'' - Je kunt niet iets haten dat niet bestaat.

''We leven nu in de eindtijd '' - Er is geen spraken van eindtijd The end of the age (fish) not the end of time or the end of the world which is a fraud in the bible Revelation book.

''Respecteer het geloof'' - Nee waarom zou ik een geloof die desinformatie en leugens verspreid en mensen vanaf jongs af aan hersenspoeld respecteren los van wat de kerk allemaal op zijn geweten heeft ?

''Repend else you go to hell !'' - Bekeer je anders kom je in de hell - = Fearmongering.

''At judgement day you stand before God''. = Waar heb je die fantasie vandaan ?

''He died for all sins'' - except the sin of disbelief, apparently.

''Er waren vele getuigen dat Jesus opgestaan was'' - Getuigen, wie ? Waar heb je dat gehoord of gelezen ? ( de bijbel geldt niet als bewijs )

C. Discussie tips

- Lees veel boeken en volg lectures over atheisme en astrotheology, mythologie en origine van het geloof.
- Bouw een basiskennis op.
- Stel moeilijke vragen en laat ze die beargumenteren zonder de regels te overtreden
- Wijs ze op de fallacys in de discussie.
- Laat ze inzien wanneer ze zichzelf vast praten
- Leg de definities uit van bv. Fraude, bedrog, liegen etc
- Vertel ze wat astrotheologie inhoud en dat dit geen astrologie is.
- Onthoud wat er gezegd is.

- Laat ze uitleggen waar hun ideen vandaan komen, wat is de basis van hun geloof ( Bijbel ?)
- Laat u zich niet overtroeven door belangrijk klinkende taal het meeste is onzin wat ze zeggen.
- De bijbel is door vele mensen geschreven en niet geinspireerd door een God iets dat zelfs de meeste christelijke en niet christelijke bijbel geleerden het over eens zijn..
- Wijs ze erop dat als Adam en Eva zondeval een mythe is (plagiaat) dan dus ook het Gospel verhaal van Jesus die voor onze zonde stierf ( original sin of Adam) vanwege Adam geen waarde heeft en dus ook een mythe moet zijn ?
- Laat gelovigen maar uitleggen hoe creationisme in zijn werk ging.
- Wijs ze op logica en rationaliteit.
- Geef gelovigen wat tips mee en dat ze vooral eerst eens de oorsprong van hun geloof en de bijbel en de mythen moeten bestuderen alsvorens dingen te geloven en aannemen dat wat de kerk hun vertelt juist is !
- Leg uit wat de Jesus karakter voorstelt : Jesus is just a character like Horus, Myttra , Serapis, Dionysus, Krishna, Buddha , Osiris. which rerpresents the aspects of the sun.. IN wintersolstice 25 dec the sun ''stands'' still for 3 days and after that he will climb futher up again
- Geef ze de feiten die zijn vastgesteld uit mythe en bijbel onderzoek door biblescholars en mythologist and astrotheologist.
- There is NO christian who tells the truth, they do not even know what the truth is, the truth is the bible is a human written book, without inspiration of a God, God does not appear in the bible at all, citing bible does not mean anything, anybody can write anything in a book, the bible is a forgery , fraud which is proven to be so, No evidence of a God let alone a Jesus to be found. give me one example of evidence of Jesus, just 1. No Adam and Eve, no Noach, No Abraham, no Moses, no disciples or apostles, no Jesus, no second coming, no end-times, no hell, demons, angels, devils. no resurrection, ascension, raising dead, cursing trees, etc impossible.

D. Weerwoord

Ja maar de bijbel is het woord van God.
Wie zegt dat ? Waar staat dat ? let op circular reasoning, cirkel argumentatie. !

I'm not obligated to make you believe it. You don't believe... because you don't want to believe.
NO not because I do not want to believe it, by the way why should I want to believe it, first the evidence than we will look further. You do not have the evidence.

E. Moeilijke vragen aan gelovigen

Hoe oud is het universum en de aarde ?

Hoelang is de mens al op aarde ?

Wanneer speelde zich het Genesis verhaal af ?

Waar komt het Genesis verhaal vandaan oorspronkelijk ?

Genesis is duidelijk allegorische mythe ( is aan de txt te zien) waarom word het door gelovigen dan letterlijk genomen ?

Als de aarde 6000 jaar oud is hoe kan het dan dat 4000 v chr er al een bloeiende Sumerische cultuur was en dat zelfs daarvoor 6000 - 12000 jaar eerder al culturen zijn gevonden met mechalitische bouwwerken ?

Rekensom Heden - 2000 jr is jaar 0 - 4000 jaar is 4000 v chr. = 6000 jaar v chr. met Sumerische cultuur en toen werd de aarde geschapen ?

Hoe onststond de zon, zonnenstelsel met planeten, manen en de aarde ?

Hoe schiep ''God'' de aarde ?

Hoe schiep ''God'' de mens ?

Waar komt al het water vandaan om hoger dan de bergen uit te komen ?

Wanneer vond het Noach verhaal plaats ?

Hoe kreeg Noach al die dieren in die Ark ?

Hoe kon Noach al die dieren voeden en verzorgen ?

Die dieren van allerlei continenten hoe kwamen die naar de Ark ?

Hoe kan het dat de bijbel stories zoveel overeenkomen met mythen ?

Geef de bewijzen dat Jesus bestaan heeft?

Why is there a pagan Egyptian obelisk on the Vatican plaza together with the solstice and equinox sun cross ? Thats pagan sunworshipping cult symbolic material, Why is that on the Vatican plaza, are they're telling us they are in reality pagan based religion, Christmas, Easter are all pagan festivals, Saturday = Saturn day, Sunday = Sun day, Monday = Moon day, which are all derived from pagan sun and stellar cult.

F. Definities

(A)theist: Classification:

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
5. Leaning towards Agnosticism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there."
7. Strong atheist. "I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung knows there is one."


"1: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Assumption = Aanname, hypothese, veronderstelling. Accepteren (voor waar erkennen) van een bewering, idee, mening, opvatting, stelling (die niet vaststaat). Citaat: “Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups” (“Aanname is de moeder aller blunders”). Zie ook: fact.




Questionable eisegesis: Reading into the text what one already believes,

Scholarly Exegesis : Reading the text as it is written, and then ( and only then) drawing conclusions.

De tien geboden van Atheisten

1 U zult de bijbel als zodanig niet als bewijs opvoeren voor wat dan ook.

2 U zult geen beroep doen op appeal to majority ( Ja maar miljoenen geloven het dus.. )

3 Doe niet alsof u weet wat ''God'' wil of niet !

4 Ja maar die of die (gelovige) geleerde zegt het ook en die man is toch niet dom ? ( Pupulous

5 Discussie niet afbreken met dooddoeners en afbrekers.

6 U zult uw discussie oponent geen woorden in de mond leggen.

7 Val niemand persoonlijk aan. Val de boodschapper niet aan. - Dont attack the messenger (Add Hominim)

8 Laat u niet leiden door emoties.

9 Studeer eerst de origine van het geloof en de bijbel voor dat u gelooft.

10 Gebruik Ocams Razor waar het toegepast kan worden. - Use Ocams Razor

11 Geef een ander niet de schuld van wat u zelf doet.

12 Neem dingen niet letterlijk die allegorisch en of symbolisch en mythologies zijn.

13 Blijf bij het onderwerp en wijk niet af - Stay on the topic.

14 Draai de boel niet om - You should not turn things around.


You cannot proof a negative.

Believing its true does not mean it IS true.

Faith is believing without reasoning.

Ignorant are the ones who do not study but are brainwashed and stuborn in their believe given by church.

Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups” (“Aanname is de moeder aller blunders”)

"The virtue of using evidence is precisely that we can come to an agreement about it. But if you listen to two people who are arguing about something, and they each of them have passionate faith that they're right, but they believe different things -- they belong to different religions, different faiths, there is nothing they can do to settle their disagreement short of shooting each other, which is what they very often actually do."
--Richard Dawkins

Feiten lijst

1. Genesis = Was originaly a Sumerian mythe, allegoric tale. Jews in 6th century while exiled by the Babylonians wrote Genesis from Babylonian scripture which had it from their ancestors the Sumerian culture about 6000 years ago. While the supposed Moses could not have written it because ''he'' lived more than 1000 years earlier so Moses did not wrote the Pentateuch.

2. Noach story = Gilgamesh Sumerian tale.

3. Abraham and Sara = Fantasy tale, allegoric meaning and derived from Bramah and Sarasvati from India.

4. Lots story = non historical, allegorical. If their was anything to the salt pilar and the other events in the story it was an natural disaster of some unknown kind, nothing to do with ''God''

5. Moses = Mythological character, 3 signs to pharao are nothing but initiation ritual not some miracle from God which Moses had to do before the Pharao.

6. Exodus = Non historical, plagues are non historical as presented, could only have been natural and certainly did not appear in 1 day, nothing to do with God destroying humans via nature.

7 Ark of Covenant = Egyptian ancient technology, why dangerous, because the ark was build as a capacitor of static electricity which is proven by University and John Hutchinson !

8 Mana = Probably just a fairytale, Powder or seeds from the Tamarisk or other tree.

9. Manna 2 = Gold from golden calf was monatomic gold due to burning the calf. Heating gold gives you monatomic gold which is gold in powder form. Producing this form of gold is ancient egyptian technology which is proven to be so. When digesting this stuff you could enhance your psychic abilities and or natural flow of energy in your body, which is proven to be so. Pharao's used this and also the ''wands of Horus ''

10 ARk was build by Egyptians not from instruction by God which is ridiculous.

11 The 10 commandments = Spells out of the code of Hamurabi and also from the 42 negative confessions or spells in the Egyptian book of the dead (1500 BCE). and or 1760 BCE Hammurabi code.

12. The law = likewise obviously a Egyptian origin.

13 Jesus = Sun god aspect of sun in various faces in the zodiac in reference to the earth.

14 Miracles as raising dead, cursing tree, feeding multitude, healings, resurrection and ascension are not possible and are themes from various myths from thousands of years earlier all copied and edited into the Jesus myth out of scripture from Alexandria Library.

15 Walking on water = Sun ''walking on water''

16. Maria, 12 apostles, Joseph etc = All characters in the astrotheology myth..

17 Equinox and solstice cross and obelisk on vatican plaza = pagna sun worshipping cult.

18 Sodom and Gomora = Natural disaster (if at all happpened ) nothing to do with God destroying a city because some people did not ''behave''

19. Astrotheology = Pagan sun worshipping based on zodiac, moon, sun, stars and visible planets in our solar system. Jews, gnostics and christians ''borrowed'' symbols, scripture, festival, themes etc to be able to convert more to christian religion easily. Not any symbol, scripture, festival myth is unique to christian religion, all is picked, stolen and borrow and copied from much older mainly pagan sun and stellar cults.

20 Jesus = Pagan sun worshiping character which represents the sun who '''dies'' on cross and is resurrected again every morning as well as at the winter solstice 25 dec after 3 days. Virgin birth , miracles, etc borrowed from older myths. No evidence of existence of Jesus, not biblical not external and historical.

21 Maria = Virgo, Jesus = Sun, 12 apostles = zodiac, Judas = Scorpio the backbiter, J baptist = aquarius-age, Bull is Taurus, Lamb is Aries, Jesus = Pisces.

22. Second coming of Jesus = Coming of new age Aquarius ( follow the pitcher in bible)

23 Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Lot and ... , Moses and Miriamne, Samson and Delilah, Jesus and Maria M, all represent a conflict situation and is meant allegorical not historical !

24. Yahweh, Jehovah, Baal, El, Elohim etc all human names given to the Sun in astrotheology myths.

25. Sermon on the mount = text coming from old testament scripture.

26. Water to wine = Taken from a myth from Greece where Dionisys / Bachus was the God of wine and water.

27. Bible does not count as proof . saying ''Its truth because the bible says so ''' is a circle argument and is not valid and can and may not be used in a honest discussion about the topic.

28. Evolution theory = scientific proven.

29 Creationism = unproven.

30. So called historical evidence outside bible by Historians = 10 Historians are called in to allegedly have proof and evidence of Jesus as historical person = All references are fraud , forgery, interpolations, not referencing to Jesus at all etc.
So I think you have enough for this time obviously there are many many more facts to cover. Read Achary S book and you will find many references.

To be continued ....
(in book)

Recommended reading list


Alberto Canen-The observer of Genesis the science behind the creation story.pdf
D J.Wiseman-Genesis Archeology.pdf
G_D-The Sumerian swindle
Uffington-The Greatest Lie Ever Told.pdf
D A Mackenzy-Myths of Babylonia and Assyria.pdf
David A Leeming-Creation Myths of the World .pdf
William Bramley-The Gods of Eden.
Strange-Legends of the Old Testament.pdf


Acharya-The Christ Conspiracy_the Greatest Story Ever Sold.
Acharya S-Zeitgeist-compendium-(his)-.
Acharya S-Zeitgeist source book.
Acharya S-Zeitgeist Challenge.
Acharya S-Who was Jesus=Fingerprints of the Christ (07)-.
Acharya S-The History of Mythicism.
Acharya S-Suns of God 1.
Acharya S-Suns of God 2
Acharya S-Religion101.
Acharya S-Origins of Christianity.
Acharya S-Nazareth.
Acharya S-Moses-dionysus_(Dec).
Acharya S-Mithra The Pagan Christ.
Acharya S-Jesus as the sun.
Acharya S-Isis Virgin Mother Virgin Mary.
Acharya S-Interviews.
Acharya S-Exodus case review.
Acharya S-Delusional Christians Defend God's Atrocities(forum).
Acharya S-Christ in Egypt=The Horus Jesus Connection 1.
Acharya S-Christ in Egypt=The Horus Jesus Connection 2
Acharya S-Articles collection.
Acharya S-Ehrman and the Quest ot Historical Jesus

Timothy Freke-Jesus And The Lost Goddess.pdf
Timothy Freke-The Jesus Mysteries(2002)pics chinese.pdf
Timothy Freke-The Jesus Mysteries(V 2.0).pdf
Timothy Freke-the Laughing Jesus Religious Lies and Gnostic Wisdom.pdf

History of Egypt:

Massey-The Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ.pdf
E.A. Wallis Budge-The Egyptian Book of the Dead.pdf
Adolf Erman-A Handbook of Egyptian Religion.pdf
Nozo123-Handbook of Egyptian Religion.pdf
Ralph Ellis various books


Christopher Hitchens-God is Not Great.pdf
Christopher Hitchens-The Portable Atheist.pdf
Steve Wells-Drunk-With Blood Gods Killings in the Bible-.pdf
Steven Wells-Skeptic's Annotated Bible .pdf
Dan Barker-The Christian Delusion (2010).mobi
David Mills-Atheist Universe 2006).pdf
J W. Loftus-The End of Christianity (2011) .epub
Bertrand Russell-Why I Am Not A Christian.pdf
Richard Carrier-Not the Impossible Faith (2009).pdf
Robert M Price-Deconstructing Jesus (2000).pdf
Sam Warren-The Bible Naked,The Greatest Fraud Ever Told.pdf


Joseph Campbell-The Hero with a Thousand Faces extract.pdf
ExposingReligion Blog-Failed biblical Prophecies.pdf

Historical Jesus:

Atwill-Caesar's Messiah (2005).pdf
Habermas-The Historical Jesus (1996).pdf
Massey-The Historical Jesus and the Mythical (1880).pdf
Murphy-The Historical Jesus For Dummies (2008).pdf
Wills-Quest for Historical Gospel (1997).pdf

Alternative Jesus theories:

Tony Bushby-The Secret in the Bible
Tony Bushby-Bible Fraud

Laurence Gardner-Genesis of the Grail Kings.
Laurence Gardner-Bloodline of the Holy Grail
Laurence Gardner-Magdalene Legacy.o.
Laurence Gardner-The Grail Enigma.o
Laurence Gardner-Realm of the Ring Lords.
Laurence Gardner-Secret of the sacred Ark

Michael Baigent-Holy Blood holy Grail
Micheal Baigent-The Jesus Papers
Micheal Baigent-Verschlußsache Jesus

The Gospels:

Bart Ehrman-Misquoting Jesus
Bart Ehrman-God's Problem
Bart Ehrman-Historical Jesus
Bart Ehrman-History Of The Bible Guidebook
Bart Ehrman-Lost Christianities
Bart Ehrman-Misquoting Jesus
Bart Ehrman-Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene_ the fol
Bart Ehrman-Truth and Fiction in The Da Vinci Code.
Bart Ehrman-FORGED=Writing in the Name of God (2011).
E R-Ehrman debunked.pdf