How people should think

I think there are some fundamental things which need explaining. Most xians dont seem to get these rules and it caused them to come up with really stupid arguments. They are:

1)If it supports atheism then its proberly true. You see, xians have a reputation for lying and getting things wrong(just look at the creationist movement) whereas atheists dont. Lets put it like this, if someone came to you and said they saw a flying pig...then someone else said they had evidence the first person hadnt seen a flying pig. Who would you believe? So information which supports atheism is more reliable.

2)If it supports xianity then it isnt true. The reverse of point 1. people dont rise from the dead so any argument that suggests otherwise is invalid

3)If its on the internet then its proberly true (taking into account points 1 and 2) The internet isnt run by the governement or the church and so anyone can post the truth on it.

This ties into the sceptical aproach that only believs things backed up by good evidence and logic.

Bible 5.2

Every few years they bring out a new version of Microsoft windows or patches to fix bugs and make imrpovements. Now why doesnt your sky daddy provide updates and new versions of the bible?

Evidence found in the bible itself

now 1 corinthians 15 is the earliest summary of what the church believed. Conspicuously missing from it are:
-the feeding of the 5000
-jebus walking on water
-jebus being born from a virgin
-the empty tomb
-the story of the good samaritan

Therefore paul never believed any of this crap listed above or hed have mentioned it and it is all later editions to your blind faith.

Are all the references to jebus xian forgeries?

Now I think ive hit gold with this one. I was thinking about how bart ehrman makes a big thing of how we dont have the origional manuscripts for the bible and so dont know what the origionals said. Well what if we use his argument and apply it to the question if wheather jebus existed? Suppose none of the origional manuscripts mention jebus and every reference to jebus in the bible were a textual variant. Well, then the bible would have never mentioned jebus. Seeing all the other references to jebus are known to be xian forgeries we know xians were faking documents to justify there a priori assumption jebus existed. Moreover earl dhorethy has pointed out that there are pssages in the bible that clearly state jebus didnt exist. So can you prove to me that any of the references to jebus were in the original manuscripts when we dont have the origional manuscripts?

THE REASON PROJECT

The much anticipated reason project is here....

For those who dont know what the reason project is, then it is a website ran by Sam Harris, with the help of some of atheisms greatest minds (richard dawkins, bill maher etc) It include various articles plus an updated bersion of the skeptics annotated bible. Wow.

Unfortunatly there isnt much content on it yet, but so far it look amazing.

God Vs the Bible

Has anyone come across this free e-book. its pretty good. And free. You should all read it.

Some lessons from hollywood

I went to see x men origin wolverine and in it a character says that their powers arent gifts because gifts can be given back. Now when I see a movie I tend to think more deeply about it than most people, due to my intellect, and so realised what the character was saying. If a sky daddy gave us gifts then we would be able to give them back. Yet we cant. So when xians talk about gifts we must wonder how they are gifts when we are unable to return them. I also wondered why you sky daddy gave me the gift of logic and skillful argument if they knew that i would use it to figure out they dont exist?

Also I saw this article claiming that the vatican are against the angel and demons film. no doubt some will try to justfy it it with all the usual claims...oh its a factually inacurate film...oh why would the vatican want to be associated with such a film...........Id like to suggest and alternative-the vatican have something to hide. Just think about it.