the whole virgin birth thing is quite amusing actually it is a mistranslation of the ancient greek word παρθένος (young woman) to παρθένοᾆφ (virgin) in a translation of the bible

Skii if you are interested in the plethora of parodies which christianity uses then i suggest you look at the nativity stories of jesus, mithras, horus and others and see the incredible similarities especially in horus

Mandat

“p.s. by the way, where do you get that they are evil?”

The Vatican labelled pagans evil. No real reason, apart from they worship Lucifer. Bad huh? Not really, since Jesus is based on the original Lucifer, the lamb of god (note the horns he has. Obviously we can’t have 2 conflicting ‘lambs of god’, so they outlawed paganism and classed it as Satanic. Rather petty I think.

Holy cross = Egyption symbol of new life

Christmas = Pagan festival

Halo = Egyption symbol for spiritual energy and power

Just a few things Christianity stole from earlier times (which by the way is against your 10 commandments)

Also in reference to an earlier article about an Atheist who wants to destroy society, big deal if Stalin was atheist. Hitler was Catholic. Lets not forget a certain few ‘holy’ crusades. Stalin never killed in the name of Atheism, whereas unspeakable numbers have died in the name of ‘God’.

Jesus was from the middle east. Why do you worship a white guy?

I’m sorry, but if there is a God, he/she certainly ain’t Christian…and in reference to the whole ’science can’t be used as proof against religion’ arguement..if by some miracle the remains of Mary herself were found and it was proven using testing she did indeed have a virgin birth, would the religious people still hold that opinion? Of course not.

I’d like the author of the articles to reply if possible.

It is exactly the kind of behaviour that atheists and agnostics are getting so mad about when it comes to talking with religious people.
On the other hand, Krugle made a real argument on the subject. Of course we can never know the truth about mary’s pregnancy, so i challenge you to tell us why it would be “insane” to suggest that somebody who wrote a book over 1000 years ago would be absolutely sure about facts that even he wasn’t there to watch for himself.

“If you don’t have a problem with God, why don’t you just give him a chance to do wonders in your life? What have you got to lose?”

As atheists, we see this from completely different viewpoint. We cannot “Give him a chance” if all of our logical reasoning points to the fact that there is no god.

The bible states god is the best he can possibly be. He is morally perfectly good. If something is by definition the best it can be, any change it undertook would be for the worse. This is pure logic.

According to the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope has a direct link with god. In 1095, as “directed by god,” the Pope sent huge armies to retake Jerusalem. As an educated member of the modern world, you cannot possibly think that the slaughter of thousands of Christians, turks, and muslims was morally right, and yet, this was directed by god, who is always morally perfect. The logical conclusion to be drawn from this is that our basic moral instinct is that it is morally perfect to kill people in the name of the church. Why would we ever want to be morally perfect, and go to heaven, if that is what’s considered right? that must In essence you and every other christian in America worship the same god that told Pope Urban II to declare war on the turks for the first crusade in 1095 CE, and god certainly hasn’t changed since then.I could go on and on about Christianities faults, but I would almost certainly achieve nothing.

“most atheists have problems with the stubbornness and thick headed beliefs of many religious people the problem they have with them is that they only believe in one set thing and are not open to the idea that they could be wrong”

But on a side note, how can the bible be the reality of the universe? It is simply a book written by a bunch of men (The New testament at least) and as far as the “Big Bang” Theory goes, there has been absolutely no scientific evidence proving it. Whereas if we look at The theory of Evolution, there have been countless instances where things have been figured out and discovered which give Evolution more and more proof.

As far as “pandering” a belief in God, going back to what Krugle was saying, why must we as people look to an omniscient being to tell us what’s right and wrong? Why must we look to the bible/torah/quran for our answers? Can we not just be raised on the same morals growing up, and simply cutting out the middle man who is always watching us as we commit our sins? Why can’t we just not sin in the first place? That way we wouldn’t have anything to repent. If your response is that we as humans can’t not sin, then why doesn’t the almighty god take into account that he apparently created beings that were unable to follow in his command?

It is also a known fact that religion is and has been the cause for more wars than can be accounted for throughout history.

On a final note, The Antichrist is Charles Darwin, not Dawkins. (See bottom of your website if your limited belief system has you confused.)