Atheists are mentally ill

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Did you just pull that out of your ass? Buddhism and the big Chinese philosophers predate Christianity by hundreds of years. If there are similarities, Christianity stole from it.

Nah the similarities would be from the Enlightened Masters gaining insight to the nature of God independently and interpreting it through their respective culture. Buddhism/Taoism rejects the existence of a creator/personal God so that's a big flaw right there. Also in Buddhism the universe is seen as something evil to be escaped from while in Christianity the universe while harsh is a creation of God and something to be revered as good, though not worshiped of course. So the differences are there they're not exactly carbon copies.

Let me remind you what happened:
you: all morality and good things came from Christ.
me: what about countries that have other religions?
you: all those religions are similar to Christianity that's why.
me: if they are Christianity stole from them because they predate Christianity.
you: The parts where they're similar they got from the holy spirit, others they just got it wrong.

Like really? So every religion in this world that preached anything you agree with came from the holy spirit, and if they preached anything that you disagree with they got that part wrong. YOU DON'T KNOW THAT. You're just saying that because you cannot explain why morality is so similar in different cultures and you're twisting reality to attribute all the "good things" to your god.

Oh yes I can. They're equally ridiculous. Virgin birth, you kidding me?

I didn't say anything about the Virgin birth, I don't particularly have an opinion on it myself. Catholics have a big belief about it because they see the Virgin Mary as goddess like figure so that would give her something miraculous to do. I think the focus should be focused on what happened when/after Jesus died, that's the money shot right there. Muslims believe Jesus flew off the cross and was replaced by Judas but all Jews tend to look the same so no noticed or something. But ummm...yes.

Virgin birth is in the bible. If you want to treat something as true because it is in the bible, then everything in the bible has to be true. Actually you're so dishonest you'll probably try to sneak this in again and again. But ummm ... no. If virgin birth can be written but did not happen, then the same goes for the resurrection. Did not happen.

Why do Christians always claim to know so much about the resurrection when there is no evidence for it? You can't even prove it happened so all you can say is, why else would people say it happened. That doesn't deserve an answer.

The evidence is the eyewitness reports these were collected and put into the Bible. You'll notice it was women who discovered the empty tomb, they wouldn't have been viewed as reliable eyewitnesses at the time so if this were a deliberate fictional account they would have had some proper men on the scene. But what you have is a genuine attempt at trying to piece together what actually happened. All I'm saying is that this is a lot better than Mohammeds magic horse or Joesph Smiths golden tablets, it's a good start.

Until you prove the bible to be a true account of history, there were no eyewitness reports. I've already said they're equally ridiculous, you don't believe that because you grew up in a culture where so many people believe in it, but it is equally ridiculous.

No, you have the burden of proof.

You will still have to provide an alternative explanation to what actually happened seeing as something apparently did. It's some kind of historical event involving a couple of hundred people in a specific area.

No I don't. No it wasn't, you haven't showed that it was.

And why not....sure, it 'of course' was based on something. Myth? Legend? Wishful thinking? Depraved imagination? Political agenda? Shall i continue, or are your fingers already in your ears?

Yes but it isn't as easy to dismiss as the other examples I gave. So if you had to decide on one to have faith in this would be the one to bet on. I'm not saying it's convincing enough to prove to any non-believer that God exists in general. You do have to believe in God to begin with for this to be viable. Of course the Jews/the more philosophical pagans of the time did believe in God so wasn't too much of a problem. For an atheist there would be the barrier of naturalism you have to make your way through before you can accept this. Though you may see it as a protective shield that repels bullshit than a barrier if you're a seriously committed to your atheism. Though once you're this committed it may as well be a religious faith in it's own right.

[/quote]
I'll say this one more time: they're all equally ridiculous.

What the fuck is naturalism? If someone can properly explain what supernatural is and show that it exists, it'd be natural. Supernatural is just another word used to make people like you feel better, because otherwise you'd have to say, I believe in imaginary things.

Atheism is the lack of belief. Get that through your head. Your bullshit isn't that hard to refute, it really is so ridiculous that's why we don't believe in it.

Stop bringing science into it unless you're willing to back up that claim.

Well if the universe was purposefully created and finely tuned for life this would all have to be a coincidental byproduct of some kind that just kind of all came together somehow by random chance. I'd say that in itself is stranger than any virgin birth. Virgins can easily give birth anyway you would just need to inject some sperm into them, it wouldn't count as sex if it's not a penis.

[/quote]
It's not random chance. Is that what joseph did? So where did he collect the sperm of the holy ghost?