Luke

many atheists point out that because there are other religions where gods were died and resurrected and mortal maids were maid pregnant by the gods that christianity was "obviously" borrowed from these earlier myths. what i want to know is why does christianity have to be original to have any credence? also why does the fact that the resurrection and jesus story has similarities in other religions mean its false?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkU3a2eor3U

how is denying that 9/11 was caused by islamists being a "fascist"

i sometimes think that atheists approach religion the same way a truther approaches 9/11. the truther says that the american government caused 9/11 and that people who say otherwise are liars. the atheist will say that the resurrection was a "cunningly devised fable 2 Peter 1:16-21 " and that people who say otherwise are liars. some conspiracy theorists will say that it was "obvious" that princess diana or the politician john smith was murdered just like some atheists will say its "obvious" that the resurrection did not happen and god is not real.

i was watching a hitchens debate and one of the reasons hitchens gave for not wantingto be a christian was that he did not like the "silly rules" that the religion has like no gay sex, abortion or euthanasia. he also said that if god was real and asked him to sacrifice a child he would say "no, **** you!" while these rules may be difficult to accept, we just have to accept them, we do not want to be like the rich young man in the bible who thought that giving up his lifestyle was silly but later felt deep regret at the choice he had made.

i believe that christianity is the only religion in the world that has an eternal hell, i find it implausible that someone would want to invent such a concept. all the other religions seemed to retain their numbers with the threat of a painful death being enough to stop them leaving the religion. surely no grown adult would have taken a preacher that said their religion had an eternal hell seriously.

christians are much better organised than atheists and so that means that it is easier for us to get our voices heard in the press and on the tv and it is easier for us to open and to take over schools and make sure there are people who represent our views in politics. when we see dwindling numbers of believers we take action, get together and try and educate the young ones as that is where our future lies and young ones are always willing to listen to the gospel(i was anyway) and not look for faults in the religion. i am pleased to say that there are more religious schools in england than at any time in history and the number is growing, we will again become missionary's to the world.

i am against it mainly on the grounds that people could be using it to kill their burdonsome relatives. i would rather see people suffer for a long period of time than to see folks killing off their burdonsome relatives with ease.

Islam

Christianity

Hinduism

Sikhism

Judaism

Buddhism

this is just a bit of fun, its not meant to be serious lol

is it because they do not want people to be blaming islam for such an atrocity? is it because they cant imagine arab men being able to carry out such an attack? is it because they want to see the west as bad and the islamic world as good?

many atheists i have encountered have told me to shut up when i challenge them to a debate, this is sad as debating is highly enjoyable and even a debate arguing about the existence of fairies is an interesting one. i was sad to see a video of christopher hitchens refusing to answer a conspiracy theorists question, i think that he let the rationalist community down there as he could have actually provided a very good answer as to why 9/11 was done by muslims and not the american government.

if he is religious how on earth can he think he is doing the work of god?

kim jong un says he is a god but does not believe in a god, is he an atheist? also why does kim jong un not invent a hell for unbelievers as according to atheists inventing a hell is a good way to keep a grip on your citizens.

i do not see how it would damage the economy and small businesses, many happy and successful countries in europe such has germany, the netherlands and all of scandinavia have high taxes for high earners but the majority of the population benefit as a result and even the rich in those countries still manage to be comfortably off and hardworking. what is the problem with high tax?

this is not to say that atheists are more selfish and greedy but there are people who will only act nicely if they are threatened with punishment.

for example is it insane to believe that gods and ghost exist? what about pixies, fairies, santa, harry potter or red riding hood?

i remember when benedict was pope many atheists kept going on about how nasty he was and how he was a nazi etc i dont know how anybody could hate him, he had a strong desire for peace and justice, he wrote interesting and thoughtful books, was popular with catholics of all ages, had a love of classical music, was also against fascist governments.

atheists are always talking about the negatives about such a world, what about the benefits?

it has always baffled me as to how to fine thinkers could have such opposite views with regards to matters of faith, how would an atheist explain such a contrast in views?