Even better.

In America, the "liberal" media, simply agrees with the "truth" of religion. At least you have some effort of exposing the ruse.

In fact it tries REALLY hard.

@Mcflewster It does, I have a lot of respect for the BBC, though I do think that in resent times, it has started to lose its way in a lot of domestic trivia, and low brow popular culture, loosing therefore, its once good global vision. The current dramatic events in S. America for example went unmentioned by the BBC, though they were well covered by Sky, Aljezera, and RT. PS. can't remember how you spell Aljezera, but you know who I mean.

I'm a fan of Gilgamesh.

Not necessarily in every case a hand job. Could be hand holding or handshake.

Virgin births were rather common in the BC/AD time frame as well. Several Egyptians - real (as in Pharaohs) and imagined (their Gods and demi-gods) - Alexander the Great, and a number of others were said to have been born of a virgin.

@AnonySchmoose I like your little Jesus toon. To that, I would add "Good, keep it up."

Banging ,head, and brick wall comes to mind. The fact that the first gospel of Mark has no mention of the nativity,it came very late to the Jesus story and countless gods which predate Jesus had a human mother and supernatural father has no effect on them ?

@Moravian
I had hoped to have a conversation about Mary being born a chimera, or being born intersex with ovotestes which could have produced sperm and eggs simultaneously. The Catholic fundamentalist would not consider those possibilities.

@Moravian
Most 'Christians' I've met will not admit that all the gospels written were not included in the Bible, thus leaving out some of the historical record. Also, it perplexes me why most Christians aren't interested in the history of their religion, such as all the mystery religions with similar characteristics that preceded Christianity.

@AnonySchmoose This possibility was mentioned in the debate but dismissed by the theists.

@AnonySchmoose All the so-called gospels not included were also written by stupendously ignorant superstitious 2000 year old sheep herders simply passing on their superstitions. Any written word by such people is simply nonsense and insanity. Why is this even part of a serious discussion??

n@Healthydoc70 Because millions of people have been indoctrinated with this mythology and it is Sunday and the BBC feel that they have to pander to those people.

Atheist: "Where's your evidence for this Virgin Birth thing?"

Catholic: "It says so in the Bible."

Atheist: "I said evidence, not unsubstantiated claim, you blithering idiot!"

@Healthydoc70
Doctors without Border _____

The old guy who insisted that the earth is under 10000 year old was fun. Pity they hadn't given him some more air time.

Imo, a perfect example of ' Faithfool Closed Mindedness ' and the epitome of the adage " You can lead a Faithfool to reason BUT you CANNOT make him/her THINK."
As to the ' Duffer' CLAIMING to have located the Mountain in the Sinai Peninsula where the mythical Moses received the equally mythical 10 Commandments, the Standing Stones and the Tabernacle as well.
To him, "I say SHOW the World, prove it to be True and undeniable and then answer WHY it was, as per Exodus that the mythical Moses CAUSED an Ark, a CRATE made from wood and decorated with 2 Golden Angels atop of it btw, to be made and carried with his Hebrew Refugees and simply LEFT this Holy Tabernacle behind?"
Where does it SHOW clearly that this mythical Exodus ACTUALLY occurred during the Reign of ANY Egyptian King named Rameses, was it Rameses the First, the Second, the Third, etc, WHICH King Rameses was it, WHY has there NEVER been ANY evidence found at the bottom of the RED Sea to SHOW that HUNDREDS of Egyptian Soldiers, Chariots, Horses, etc, WERE DROWNED ALL at EXACTLY the same time and in EXACTLY the same Place?
WHERE, exactly and Precisely IS this Tomb in which the mythical Jesus was laid to rest and from which he is ' CLAIMED' to have Risen AFTER being resurrected?

@Triphid Was Moses mythical or did he actually exist ?. I read a fascinating book on the development of religions (It;s on my Kindle which I have missplaced ). The author equates Moses to a modern day cult leader and if you study the old testament his actions certainly bear this out. He had total control over the tribe and through "god" he kept that absolute for the supposed forty years. Only when he died and Joshua take over did the tribe move on.

@Moravian Well that may well be he case, since the ONLY person mentioned in Ancient Egyptian History with a name similar was a Moseh, a Hebrew Mercenary in Goshen who got the boot, EXILE, with his 600+ fellow Mercenaries for Arson, Pillaging of Trade Caravans, Slave Trading, Rape and Extortion.
Since Egyptian Law stated that ONLY Egyptians and Foreign Enemies could be sentenced to Death then Moseh and his Criminals had to Exiled from ALL lands belonging to or governed by Egypt.
But that episode is recorded as happening in the reign of King Seti 1, father of Ramses the Great not, NOT in the reign of Ramses the Great.

Mormons follow a religion founded by a con-man who had been recently released from jail, in upstate N.Y, who made some outlandish claims. It seems like it was a foreigner for Qanaon.

@BirdMan1 - Yep! That's the one. He was an 19th century cult leader in every sense of the word. It allowed him lots of property without working for it and some 36 wives, about a third of them concurrently married to other men. His claims were outlandish and verged on the occult.

Of course they had navels. They were created in the image of God, and God was created in the image of men - who all had navels.

before Christianity totally separated from Judaism the Jews were still looking for their saviour who had to be of the house of David. I remember debating this with a church minister on another site and he insisted that Mary also was descended from David. As a tribal chief David probably had a few wives and concubines so he would have had many offspring and it was probably quite common for cousins to marry

The internet seems to have significantly increased the belief in conspiracy theories. Religion may not be as easily transmited via social media as conspiracy theories - it may require more space in the brain, I really don't know - so you may still be correct about religion and the internet. I would take a moe skeptical position on this subject, however. Perhaps it has more to do with our collective willingness to believe something we are told, or our lacck of being on guard against BS. Religions have been arguing amoung themselves for long enough that more people are less willing to believe what they hear about religion, but conspiracy theories haven't yet earned the same level of unreliability on a wide scale. A good question for someone to look into.

Ran across this article on FB just now. It alludes to what I was attempting to say.
"Pastors are leaving their congregation after losing their churchgoers to QAnon"
[yahoo.com]

Interesting.

It's all myth, though it is frustrating to hear people tell about how they "know" that the creation myth, that of Western European peoples, was the real thing. I do not know that science "undermines" religion, as the religious do not bother with science's thinking in a receptive manner. What may be undermining religion are the religious who are so easily seen to be hypocritical by some who have been raised with it.

@BirdMan1 As was reportedly to have been said, " You CAN Fool ALL of the People SOME of the time, Some of the People ALL of the time, BUT NEVER ALL of the People ALL of the time."

Attempt at irony and thanks for pointing out the typo

So that's your opinion which I totally disagree with.

Why do you expect science to supply the meaning of life for you? Ask yourself what it means to even posit the question. What does the concept of the meaning of life mean and why do you expect science or religion to supply that for you? Why do you seek an answer to a question that IMO has no meaning and no answer.

@Healthydoc70 The question was "Is science undermining religion" Nothing to do with the meaning of life which is what you want to make it.

@Healthydoc70 I don't expect science to supply the meaning of life. Many hoped it would replace religion but that didn't happen. The reason why I would like to know the meaning of life is the same reason as Socrates' when he said 'the unexamined life is not worth living'. He thought that way. So do I. Unlike Socrates, I don't think everybody has that need. But clearly many do or religions would not still a following. Your last sentence is a bit odd because it kind of says meaning has no meaning.

Moravian It has everything to do with meaning. It always has and it always will.

@brentan Science shows us the "how" not the "why". Surely it is up to each individual to give meaning to their own life.

@Moravian 'Meaning of life' and 'meaning to life' are related but not the same thing. Myth, religion and philosophy attempt to explain the meaning of life in a universal way while we give meaning to our live in an individual capacity. But we're going off-point. Religion is not being replaced by science.

@brentan This can be argued till the cows come home but a survey shows that scientists tend to be less religious than the general population. This is not surprising . What surprises me is that so many scientists are religious. Cognitive dissonance at work I think.
Chart showing church attendance in different countries

@Moravian We're not discussing the topic anymore. This could be a new topic.