Simple question, simple answer - no.

Insulting Leopards isn't really right either ! They're smart, fast & beautiful !

Dear OzSpen,

To repeat:

“For a human virgin to give birth, for a god or for an afterlife there is no evidence.”

Your superstitious belief is not evidence. The Bible is not evidence. Other religions have other sacred books. None of them are evidence. They just encapsulate the legends that support the religion. A reasonable course is to be skeptical of the reliability of all of them.

Christianity has many sects and is one of many religions. There is no reason to accept any of the Christian sects or any of the other religions.

The resurrection of Jesus is myth.

There is no issue of life after death. Human life requires a brain, a digestive system, muscles and other parts of the body. At death these cease to function and start to decay. We cannot think without a brain. We cannot ingest nutriment and eliminate waste without a digestive system. We cannot move without muscles. We cannot live without a body.
You and many others may believe in such nonsense as life after death, but it remains superstitious rubbish.

Shakespeare wrote in a superstitious age. Hamlet was afraid of something coming after death:

“But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?”

Swinburne was aware of modern science. In “The Garden of Proserpine” he wrote of death as the end:

From too much love of living,
From hope and fear set free,
We thank with brief thanksgiving
Whatever gods may be
That no life lives for ever;
That dead men rise up never;
That even the weariest river
Winds somewhere safe to sea.

Then star nor sun shall waken,
Nor any change of light:
Nor sound of waters shaken,
Nor any sound or sight:
Nor wintry leaves nor vernal,
Nor days nor things diurnal;
Only the sleep eternal
In an eternal night.

Swinburne has it right

david f.

<<Your superstitious belief is not evidence. The Bible is not evidence. Other religions have other sacred books. None of them are evidence. They just encapsulate the legends that support the religion. A reasonable course is to be skeptical of the reliability of all of them.>>

You've provided zero evidence to support your statements here. They are your assertions or opinions. They have no more substance to them than the fact they are your presuppositions.

Then add the fact that by dumping your assumptions on us you expect us to believe that ...

+ <<The resurrection of Jesus is myth.>>

+ <<There is no issue of life after death.>>

When you get a comprehensive handle on what REAL evidence means, we'll have a rational conversation. Up to this point, all you've done is dump your atheistic, humanistic, rationalistic presuppositions on us - all in the name of david f's opinion.

When you move from straw man logical fallacies to dealing with ALL of the evidence, we'll have an opportunity to have a reasonable discussion. Here you've engaged in fallacious reasoning, without dealing with the content of my article.

Spencer wants not only write the articles and state the questions,
He wants to mark and answer your questions for you like a school teacher;
And scold you like a child when he thinks your answers don't fit into his own ignorant worldview.

Dear OzSpen,

The fact that belief is not evidence is obvious to any reasonable person, but your superstition overrides reason. I will leave you to it.