Was Jesus Born of a Virgin?, Part 2

Part 1 can be found here. I received a response from a Christian who switched topics from the virgin birth to the resurrection of Jesus and the mysteries that science hasn't solved yet. He argued the resurrection of Jesus supports the virgin birth of Jesus and that, even if the virgin birth is hard to believe he could never believe what an atheist like me does. My brief reply is instructive I think.

Billions of people were raised to believe something differently. As outsiders they could no more be convinced of your type of Christianity, than you could be convinced of their particular religion. Given this, the most charitable thing we can say about how people adopt their religion is that learning one's religion on Mama's knees is an unreliable way to know which religion is true, if there is one. Agreed? In other words, billions of people have been indoctrinated to believe something false. How do you know you aren't one of them? Do you want to know? Or are you having fun trying to match wits with me/us?

We were originally talking about the virgin birth. Now we are talking about the origin of everything and the resurrection. Shouldn't we stay focused? Regardless of whether Jesus was raised from the dead, and regardless of whether or not some deity created the universe (things believed by the Christian clergy I mentioned), isn't the virgin birth of Jesus quite problematic given the facts we presented? That's what we were talking about. If you switch topics you're probably not being honest with yourself about this particular issue.

For the record I don't "believe" in any of the things you say I do, like,
You must believe that everything came from nothing. Order from chaos: rules from the dark void of emptiness, that senseless matter adhere to. Then the cosmos and life here on this tiny planet, suspended in a vacuum in what to our minds, is infinity. DNA and RNA code from nothing, as if a tumbler spilled out a numerical sequence that results in the physical and mental characteristics of a living, breathing machine, that can see and hear and think and replicate itself and seek to understand its own origins and the world around it.
The reason I don't "believe" these things is because as soon as I realized religious faith was unfounded I looked to science to provide the answers, if they can be solved at all. Science has a very impressive track record. The fact of evolution, for instance, doesn't solve everything, but it does tell me I should wait on science to solve the other questions left unanswered. From evolution I've learned to think exclusively in terms of the probabilities. Belief has nothing to do with this. Thinking in terms of the probabilities is one of the most important lessons that science teaches us. So I go with them. My conclusions in these areas depends on the consensus of scientists working in their respective fields, not some ancient superstitious book in the ancient pre-scientific world written by men who didn't have a clue why the sun disappeared at night, nor why the rain falls, nor the genetics of how babies are made.