I am a pixieist, what do you think of my proof that universe creating pixies exist?

[Expired]

Again, This argument is an example of an incomplete understanding of Christian theology, missing as it does a major philosophical and historical aspect of Christian thought: the idea that there are positive reasons suggesting the existence of God. Whether Christian or atheist, you can’t help but laugh at this. Of course, we laugh for different reasons. But who is thinking about this correctly? When it comes down to it, this image is merely a false analogy, a logical fallacy that tries to the argument of the existence of pixies with the argument for the existence of God. The Bible is epistemologically correct, explains why science is possible, gives a consistent basis for morality, logic, and truth, and is without contradictions both internally and with reality. The Bible explains the most fundamental questions that humans need to know, Where did I come from? (God created us - Genesis 1:1) (2) Why am I here? (we are here to have a relationship with God - Genesis 15:6) (3) Where am I going? (we have a destination after death - Genesis 25:8).  The bible contains hundreds of fulfilled prophecies which people who are not open to the evidence deny.

Fuck off.

[robvalue]

I think that I should do everything you say from now on. How did I manage to live my life up until this point without such profound knowledge

[chimp3]

But does your Jesus have a helicopter tea pot?

[Homeless Nutter]

[...] The bible contains hundreds of fulfilled prophecies which people who are not open to the evidence deny.

Horsesh*t. Bible is a work of fiction - it's easy to write about prophecies and then write about them coming true, when you're an author of fiction and are not required to provide any evidence. There are plenty of fulfilled prophecies in Harry Potter stories. And if you're a child, or a dimwit - you may very well believe, that Harry Potter is real.

[robvalue]

The Bible explains the most fundamental questions that humans need to know, Where did I come from? (God created us - Genesis 1:1) (2) Why am I here? (we are here to have a relationship with God - Genesis 15:6) (3) Where am I going? (we have a destination after death - Genesis 25:8).  

Erm, yeah. It explains them by making up stories. Anyone can do that. Most religions do it. I can do it too. These are comfort blankets, nothing more.

The bible is utter hogwash and the OT is especially an embarrassment to "nice" christians as they have to constantly make excuses for why their god is blatantly an evil fascist dictator.

[I_am_not_mafia]

You're all wrong. Gnomes are the true creators. They have the biggest, pointiest hats and there are many thousands of believers worldwide as evidenced by the effigies they erect in their gardens. You guys are all just agnomtic.

Gnomes are false idols. And no one has seen a Pixie yet everyone has seen a rainbow. Which is proof of the existence of a Leprechaun planting pots of gold.

[I_am_not_mafia]

At the end of the day this argument is simply a joke, to mock the existence of God and keep in mind the atheist does not even believe in the universe creating pixies

That's because Pixies don't exist, only Leprechauns. Your argument is example of an incomplete understanding of Leprechaun theology.

[Tonus]

At the end of the day this argument is simply a joke, to mock the existence of God and keep in mind the atheist does not even believe in the universe creating pixies even though he uses the argument against the existence of God.

The atheist uses the argument to show that anything can be substituted for "God" and be defended in exactly the same way, thus invalidating the method. If a particular argument relies on a presupposition that must be accepted before any other work can begin, even though it cannot be proven on its own, then it's open to the sort of abuse you see in the OP. If you think that using "pixies" is too overt to be taken seriously, just use "Allah" instead. Surely you must be aware that we have had many Muslims explain to us that it is their version of God that is true using almost identical arguments to yours? Why is your "step one" valid, and not theirs?

If the atheist is just rejecting God and all of these strong arguments and evidence for His existence, why aren't the theists of the world united in one single set of beliefs? Why is it that even people who claim to worship the same God that you do --and who would agree 100% with the first paragraph in your post-- feel that you are wrong enough that it will affect where you end up in the afterlife? Why are there tens of thousands of denominations within Christianity even though they all follow the same God and the same book? Why does your explanation only mollify such a relatively small number of people if it's such a slam-dunk? Why did humanity go through thousands --if not millions-- of Gods during a period when this incontrovertible proof and evidence should have been just as strong --if not stronger-- than it is today?

I'll give you one reason-- because people are willing to accept the kind of thinking exposed by the first post in this topic.

[ukatheist]

Yabbut, the origin of the word gnome is 'to know', so it must be true. And you can't deny the prophesies in gnomic theology...

http://www.nj-pbem.com/data/Gods/gnomego...meGods.htm

Clearly says that the gnome gods encouraged people to explore undiscovered lands - and wow, look, the americas and australia were 'discovered' by explorers.

Checkmate agnomtics.

Sent from my ALE-L21 using Tapatalk

[I_am_not_mafia]

Yabbut, the origin of the word gnome is 'to know', so it must be true. And you can't deny the prophesies in gnomic theology...

http://www.nj-pbem.com/data/Gods/gnomego...meGods.htm

Clearly says that the gnome gods encouraged people to explore undiscovered lands - and wow, look, the americas and australia were 'discovered' by explorers.

Checkmate agnomtics.

I can't argue against this so I am going to completely ignore it and pretend that you never said it.