Hello.....I have a little problem

[IATIA]

I agree with you here, they are not deductively sound arguments. My next question for you would be do you only believe in the existence of that which you can deductively prove to be true?

If I can touch it, feel it, see it, taste it, hear it or reasonably deduce it, I will consider it. 'Consider' is a key word.

More circularity.
“Nothing supernatural can exist.”
“Why not?”
“Because the natural world is all that exists.”
“How do you know this?”
“Because nothing supernatural can exist.”
“Why not?”
“Because the natural world is all that exists.”
“How do you know this?” …and on and on it goes...

Those are your words. Mine are: All that exists is natural. Simple as that. Whether or not we know of it or we are aware of it, it is natural.

There is nothing here that is not supposed to be. If something that is not supposed to be here exists, then it must be a part of existence and therefore must be natural and supposed to be here. NOT CIRCULAR.

It might be rare, unseen, unknown, unknowable, but in no way, no how, no fashion, unnatural. Attack all the semantics you wish, but if it exists, then it is natural. Your god is supernatural, therefore it does not exist.

We have yet to establish the authority of this dubious collection of books alleged to proclaim it's own authority.

Who is “we”?

I ain't got no mouse in my pocket!

Because they are logically incoherent with my worldview.

So if they are logically consistent with someone else’s worldview then they are rational in believing in their existence?

Again, your words, not mine.

First, I never used the word rational. Secondly, I am referring to my own worldview, ergo "with my worldview".

If we (still no mouse) want to consider rational, then I am rational and you are irrational.

I am rational, because I am using sound logic, sound reasoning, and sound science to base my opinions on. Note, 'opinion' is another 'key' word.

You, however, are irrational. Why? (Well I do not really know but...) You are basing your worldview on fairy tales written thousands of years ago. Not only that, but your have selectively accepted and declined various documents with no thought as to their validity except that a bunch of religious freaks in 400 some A.D. picked them for you and said "god wrote these.".

Well I don’t see any mention of a space ship, but the dimensions of the city in Revelation 21 are meant to symbolize the sheer magnitude and eternally secure nature of Christ’s church.

It sure is going to be crowded with 2 billion people in there. That is the best god could do. Man, this guy is a wuss.

Are you suggesting there are no absolutes but morals are absolutely relative? Careful with those self refuting claims there.

Absolutely, (Damn, another absolute). Morals are relative to the world, society, government, life form, species, dimension, universe, whatever. Nature will cull on it's own.

If everything deserved to die then it is not wrongful genocide to give them what they deserve, it is justice. God has the right to do with His creation as He sees fit. Where did God approve adultery? You still have not demonstrated how it would be wrong for God to do any of these things; especially considering that you have already admitted that there are no moral absolutes so it really is just different strokes for different folks isn’t it?

So, babies pissed off your god? Horses pissed off your god? Deer pissed off your god? Damn! It does not take much to piss off that dude, does it?

No wonder you are afraid of him. Hell, you could get wiped out for neglecting to 'bless' some one after a sneeze.
(OOPS. They already did that. Great Flick )