Atheism: The True Path?

[lrh9]

My contention is that neurology proves that personal existence is the result of the specific configuration and electrochemical interaction of neurons that compose the brain. Once the configuration of the neurons and electrochemical in the brain degrade past a certain point, personal existence ceases irreversibly. Logically, that does not address the proposition that god exists. It only means that the soul does not exist. In which case I really have no incentive to believe. Of course, a counter proposition is that a deity does exist, and all though we do not have a soul during our physical life, one is created upon our death. To which a counter idea would be that since mortality is a physical problem, it can be physically solved resulting in immortality. To which another counter idea would be that immortality would be no bar to divine intervention. To which another counter idea would be that if humanity had developed the technology to live forever, it might have the technology to oppose a deity. The truth is, anyone can argue theological questions for as long as they can and not arrive to any agreeing conclusion. Which is why instead of expounding upon these ideas in my general interaction with theists, I have one policy towards them.

and

before I kick your