Atheism Destroyed in Under 50 Seconds

[CliveStaples]

Except I LACK belief, I'm not acting on any 'belief'. No denial. No claim made, no belief, no denial.

Oh, my good lord. Is this a bit? This has to be a bit. Excellent trolling.


In case you've actually gone full retard, if your actions are no different than they would be if you believed that no gods exist, then functionally you deny that gods exist.

I'm not saying that you affirm the belief "No gods exist". I'm saying that from a Pragmatist, functional point of view, you would be considered to have 'affirmed' (in a different, Pragmatist/functional sense) that belief.

Nice try, but you're the one claiming there's a god, and that he created the universe. The burden of proof is on you.

I didn't claim any of that. Do I need to repost all of my contributions to this thread? Go through line-by-line so you can see that I never claimed that there's a god, or that he created the universe?

You said that a certain proposition "in no way demonstrates the existence of a god". I am asking you to support this claim. Are you unable to do so?

Yep. The existence of a god or gods must first be established. Otherwise I'll stick to the - don't know, answer. Any fictional character can be used to explain everything as much as your imaginary friend (god).

Now you're just ignoring the hypothetical.

Suppose there was an observed phenomena, for which the best explanation was the existence of the Christian God, and the non-existence of all other deities. Wouldn't this tend to show that the Christian God exists?

NB: this is essentially what the proof of the Higgs boson amounts to, at this point. We have a bunch of observations that are best explained by something like the Higgs boson.

How does that make any sense? How can you have proof that pixies created the universe if you have not yet demonstrated that pixies even exist? That's total theistic nonsense.

Uh, what? "Have not yet demonstrated"? Are you that incapable of reading:

So any proof that pixies created the universe must prove along the way that pixies exist.

That is, as you're reading through the proof, before you get to the "Pixies created the universe" conclusion, you will necessarily have to see a (sub-)proof with the conclusion "Pixies exist".