Atheist or really Agnostic

[Esquilax]

To believe that God exists does not require an absolute negation at all. It just needs positive evidence that God exists. So there is no comparison.

Let us know when you get that positive evidence. See, you're phrasing this as a glass half full scenario, but for an atheist, that glass is half empty: what you're describing is the burden of proof, and many of us would submit that it hasn't been fulfilled.

I believe the Holy Bible is true.
It claims to be from God Almighty.
It proves itself in many ways.

Why and how?

The atheists does not have a book which claims to be from their supreme being. It would say "I am God I do not exist"

Please tell me you understand the host of fallacies in this statement.

The Holy Bible is a record of historical events. These events show that God exist.

So how would you respond to our knowledge of history that conflicts with the accounts in the bible? Because there's kind of a lot of that.

The atheist has no record of the no God''s actions.

That... I can't... what?

The saved have the witness of the Holy Spirit in them.
The atheists has the witness of the nobody.

Major begging the question: if the atheist is correct, then you don't have any kind of witness either.

The existence of the universe is a very strong proof of the existence of its Creator.

Total non sequitur: the universe is proof of the universe. But I'm looking for a new argument to have, so let's play: what evidence are you thinking of when you say this?

The atheist must try to explain it away.
All attempts have failed.

Oh, do give me a chance before you say that.