Atheism and the existence of peanut butter

[Spongebob]

A better way to show why these objections are really bad is to apply them to anything, to show that anything can't exist. So, let's rule out the existence of peanut butter;

What you are actually doing is known as False equivalence logical fallacy.

I still think it's a gigantic strawman argument.  I can understand the intension but the arguments against peanut butter are incredibly lame and don't represent the arguments opposing the existence of god.  I'm guessing he worked for hours to come up with that lame ass peanut butter nonsense and it is embarrassingly silly.


@Klorophyll  I think everyone here gets that your position is based solely on the Cosmological argument.  That's fine; it's a valid philosophical argument but as arguments go it is, in the end, inconclusive.  One can accept your assumptions and conclusions as true or reject them as incomplete and neither can be demonstrated to be true or false.  That's the nature of the argument.  I'm sure there's not an atheist here who hasn't spent considerable time reading, digesting and considering this argument, and ultimately rejecting it.  So doubling down on it isn't going to get you anywhere.

And you still refuse to accept the point I made on another thread on this same topic.  Even if one does accept the cosmological argument as true and accepts that there is a god, it says virtually nothing about the nature of this god, meaning who or what it is and what it wants humans to do.  For that you must refer to mythology, legends, ancient texts and personal experiences.  No atheist is going to have any of that.