Atheism and the existence of peanut butter

[Deesse23]

You cant rule out pink pixies as well.

You're quoting me out of context. 

Context does not matter in case of faulty reasoning. Your faulty reasoning was centered on shifting the burden of proof.

You argued that one cant rule out hidden determinism (as the basis for your god claim), therefore you are right.
I just exposed your faulty reasoning by exchanging hidden determinism for pixies as the basis of whatever (god) claim i am pulling out of my ass.

Context is really irrelevant here.

That's not really what I am arguing for, you know. Causation is only a premise in the cosmological argument, it doesn't prove the existence of a deity per se.

For the record: You the theist on an atheist board, are arguing in a thread about "(a)theism", and your goal is not to demonstrate a certain deity is the cause of the uni/multiverse, but simply that causation is a thing, even on a fundamental/quantum level? You, the theist are arguing against potential non-determinism, against non-causation, not for your deity to insert but just because?
You like the cosmological argument not because you think it affirms the belief you already have*, but because you think its sound?
And you think anyone here is gonna buy that?


*i am assuming you didnt become a theist by evaluating the cosmological argument, but for other reasons, like almost everybody else, who argues per cosmological argument. You dont believe because of it, but you like to defend your belief with it, correct? For the record: I find it mildly dishonest to try to convince others with arguments, by which you werent (most probably) convinced to believe yourself.