Even if theism is a failure, it's still superior to atheism

[R00tKiT]

I really could not care less about exegesis of the Quran or Bible or any other religious text. 

And yet you accused a highly acclaimed scholar of twisting the verses of the central religious text to fit his needs, this is an extremely serious accusation that requires formidable evidence. I guess I'll just ignore from now on what you said about al-Ghazali and fundamentalism.

Yes, if you make false assumptions, you will deduce false conclusions.

That's actually not true. I recall you have a solid background in math, and so you must know that false propositions can in principle lead to true propositions.

0=1 leads to 0=0 when we multiply both sides by 0, and yet "0=1" is a false proposition, but 0=0 is true. 

But sure, false assumptions are not a reliable way to apprehend reality. The thing is, you actually have to prove that they are false. Remember, the burden of proof is on you because you're asserting that some assumptions are false.

As for the impossibility of God: first define, precisely, what you mean by 'God'. 

God : a personal creator of the universe, -and hence outside of the universe, that is omnipotent and omniscient.

Prove it's impossible for this creator to exist. Good luck.

 if you believe otherwise, give a precise definition of 'natural' and 'supernatural' as well and we can discuss.

I don't think this natural/supernatural distinction has much interest, despite its frequent occurence in this kind of discussions. The term "natural", in this context, might stand for anything that is not the product of human intelligence, and sometimes it's defined as anything that isn't the product of any intelligence, which obviously smuggles the conclusion that theism is false.

So, these words are semantic games that can be very misleading, and sometimes make it easier for the atheist to smuggle the conclusions they want.