>>15
Oh look, it's the four-year-old's argument for the existence of God dressed up in fancy notation.
Show me a piland and we can talk.
>>17
The "burden of proof" has no place here, each argument needs to be proven. Atheists are unable to prove this second point.
Wow, are you really that confused?
Look, if you replace "God" with "leprechauns" or "unicorns", you have the exact same argument. Would you call yourself agnostic with regards to them as well? Would you say the burden of proof falls on people who don't believe in leprechauns or unicorns as well as those who do?
Until humans solve things like the "first cause" problem in the creation of the universe
There is no first cause problem. It's been addressed in this very thread already, even before
>>18 quoted Russel.
then there's always the possibility of a creator.
There's always the possibility the world was created last Thursday and we were created with it, with all our memories and whatnot preformed.
The fact that it's strictly possible doesn't mean it even deserves mention. The existence of God is in the same category as last-Thursdayism.