>You're describing the universe as 'only' containing that which is not God.
But I'm in fact not describing any universe. You are, and I reject your description without adding my own.
But it logically follows that if I don't believe in God then nothing IS God in my perspective.
But that is not the same as me saying God is an impossibility.
>This claim is easily disproved by logically deducing that 'mention of God' MUST have historically occurred a FIRST time, whereby before that time 'nobody mentioned God'.
You disagree with me and then repeat my point. Did anyone believe in God before the "first mention"?
>By your 'logic', there should never have been any mention of God in the entire history of humanity
No? Someone obviously did. Not just one but many. With many different ideas of what a God is. Humans are creative like that.
And as you or some other anon described earlier - the feeling of there "needing" to be something bigger than one self is natural in humans so it's only logical that we came up with a God.
>You're trying to shift the burden away from you again.
I never had the burden. What do you want me to prove? That God doesn't exist?
That is not my position so why would I try and prove that?
If I could prove that I would say that I know God doesn't exist - not that I don't believe in your claim of a God.
>All I am saying is that I just reject your claim about what the universe is about
And what claim is that? You are free to reject it, I'm just genuinely curious what you think I am claiming. Because I've told you now 4 times that I am not making any claims, only rejecting yours.
>Burden is NOT just with me.
I know you don't like it - but it is.
Only you have the power to end this slide. I will keep defending my position as long as you twist it. Kek