Yours isn't logically sound because you are trying to prove that a God who can do anything can't do something.
first of all, you have nothing to show that god actually can do anything, or that he even exists for that matter. whats more likely, that an all-powerful being that can violate logic but refuses to show himself exists, or that there is no such being after all? you are just stating a mere belief, and that belief happens to be illogical. if you can somehow deal with this without going insane (e.g. youre too afraid to admit that it cant happen) then good for you. it still is not a premise for debate, but an illogical belief that you hold.
If you were making a billion dollars at a job, would you go looking for another job? Of course not. People are content with Christianity, therefore they stay.
how is holding illogical beliefs equivalent to making a billion dollars? again, refer to the santa claus belief. you gain nothing but positive things from believing in santa claus, but no free-thinking adult does so. whys that? santa wont send him to **** if he stops believing.
Wrong. The point is, you make ridiculous statements, that all examples that I find do not follow, and then gloat about it. Actual data has to back up theory.
wow, i never thought id see a christian say this. please provide actual data to back up your illogical beliefs.
I'll be sure to take one at Harvard/Yale/Johns Hopkins/Carnegie Mellon in a year and a half.
HAHA dont fool yourself. practically everybody gets mail from those places, yet you dont see all of those people getting in, do you? want me to send you all my junk mail from those schools?
Now explain how God breaking His own rules violates his existence again. That's just a silly statement.
well if you knew anything about logic youd know this. if we let p = "god exists" then applying "p & ~p" yields "god exists and god does not exist." common sense tells us that this is false. god cant both exist and not exist at the same time. "p & ~p" is a false statement. now, lets assume that for some reason god wants to make it true. that means that "god exists and god does not exist" is true. this means that both p and ~p are true. if ~p is true, then "god does not exist" is true. i.e. god violated logic and it led to his own non-existence. this means that he could not have violated logic, because the initial assumption is that he does exist.
the obvious response to this is that "well god can also violate the new logic that he just created." of course he can, its not actual logic. anybody can violate it. and, by violating false logic, you are following true logic, just as god is bound to do.