Theism is more rational than Atheism.

"The Bible is a self contradicting, factually flawed book written most defiantly by history 'trolls' who wish to influence people. I wish to ask you this: Your arguments obviously show you are a firm believer of the Pascal's Wager and you even admit the possibility of what I have stated above - If you don't truly believe in god, and only 'believe' it because of the divine reward; what makes you think that god would appreciate such type of a believer?" I don't! It's annoying when Atheists assume that I believe in God because of this- Please stop getting personal, we're debating. Not a fight full of Ad Hominem. "HA! Admitting you have made the Ad Populus fallacy? I would dismiss your argument, but that would mean that this round was useless, so I might as well do it for the fun of it." I see you're starting to get a bit rude.. I didn't say I made the Ad Populus fallacy, I'm just saying that it's more likely for something to exist when it is documented, with a small chance of being real (Since there is no reason for a bunch of people to write a huge book about a giant lie, being ODDLY specific about everything.) "Not so. It would seen that after 2 rounds of destroying your arguments with the Infinite Possibility Argument, it appears you still don't understand, so I will try to use another argument: (Which I must admit is not too hard) If a third party were to write that a theist hating god exist because they've seen one, we would have no way to find out if its true. Using your logic, there is ALSO a 50% chance. Same goes to any other holy book or even articles labeled as 'pseudoscience'. Due to the burden of proof, we cannot 'prove' certain things exist (I would name one, but no FSM, right) and therefore, if it was written and we don't know the truth of the mindset of the author/writer, it would be 50% possibility of truth." True, it is a 50-50 chance. But, we have to consider the REASON behind the bible. Why would anyone make such a gigantic document and be so oddly specific and so descriptive about.. Well, nothing? It's slightly more likely that they documented real events as they interpreted them, or in other word, Holy activity- Meaning that slightly raises the chances of a God existing, meaning Theist is the way to go. Anyways, you're just saying IF a third party were to write that- They didn't, meaning a Theist hating God isn't more likely than Atheist hating gods. "As you should realized now, this is extremely fallacious. (Please just stop with the Pascal's Wager. I believe I have already effectively destroyed that argument and there is no point in trying to rebuild it from the dust)" You haven't destroyed it yet, my friend. I'm not really using the Entire wager as it was originally presented- I'm just saying that it's possible for a God to exist, and the Bible slightly raises the Chances of a certain God existing- Meaning that if you're Theist, you have a slightly better chance. If this is the case, then being a Theist is the most Logical Path, as it is the most likely to be correct due to the Bible. Say, if you write a book right now that's as specific and descriptive as the bible, only this time about a Theist hating God, and then 6000 years in the future people find it, It would be equally logical to believe in a Theist hating God as believing in a Atheist hating God, you get me? I'm just using the logic in Pascal's Wager.I ask of you to not leave any questions, seeing as this is the last argument. What I mean is, don't say something like "Why should you believe in God?" Since I cannot respond to this. Second, I believe I do need to add to my points, seeing as I originally thought that it was a LOT more likely for God to exist than for him to not, but now I realize it's a very small chance. Although Theism is still more logical than Atheism, it's by a small amount (Because we know how humans work, and we know they might probably make a giant book out of real events rather than just stories they made up.) My Final point is, that people probably Documented events that are most likely caused by a possible(Due to the irrefutable possibility of creation or eternity), Theist-loving God. If this God has bigger chances than Gods we make up, then this means that it's logical- More than Atheism, the laughing off and disbelief of any kind of Deity- Which have very low chances of survival (Although they are close to a Deists, less than 1%.)I await your conclusion, thank you for the Debate. I enjoyed it very much.