
(WEBSTER:  myth:  "a traditional or legendary story...
           ...a belief...whose truth is accepted uncritically.")

How does that qualify?
Indeed, it's almost oxymoronic...a rather amusing instance.
I've found that most atheists hold almost no atheist-views as
"accepted uncritically," especially the few that are legend.
Many are trying to explain basic truths, as myths do, but
they don't meet the other criterions.
Also...


You accuse him of referencing mythology, then you procede to
launch your own xtian mythology.  (This time meeting all the
requirements of myth.)


Ah, but not everyone "knows" that god exists.  So you have
a fallacy.


And that makes it true?  Holding with the Bible rules out controversy?
Read the FAQ.  If you've read it, you missed something, so re-read.
(Not a bad suggestion for anyone...I re-read it just before this.)


...should I repeat what I wrote above for the sake of getting
it across?  You may trust the Bible, but your trusting it doesn't
make it any more credible to me.

If the Bible says that everyone knows, that's clearly reason
to doubt the Bible, because not everyone "knows" your alleged
god's alleged existance.


1) No, they don't have to ignore the Bible.  The Bible is far
from universally accepted.  The Bible is NOT a proof of god;
it is only a proof that some people have thought that there
was a god.  (Or does it prove even that?  They might have been
writing it as series of fiction short-stories.  As in the
case of Dionetics.)  Assuming the writers believed it, the
only thing it could possibly prove is that they believed it.
And that's ignoring the problem of whether or not all the
interpretations and Biblical-philosophers were correct.

2) There are people who have truly never heard of the Bible.

3) Again, read the FAQ.


Bzzt...wrong answer!
Gravity is directly THERE.  It doesn't stop exerting a direct and
rationally undeniable influence if you ignore it.  God, on the
other hand, doesn't generally show up in the supermarket, except
on the tabloids.  God doesn't exert a rationally undeniable influence.
Gravity is obvious; gods aren't.


No, human reason hasn't always come back to the existance of
"God"; it has usually come back to the existance of "god".
In other words, it doesn't generally come back to the xtian
god, it comes back to whether there is any god.  And, in much
of oriental philosophic history, it generally doesn't pop up as
the idea of a god so much as the question of what natural forces
are and which ones are out there.  From a world-wide view,
human nature just makes us wonder how the universe came to
be and/or what force(s) are currently in control.  A natural
tendancy to believe in "God" only exists in religious wishful
thinking.


Xtianity is no more reasonable than most other religions, and
it's reasonableness certainly doesn't merit eminence.
Divine justice...well, it only seems just to those who already
believe in the divinity.
First, not all atheists believe the same things about human
nature. Second, whether most atheists are correct or not,
YOU certainly are not correct on human nature.  You are, at
the least, basing your views on a completely eurocentric
approach.  Try looking at the outside world as well when
you attempt to sum up all of humanity.