God Part N....

[Viking]

In short, Yes or No? Or Maybe?

Maybe; as long as it cannot be disproved scientifically.

Or better yet, what's the difference between a Leprechaun and God?

They way they exist, if existant. But Leprechauns was invented, God might be.

But you have some proof. The moon is a rock. A black rock is only a rock that absorbs all the visible spectrum, hence dark according to your eyes.

Secondly, black stones do exist. It's only a matter of probability.

What's your proof in god? God doesn't even have a physical property. God is metaphysical or Supernatural.

But it pointed out that lack of proof does not equal non-existant, wich is true in all cases, no matter probability.

Is there proof that I'm not just some very articulate Artificial Intellegence created by Mossad?

Not as I know; thus you might very well be it.

Because you know of none does not mean that there are none. I suspect it would be very difficult to prove that there are neither any proofs of God's existence nor that there are any disproofs of God's existence.

Correct, but logic tells me that such proofs simply cannot exist.

For the record, I'm an atheist, but reading the bible in an objective way I find it to be more of a praise of an atheistic-like, secularised wisdom and philosophy, than a dogmatic belief, and therefore I could title myself Christian as well, although I don't, as people might find it offensive.

I`m an agnostic, I am not willing to believe in something supernatural, nor believe in claims without proof.
If you are an atheist, you are claiming that there is no God, thus you are not a Christian.