Do you think you need evidence to substantiate the claim that Senor Hoint is not a god?If you made that assertion, of course you would be expected to provide some evidence to support your claim.
The statement I was questioning was, "There is no god". Are we to just accept that as true without any supporting evidence? How does he know? Why should anyone believe him?
If you are really asking this question you are probably beyond hope. Do you really have such a low-level understanding of logic?what exactly is the difference between saying "I don't know" vs "this is what I believe"?
There are different wells within us.
Some fill with each good rain,
Others are far, far too deep
An equitable exchange of giving as measured by that which benefits the other. This exchange is mediated by the husband since he is much less likely to be duped or misled by 'evil.'
The better question is "is senor hoint a god?". If we disprove that proposition, it covers the other by default.
Or we could just find out that you are a god. Who knows?
Hell, you arent EVEN wrong. Being wrong would require you to put forth a claim that is actually supported by real evidence, not spectral fucking evidence, and then having that claim judged as incorrect. You arent even THERE yet.
The label of delusion is apt, as you cannot demonstrate that what you believe exists.
When someone believes that aliens are speaking to them through their brain and have no evidence to support it, we call that person delusional. Whats the difference between that and what you believe (other than the idea of aliens actually existing being far and away the more likely proposition of the two to be true)?