Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[I_am_not_mafia]

I was told that just the other day by a talking donkey and he took offence when I didn't believe that he existed. I tried to argue with him that he was a product of my brain and a shit load of drugs that I had just taken but he tried to convince me that seeing him was itself evidence.

I have to say though, it was more tangible than a temporal lobe seizure and a personal relationship with an invisible presence you cannot hear or touch.

That's your example! It is not metaphysically possible for God to use a donkey to send a message to its obstinate owner? Perhaps the donkey spoke or perhaps Balaam just heard the wise-ass speak. Neither is metaphysically impossible. 

What does metaphysical even mean?

It's a bullshit term that has no bearing or relevance to reality.

A natural donkey is physically unable to speak. Arguing anything else is just an academic method of make-believe.

So does Shrek and its sequels. Which incidentally also contains a talking donkey.

You probably don't even know the story--saw it on an internet atheist list of sophomoric objections to Christianity. You're way out of your depth discussing these issues because you just don't know nor understand what you are objecting to (even at a basic level). One of my favorite quotes comes to mind: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."

On the contrary, I have seen all the Shrek films!

Anyway, I wasn't actually being entirely serious. I have never hallucinated a talking donkey nor would I take drugs to bring that about. But the point still stands. Products of the brain sensed only by one person and not objectively measured by a third party or an instrument is not evidence no matter how real it seems.