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

[possibletarian]

All of which can be explained without invoking a creature with impossible to prove characteristics, like I said all in the mind then.
Apart from wanting god to exist,  do you have anything real you can offer ?

I offered a list of different ways of discovering that God exists. To which you replied "All of which can be explained...". Even if you had a theory for each of them, those theories are your opinion. You cannot prove one counter-argument to any of the above--not one. 

The evidence that I believe that supports my belief (another opinion) is below:

1. Person of Jesus is compelling.
2. The NT describes actual events including the miracles, life, death and resurrection of Jesus.
3. God works in people's lives today--changing people on the inside as well as the occurrence of miracles.
4. The natural theology arguments:
a. God is the best explanation why anything at all exists.
b. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe.
c. God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
d. God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.
e. God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties.

Since you cannot 'prove' that any of these are falsely held beliefs, my conclusion (opinion) that God exists is by definition rationale (from my reasoning listed above). The amount of evidence meets my personal threshold for proof that God exists.

Oh I believe that you believe them I've already said that, and that you believe the explanation satisfactory.  I don't think anyone here has a problem with accepting that you believe.

Of course you can't prove a counter arguments to things which only exist in peoples minds,again I don't have to,  I say if you can prove any of the above then please do so, it's been an open invitation as long as you have been on this forum, of that I'm sure.  At the very best you are offering an opinion, none of which can be considered reasonable proof.

As for it meeting you personal threshold of proof, that's fine at least for you, but if you out to convince others then i would suggest it requires considerably more convincing proof if indeed inference can even be called proof.  You are a perfect example of what this thread set out to accomplish, that faith statements about timeless, space-less, immaterial, spiritual beings can not be unproven no matter how whacky, stupid or silly they are.

And if the threshold for you believing is simply that no one can disprove what you believe then that equally justifies anyone's belief in any unprovable/non falsifiable claim.