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

[LadyForCamus]

You have what appears to be, for all intents and purposes, an ‘old days’ televangelist asserting that god is present, and that there is a light above a woman’s head.  You have no evidence of this alleged light above her head, and no evidence that the light in the photo is god. An assertion that it is god is not evidence that it is. You simply take Branham at his word?  Why on earth would you do that?  Tell me, Huggy; how much money have you wired to Nigerian princes over the years?

We'll it appears you didn't watch the video if full context.

Let me tell you a little about William Branham.

First of all, he's never been on television and he was passed away before I was even born.

2. He had a seventh grade education

3. Never took an offering in 30 something years of preaching

4. Worked a full time job to make ends meet (do you imagine someone like Billy Graham working a 9-5 Job?)

5. Everything he had was pretty much donated to him, even his suits were donated to him, in fact he took out an ad in the local paper apologizing for driving a Cadillac that was donated to him.

Up until now, you've heard of Billy Graham, you've heard of Oral Roberts, but you've never heard of William Branham, they were all preaching at the same time.

So what exactly was Branham's endgame? It clearly wasn't the money.

That being said you can't claim the light was fake because a picture exists of it, you can't claim the picture was fake because you have people who claimed they saw it.





Your only rebuttal to any of this is basically


You guys skipped all the way past your supposed default position of "I don't know" and went into full denial mode based only on pure speculations. Your rejection of the evidence can only be based upon on the idea that all things that exist in the universe are known, is that what you're saying?

I’m not sure what any of the above has to do with evidence of the light being caused by a god?