hektor so you have no proof either, thanks for making my point in other words

omnipotent omnipresence is indistinguishable from randomness

Your argument was that all religions are unlikely correct. I point why that argument is invalid.

So how did I prove your point?

I just think your argument is bogus. I am looking for a debate rn. Bored out of my mind.

it goes for all religions that they are very unlikely to be true

hektor

your syllogism is self referentially incoherent

: 0

this is basic logic

Tell me why?

u srs?

your premises refute your conclusion

Tell me why.

it isn't valid

because neither can prove their starting point: god

your premises refute your conclusion because it does not follow

it's a non sequitur

I was not proving God.

its just sall self referential lore

i cant get more simple than that you idiot

google search non sequitur dot com

it does not follow

with unknown beginning state

I just was saying that the logic he was using was not strong.

you have been BTFO'd bro

I know what a non sequitur is.

delete your acc

self

referentially

incoherent

@Nerthulas can you explain his post instead of reactions?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/QnUN2rXheCck/

if you don't believe in god you're a fag

this is what i listen to when i btfo cuck lords like @Hector

he isn't making an argument he's just spouting jargon lol

take a bible, the more intricate the claim (the bible as a whole)

hektor's syllojizum is leaking from his impotent logical phallus

the less liekly it is true

theres going to be bugs in the software