'Evidence' is a derivation of 'evident'. Personal testimonies aren't evident to anyone but the person/people who experienced it, and eyewitness testimony is almost always flawed due to our psychology. We forget, embellish, transpose, misunderstand, etc. all the time. So personal encounters/relationships are utterly meaningless to those outside of the experience, and likely based on flawed recollection to boot.
And, yes, many (most?) atheists are open to the possibility of a god. The thing is, for evidence of this god to be considered valid, it cannot be something that can be considered evidence of something else. And it must be tangible, measurable, and testable. Assertions alone don't cut it.
And that's why we don't believe in any religion we've encountered to date. The divine is nothing more than assertions via hearsay with nothing to back it up.
And, yes, many (most?) atheists are open to the possibility of a god. The thing is, for evidence of this god to be considered valid, it cannot be something that can be considered evidence of something else. And it must be tangible, measurable, and testable. Assertions alone don't cut it.
And that's why we don't believe in any religion we've encountered to date. The divine is nothing more than assertions via hearsay with nothing to back it up.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
