Perhaps none of you have noticed my signature line in which the evidence for the existence of God has been plainly stated. Evidence means that which is evident. Evidence is data about the world used to support a conclusion. You may disagree with the conclusion I accept as a valid interpretation of the data. I understand and welcome that disagreement. I believe that people can apply reason to simple observations (things clearly and plainly evident) about the world and draw conclusions about an important issue, namely whether there is a Divine aspect to reality.
I carefully stated proposition 2 as "The proposition that god(s) exist is not true," as opposed to "The proposition that god(s) exist is false." That allows one to take the 'I don't know' position which would be a kind of state of innocence of someone has not had a chance to consider the possibility of God(s) existence. Many of you are not in any such state of innocence and haven't been for quite a long time. Those of you how say "no evidence" have taken a stance with respect to the proposition: There is no evidence for god(s).
I carefully stated proposition 2 as "The proposition that god(s) exist is not true," as opposed to "The proposition that god(s) exist is false." That allows one to take the 'I don't know' position which would be a kind of state of innocence of someone has not had a chance to consider the possibility of God(s) existence. Many of you are not in any such state of innocence and haven't been for quite a long time. Those of you how say "no evidence" have taken a stance with respect to the proposition: There is no evidence for god(s).
