Evidence for Believing

[Belacqua]

Because what you have presented is not evidence*
What you have presented is claims, other people making (other) claims, and fallacies like appeal to numbers. Again, it shows your lack in education (see above).

*"personal evidence" isnt evidence. Just like oranges arent apples, because i call them "personal apples". You are entitled to believe in a god based on "personal evidence". You are not entitled to proclaim your god to be true based on your fallacious reasoning. You are of course entitled to wonder why i have such rigorous standards for beliefs, way more rigorous than you.

I think personal evidence is evidence. Not proof, but evidence. If we define evidence as "anything which gives added credence to a proposition." If someone has a religious experience, it is not unreasonable for that person to feel that the possibility of the existence of God is more likely to be true than he did before. If he's honest he has to accept that he may be deluded -- but we all have to accept that about most things.

Also I think that an appeal to numbers constitutes evidence --- though not proof. 

Suppose you went to a small town you'd never visited before, and you asked 100 people what the best restaurant in town is. If 99 people give the same answer, that is solid evidence (not proof) that it really is the best restaurant in town. 

Likewise, if a billion people say they have personal experience of God, then that is evidence (not proof). 

Now you may reject the testimony of a billion people about God, while accepting the testimony of 99 people about the restaurant, because they are testimony concerning different categories -- a metaphysical truth versus an aesthetic one. But it shows that what you're rejecting isn't the possibility of numbers serving as evidence. You're rejecting the ability of any proof -- numerical or otherwise -- in certain categories.

---

1)  If a god created the universe (that is everything that exists) then where was he before he created it? (Heaven is not an answer because that would be part of “everything that exists”)

Creationists ask "if people came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys." And scientists slap their foreheads in disbelief. 

Your question here is the theological equivalent. It only shows that you don't know any theology at all.