Yes. If there's evidence in the belief then it's not faith. The point is how can belief in something that there is no evidence of whatsoever ( and IOW no indication of the truth of believing that such a thing actually exists, in this case "God") be rational and/or have any objective bearing on the matter at all? So in other words how is "faith" rational..ever? And why have faith on one God in particular if it's just as irrational to believe in any of them because there's no indication of their existence in any of them? (No evidence of any of them).
If there is no indication whatsoever of the actual existence of a God then that's the same thing as no evidence. Because that's what evidence is for. It's what it means. In the broadest sense it doesn't have to be scientific - it just has to give some indication that the thing you believe in actually exists! Science has thus far been the way it's done...but if you in any way can have objective reasons that indicate God to actually exists in some sense in reality - then that would IOW be evidence of some form. Because it would be giving credence to the truth of the belief.
EvF
If there is no indication whatsoever of the actual existence of a God then that's the same thing as no evidence. Because that's what evidence is for. It's what it means. In the broadest sense it doesn't have to be scientific - it just has to give some indication that the thing you believe in actually exists! Science has thus far been the way it's done...but if you in any way can have objective reasons that indicate God to actually exists in some sense in reality - then that would IOW be evidence of some form. Because it would be giving credence to the truth of the belief.
EvF
