Theistic Arguments: Claims and proof

[Neo-Scholastic]

Both of those of those requests for evidence are perfectly reasonable. The difference between Socrates and Jesus is that everything we take away from the Socrates stories holds true whether he existed or not.

...I think it's reasonable to expect more from the Son of God than a philosopher's friend.

Okay, point taken. You both provided reasonable questions. I did overstate my case while trying to respond to the OP. So getting back to the discussion at hand...

..perhaps someone [theist] will read this and MAYBE not create another pointless "Let's play make the atheist explain everything about reality" game...Even if you could prove that no one knew the answer to a lot of questions about our universe you still would not make God more likely...Do not turn all of the discussions about God vs. Atheism into a pointless bullet storm of questions about every single facet of reality which doesn't address the likelihood of God's existence AT ALL

What my post unsuccessfully expressed was my agreement that most of us, including this heretic, want to avoid pointless 'bullet storms'. The point I hoped to make was this. The flip side of 'let's make the atheist explain everything about reality game' is the 'make the theist address every conceiveable objection the existence of God'. While it is normal, and even somewhat desirable, to explore tangential points when talking about something specific like 'freewill', I hate to see a good conversation soured with yet another 'biblical inerrency' vs 'flying spagetti monster' war. I see threads titled to invite those kinds of debate. And that's okay for those who want to have fun playing pin-the-tail on a fundie jackass. But not every thread is the appropriate place for such bullshit.