Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

[Theo Zacharias]

@Theo:
what you said:

Also, don't forget that you are the one who claim that if God exist and affects the world in *anyway*, it must generate some form of evidence. What I'm doing is to refute this claim by arguing that maybe it generates some evidences but maybe not. I don't agree that it *must* generate evidence because it's possible that it does not generate any evidences.
Now, do you still hold to this claim especially the *anyway" part? Or you want to modify the *anyway* part?

And then later you said undetectable by current technology. But I've bolded here what you said that is absolutely wrong. In my previous replied I have said that maybe the evidence generated is undetectable by current technology, I don't know why you ignored that and posed the question again. But don't confuse that with no evidence at all, which was the position you were trying to argue for right here.

No, you're misinterpreting me. What's the use of evidence we cannot detect? I'm not sure why you interpret what I'm saying this way.