Another point of yours that nobody seems to be addressing is this
Quote:
|
There is no evidence in favor and there is no evidence against.
|
Are you familiar with the Russell's teapot analogy? If not, please look it up. At this point there are only three possible viewpoints you can take that I can see.
1.) You have accepted the idea that a lack of evidence disproving something need not be present to not believe in it. In that case, welcome to our ranks.
2.) You believe that the idea of Russell's teapot is ludicrous, however the idea of God is not. However, the argument based on your quote is exactly the same against God as it is against the teapot. So in this case, there has to be some argument beyond just, "There is no evidence in favor and there is no evidence against," that causes you to not find the idea of God ludicrous if you wish to remain logically consistent. I'm interested in what that argument would be.
3.) You believe that a cosmic teapot is a very real possibility. In this case, I give up.