If you haven’t found compelling evidence, then you haven’t looked. I’m not being snarky. Look up a list of atheists who set out to disprove God. Once you start looking, it’s impossible to miss.

What most people seem to mean by this is, “If God himself came down in a column of fire, then I’d believe.”

Most folks can’t be bothered to actually dig into the real, ample evidence that exists. You like philosophical arguments? There’s philosophical arguments for it. You like astronomical or geologic arguments? There’s that too. Logic? Check.

There’s so much evidence for Christ, it’s basically the only logically consistent worldview. I know I’ll get downvoted to hell for saying that (heh) but it’s true. There is not another logically consistent worldview beyond Christianity.

First off, you can't claim that Christianity is logical consistent until you find a way to resolve the Epicurean Paradox[0] and the question of how Sin/imperfection was introduced into our reality. If the Christian God was the only being who existed in beginning of time & everything that God created was also perfect, then which perfect being took the first imperfect action and how is it even possible for a perfect being to do something imperfectly?

Secondly, I'd like to know what you think is not logically consistent with atheism/evolution.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurean_paradox

The Epicurean Paradox doesn't exist in the Christian worldview.

Free Will as described in the Bible fully explains why and how a good, omnipotent God could allow evil. Perfect beings making imperfect choices isn't a contradiction, it's the very essence of free will. God valued authentic relationship over robotic obedience. Natural evils entered as consequences of this freedom exercised poorly, not as part of the original design.

Christianity doesn't just acknowledge this tension - it provides the complete framework to understand it: creation, fall, and redemption.

I’ll also go ahead and acknowledge that just because a being that exists outside of space and time knows something will happen, doesn’t CAUSE it to happen. So while our minds may not like the fact that God knew it would happen, it doesn’t mean he caused it to happen.

You wouldn’t forgo the joy and wonder of having a child simply because you knew one day they might scrape their knee.

By the way, a sincere thank you for engaging instead of downvoting out of disagreement. We need more of that!

> Perfect beings making imperfect choices isn't a contradiction, it's the very essence of free will.

Either perfect beings, including God, are capable of imperfect actions/decisions on some random whim, or they are not.

If they are, then the definition of perfection is meaningless.

If they are not, then God's creations were imperfect, which suggests that God also is imperfect.

> I’ll also go ahead and acknowledge that just because a being that exists outside of space and time knows something will happen, doesn’t CAUSE it to happen.

You're implying that an entity that has perfect foresight of the consequences of its actions is not responsible for those consequences.

I disagree.

> God valued authentic relationship over robotic obedience.

Robotic obedience is the only theoretical option for a relationship with a timeless entity who created the universe.

If God knows the outcomes of all universal starting conditions, then no outcome is less pre-determined than any other outcome.

> You wouldn’t forgo the joy and wonder of having a child simply because you knew one day they might scrape their knee.

Actually, I'm child-free because I don't think that the additional joy & wonder I might gain from raising a child would be worth the pain that they may experience or cause.

Also, you're welcome. ^^

All the "evidence" you cite is effectively "trust me, bro".

As for disproving God, this addresses that better than I can: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

I am not an atheist because that's my identity or belief, it's just the absence of belief. There are countless Gods amongst many religions -- do you believe in them? No? Well, then I simply believe in one less God than you do.

In the US, more people believe in angels than in evolution. I'd wager that the latter part is due to the former. I'm not a scientist but the theory of evolution is very simple and there's ample real world evidence to back it up. Where are all the angels these days?

If you don’t want to believe, I think that’s fine, however saying that there is zero evidence or philosophical arguments that could at least gives you pause would be shortsighted.

Hitchen’s tried to hold this position by regurgitatation decade old counter arguments publicly and all he got attributed to him at the end was “hitch-slaps”.

> If you don’t want to believe

Ah, there's the rub. What I want to "believe" is whatever truth shall be revealed to me. It's not like I want to not believe in God, I simply haven't been presented with compelling evidence to lead me there.

And as for other's, they should be able to believe whatever they want (but there's a catch). My only concern for what others believe is how that translates into real world outcomes. A prime example of this is that the current US Administration is Christian Nationalist and want to pass laws on their interpretation of scripture -- then that become mine and everybody else's business.