The fact that there is no evidence YET.. What evidence is there? The REASON I don't believe in a god is the SAME reason I don't believe in Santa and the like. It's not my job to disprove your claim. If you say that something perfect, magic is out there, it's up to you to provide evidence. Remember, I also can not disprove Santa. You said so yourself that you can't provide evidence. That answers the thread's question. The proof we want is the evidence you say can't be provided.
002.256 Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
Al-Qur'an, 002.256 (Al-Baqara [The Cow])
Our job is to convey the message even just one verse. I dare not breaking the rules of no compulsion in religion.
Speaking about the rules, there are sets of rules in any given systems.
In a game of basket ball there are rules. Playing golf also have some rules.
The empiral evidence you're asking is like insisting to play basket ball with the rules of playing golf. You could do it if you want to, but you may try to avoid convincing others it's logical.
if the rule of evidence applicable to other systems (crime, science etc) why not to God?
The rule to obtain any evidences is by collecting finite or measurable information. How do you deal with infinite? True, there is a process called renormalisation to cancel out infinite from each other in the equation. But like Greg Cantor said it's only applicable to the Transfinite and won't work to Deo he called the absolute infinite.
One of the best infinite-mathematician said it can not be done and you insist the rule of evidence is applicable to the absolute infinite by keep asking where's the evidence.
Either you have more knowledge than Greg Cantor by saying it can be done or what you are really trying to say: "Let's play basket ball using 9-iron."
You could do it.... Some may say it's the smart way to play others may utter different words.
empirical evidence is NOT the tool to approach God but believe is.
Notice translated Al-Qur'an uses the word 'believe'
002.006 As to those who reject Faith, it is the same to them whether thou warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe.
Al-Qur'an, 002.006 (Al-Baqara [The Cow])
One last thing, The algorithm you are using
if God Exists then
there is evidence some place or
else
God does not exist
endif
if NoEvidence( cause) then ABSOLUTELY ThereIsNoGod (effect).
Notice you are using causality law (cause-effect). meaning the cause first followed by the effect in this order. Do you think this classical law is absolute? well, in Quantum Mechanics the effect sometimes comes first followed by the cause, sometimes both occur at the same time or the way we accustom to, cause followed by effect... weird, isn't it?
Do you think relying on causality law alone is enough arsenal to challenge the existency of God?
what I am saying is: I would be careful in the way my logic works. If you have some doubts about the existency of God then to be at par is it not also logical to place some doubt in the way our inner-thought works? Is it really our logic infallible?
