Second, how can one deny the evidence for the existance of Truth (which is God)? And what other word than God is used to describe where any evidence comes from in the first place?

Third, the fact that something can even BE rational or irrational implies some sort of standard, some sort of Divine Reason, by which to judge it!

Fourth, the fact that today you are and yesterday also were implies some underlying conservation law (which must correspond to some sort of symmetry of the universe), and so your life and corporal substance are sustained, and "Sustainer sustains" is also like "workers work". If someone asks you what sustains, you know that the answer is–basically meaningless if no other information is provided, since this is obvious by definition–a sustainer. Any self-sustaining sustainer, it seems to me, must be a god!

Fifth, why is there that symmetry in the universe at all? What is this thing? What is it that divides above and below? I do suggest the normative answer is God. So if you are suggesting a lack of evidence for God (as traditionally understood), you are suggesting a lack of evidence for any meaningful distinction between up and down, which implies a lack of evidence for the law of gravity—which I guess you're already aware of, as it is one of God's laws that you see no evidence of).

Sixth, I could go on indefinitely, creating not just the sixth point, but an infinite number of points, but only if I could shed my human limitations and myself converge on the infinite. All infinites converge to a single point of infinity. That point I will designate God. And no, it doesn't have any particular location when mapped on Cartesian coordinates (to which it is the inverse of the zero point), but yes, it does exist. Indeed, it is infinitely close to every point, though not actually ON any of them.

You two missed her the most obvious failing of her claim…why would God send a prophet specific to some silly thing like a man-made state border (the U.S.)? If anything; her delusion is too restrained!

(grin) Wouldn't that be an argument for the Lunatic horn of the trilemma? Jesus said many things more out there than that.

If you are promoting certainty, then you are promoting extremism…they correlate directly.

If all believers demonstrated a little humility and doubt in what they claimed to know, then you might not see non-believers feeling the need to engage in discussions such as this. Unshakable (and unjustified) certainty afflicts a minority of the believing population, and it is those that I speak against and unabashedly ridicule. If that ridicule offends or challenges the vast majority of moderate/pragmatic believers…well…there is not really anything that I can do about that until the moderate demonstrates the truth of their system of belief. Failure to do so while demanding respect for their beliefs is tacit protection of the extremist.

"Nothing but free argument, raillery and even ridicule will preserve the purity of religion." – Thomas Jefferson

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. " – Thomas Jefferson