Right out of the door, I never ‘claimed’ to be a Messenger of God, so what reason would anyone have to believe that I am a Messenger of God?
The evidence. And I used reason on it. And any argument applied to any evidence is just as good as any other. To say otherwise - to call me wrong - would be arrogant.
Plus, you now have me telling them that you're a messenger of God, albeit an unwitting one - another reason for others to believe that you are a messenger. I'm telling them that you are. Messengers don't have to know that they're messengers. But the evidence says that that's what you are.
So you are saying you think I have an obligation to explain to you why I find the evidence I offered to be evidence of a Messenger of God? How can I explain that?
If you have compelling evidence, you present it, assuming that you are correct and want to be believed. If not, you have no reason to give your argument, but you also have no reason to expect others to believe that you are correct.
If you are an apatheist and don’t think belief in God is important at all you should not care if there is any evidence for God
I am an apatheist in the sense that I have ruled out the existence of an interventionalist God, one that manifests in reality through revelation, miracles, answering prayer, for example. That leaves either a non-interventionalist God like the deist God, who has left the building so to speak, or no gods at all. What I'm saying is that the answer to that question is not only unavailable, but irrelevant. Nothing changes if the answer is yes or no to the existence of such a god.
So, it's not that I don't care of there is evidence for a god, it's that there is none. One doesn't realize that he is apathetic about gods and then start looking for evidence as you suggest. It's the other way around. Having looked for this evidence and having found none, I am convinced that no deity is trying to reach me (no interventionalist God), and I am apathetic about any other kind of deity existing.
you expect God to do what you want Him to do
No. I expect nothing from gods, as I have explained to you several times.
That's one of the consequences of being an atheist, another thing you never seem to assimilate. Why do you keep writing to me as if I believe that their is a god and that I have expectations of it? Have you noticed that I don't project my atheism onto you? I never write as if you believe there is no God. It's a core aspect of who you are in these discussions. How could I ever forget that I am writing to a theist and slip into writing as if you were an atheist?
Yet that is exactly what you do - repeatedly - as you just did. Do you know why that is? Do you know why you keep telling me what I expect a god that I don't believe exists to do?
And yes, much of this post was theater - me mirroring you back to you. I wanted you to see what your position sounds like to others. You're a messenger because of the evidence - all of it - and my interpretation of it and conclusions drawn from it are just as valid as your objection to being confused for a messenger, because we all interpret evidence differently, meaning however we want, all conclusions are equally sound, and those who disagree are arrogant, and you don't want to be that, right?