all possible evidence past and present on deity as part of one's knowledge set.
There is none for, only against
Because the same method you create your own deity in your own conscious mind, is the same way the authors did you source your belief from.
And not only do we see them do this over and over, they always change the definition to meet their own personal needs. Many political in nature.
Belief in a deity is not based on reason or logic or evidence, its based on faith of ancient mens mythology not all modern people can break free from.
I have proposed that it is not a rational position to so consider
Your not in a position to steer the debate.
I know you wouldn't make a positive assertion you couldn't prove, right?
The problem is I can.
I can show, prove is your word. I can show without a reasonable doubt that only man defines and creates gods from a time when all men lived mythology and attributed gods to the severe ignorance of nature alone.
Your god, I can show how men defined him for political reasons alone, combining two mythological concepts into one deity.
How can you call the abrahamic deity real when Abraham never existed and is complete 100% mythology by ALL academic standards.
The same book you call a source talks about talking lizards and magic gardens, much we know was plagiarized from previous mythology and previous deities.
So what I have for proof, is a mountain of evidence against.
Your only source is mythological in nature.
Your source contains factual pseudohistory
Your source contains factual mythology
Your source contains factual pseudoscience.
Your source contains fiction
Your source was written in rhetorical prose
Your source claims a god did things that never happened.
Without this source you have no foundation for belief. And your main source has no credibility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham
By the beginning of the 21st century, archaeologists had "given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob
credible 'historical figures'
This mean he factually has no historicity as existing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah
The religion of the Israelites of Iron Age I, like the
Canaanite faith from which it evolved and other ancient Near Eastern religions, was based on a cult of ancestors and worship of family gods (the "gods of the fathers").
[71][72] With the emergence of the monarchy at the beginning of Iron Age II the kings promoted their family god,
Yahweh, as the god of the kingdom, but beyond the royal court, religion continued to be both
polytheistic and family-centered.
[73] The major deities were not numerous –
El,
Asherah, and Yahweh, with
Baal as a fourth god, and perhaps Shamash (the sun) in the early period.
[74] At an early stage
El and Yahweh became fused and Asherah did not continue as a separate state cult
So this states two Canaanite deities were made one by Israelites. We know the text reflects this, as it was redacted after King Josiah's political monotheistic reforms after 622BC.