Theology expects nothing. G-d has His own expectations. And, no matter what you say, I don't think it's going to cut it if you challenge Him and say, 'There was no evidence.'
What you mean to say is that you have defined precisely what evidence is admissable and will insist that G-d provide the evidence you asked for and you will reject anything else. Just like the people who insisted that the man let them in the door they asked for and rejected anything else.
And this is what I don't understand.
Shalom.
You're absolutely wrong here. You make an assertion that a god exists, not the god you assert. If your god made the assertion, that would be the evidence, but all I have is the words of men and men, as everyone knows, are fallible.
What you mean to say is that you have defined precisely what evidence is admissable and will insist that G-d provide the evidence you asked for and you will reject anything else. Just like the people who insisted that the man let them in the door they asked for and rejected anything else.
Trot him out, that's all the evidence I need.
And this is what I don't understand.
And what I cannot understand is blind faith with no evidence.