The point is, discussable "things" exist because we define what they are, which necessarily also indicates what they are not. We give them a "boundary", and so divide.
Evidence, in a pseudo-scientist way of thinking, is a minor phenomenon when compared to the very source of being which is one of God's main attributes as we understand the situation with our limited faculties. When a few people are in a room, and can only interact with whatever is in there, they cannot understand anything outside that room, where, presumably, the creator of the room and all its contents resides. Not with their pseudo-rational mind, that is.
so we cant precieve of this thing. we cant see it. we cant understand it. it does not interact with us but we spend our lives worshiping it? why? "the invisible and the non existant are very much alike".
So, to further this argument, please define for me, your definition of all knowing, and all powerful.
Really? There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: 17haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, 18a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, 19a false witness who pours out lies and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers.
Same problem, a contradiction, with the statement that there can be good without bad. That's saying "all good". All I'm saying is that if there's good, there's bad, just as if there's an up, there's a down.
Sure we can, we do it all the time, but not through our limited thinking. We can't prove that our dreams exist, and yet we know they are there, we experience them all the time. Same with our love towards others, fears, enjoyment of good music, etc etc. Most of what we experience cannot be proven that they exist if we take a limited "objective" perspective that pseudo-scientists claim should be driving us. Objective proof is just impossible, how can you get everyone on this planet to agree on anything? What we have is inter-subjective guidance: many of us experience something and we decide to let it influence us, call it "real". We interact with God through intuition that's faith-powered, ie, an initial acceptance that this line of experience is valid based on similar experiences that others have had and comes to us as inter-subjective evidence. For example, others have told you that dreams are real, you open your mind to the possibility and you remember them next morning. Crude example, but in the ballpark. Once that interaction takes place even once, no more "objective" proof is needed, our faith takes hold and we can see for ourselves.