2 minor spelling/grammer fixes
source | link

This problem isn't unique to God, in fact as Michael suggests you would find it quite challenging to prove or disprove with certainty the existence of virtually anything. I think the primary contention here is not whether absolute proof exists for objects/concepts (God) or not, but whether the likelihood of their existence and non-existence is equal given that they can't be proven for sure. Thus, just because you can neither prove or nor disprove the existence of God does not mean the liklihoodlikelihood of his existence is 50/50. If people are suggesting that there is some kind of "truce" or "balance" as you put it, as if it's a coinflipcoin flip as to whether God exists or not, then they have been seriously misled.

This problem isn't unique to God, in fact as Michael suggests you would find it quite challenging to prove or disprove with certainty the existence of virtually anything. I think the primary contention here is not whether absolute proof exists for objects/concepts (God) or not, but whether the likelihood of their existence and non-existence is equal given that they can't be proven for sure. Thus, just because you can neither prove or nor disprove the existence of God does not mean the liklihood of his existence 50/50. If people are suggesting that there is some kind of "truce" or "balance" as you put it, as if it's a coinflip as to whether God exists or not, then they have been seriously misled.

This problem isn't unique to God, in fact as Michael suggests you would find it quite challenging to prove or disprove with certainty the existence of virtually anything. I think the primary contention here is not whether absolute proof exists for objects/concepts (God) or not, but whether the likelihood of their existence and non-existence is equal given that they can't be proven for sure. Thus, just because you can neither prove or nor disprove the existence of God does not mean the likelihood of his existence is 50/50. If people are suggesting that there is some kind of "truce" or "balance" as you put it, as if it's a coin flip as to whether God exists or not, then they have been seriously misled.

1
source | link

This problem isn't unique to God, in fact as Michael suggests you would find it quite challenging to prove or disprove with certainty the existence of virtually anything. I think the primary contention here is not whether absolute proof exists for objects/concepts (God) or not, but whether the likelihood of their existence and non-existence is equal given that they can't be proven for sure. Thus, just because you can neither prove or nor disprove the existence of God does not mean the liklihood of his existence 50/50. If people are suggesting that there is some kind of "truce" or "balance" as you put it, as if it's a coinflip as to whether God exists or not, then they have been seriously misled.