Firstly, tangent: I love your username. Boltzmann I feel made the greatest contribution to all science by any person in history. The Boltzmann Brain is an interesting and valid concept but his law of thermodynamics is the linchpin of all human knowledge, grounded as it is in fundamental uncertainty, and the discovery of that short equation killed him. Many scriptures profess to profound truth but S = k log W is simply awesome to the point of terrifying and it’s only a few letters long. It says why today happens before tomorrow, decides the fate of the universe and tells us why coffee cools and steam engines run. It uncovered the quantum universe. Fitting that he wrote it on his gravestone.
Listen, there have been limitless gods through the ages, most of whom lie forgotten or abandoned, a fate awaiting us as much as our deities. You can’t make a general statement about them any more that you can about art. They tend to follow what came before but practically everything imaginable has been tried and contradicting opposites exist.
The question is, not what it takes you believe in deities but, if we are to be consistent, what standards we should take for belief in general. How high should we set the bar for evidence?Is evidence a legitimate means for deciding truth at all? Because likely everything that makes you believe in your God is claimed by someone with an entirely different belief that stands in contradiction, not confirmation.
“It’s true because I want it to be” is a valid, if worthless, epistemological argument. Our senses deceive, we don’t know for sure.
So what is the process when accepting a claim?
If you grew up around people who claimed brass isn’t magnetic and they always hated people who claimed it was. How would you deal with that? Would you side with those near you? Is that how you would decide?