Trek's remaining posts to this thread (i.e. the ones that are vaguely related to the thread topic and which haven't moved elsewhere due to being off-topic) are notable in that only one or two out of dozens make any attempt to provide any evidence for God.
The one that Trek keeps referring back to is the one where he posted that he believes the best evidence for God is a couple of philosophical arguments that have had holes picked in them for literally centuries by philosophers and other critical thinkers.
In that same post, Trek told us that he thinks cells are too complex to have come about by natural processes. Only a magical God could make it happen, he asserts. This argument seems to be drawn straight from Michael Behe or one of those other CreatIntelligent Design Proponentsionists. The problem is, nobody in the respectable scientific community agrees with Behe that cells are "irreducibly complex". In fact, there's nothing like a consensus among qualified biologists that anything biological is irreducibly complex.
None of this gives Trek pause for thought, apparently.
Mind you, the entire "evidence" thing is really just skylarking, as far as Trek is concerned, because Trek as told us that he doesn't believe in his God because of evidence. Trek doesn't care about evidence.
Trek has been careful not to disclose to anybody the actual reasons why he believes his god is real. Maybe, when it comes down to it, he fears he might be embarrassed if he ever told us.