This sounds like an ingenius way of covering up a lie. We have examples of fictional people in these stories still not believing in God despite evidence being put forth. Now, because people are demanding evidence, believers can just say that "you will not accept the truth even if it is proven".
Just look at yourself, and if not satisfied, look at MGW. You might want to read this topic back from page ~20 up to ~150, to find out more such people. And yes, some people have troubles to accept the truth if (they think) it's unbearable.
Don't you think God could've saved a lot of people in the Civil War, once the idea of abolishing slavery was planted, by revealing himself as a booming voice in the sky with a physical form, and shouting, "Do not fight the most violent war in American history! I, your Christian God, declare that slavery is a sin."
Don't you think that demanding that God should do something for YOU is a sin? Regardless of deed.
Nobody can explain why good things happen to some and bad to others. I don't know why. That doesn't mean that I should assume without evidence or rational justification that it was your particular god, let alone any god.
Right, we cannot. And if we cannot, then there is an incompleteness in materialistic view of the world, that allows intereference of unknown forces. You are technically right about "rational justification", but you are effectively requesting a logical proof of God, this was already discussed and the conclusion was "one cannot prove or disprove God with logic." And you're using "let alone" the other way, it's better said "...that it was a god, let alone your particular god".
Most theists tend to be gnostic theists, claiming to know that there is a god, while the more open-minded theists tend to be agnostic theists, believing in a god but not claiming to know that there is a god.
Why do you link "open-minded" to "agnostic"? These are separate qualities.
Right, but most people are brainwashed into a religion, and if people belong to specific demoninations, it can be fairly supported that those attending are brainwashed every Sunday to continue a belief without evidence, when they might have otherwise seen the absurdity in it.
Well, I have met people who were brainwashed into gnostic atheism, aka commies, after all there are plenty of them still alive. But, you can't say "most" here, only "many", which is possible. Saying "most people" without clarification requires a great deal of all-knowingness to base, and you obviously lack the required ability. "Most people I have met" might do better.
without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
And then you say "mind". No. While agreeing to the dictionary, I also have to help you notice that God, being omnipotent, is capable of viewing everything objectively, as they are, so morale provided by God will retain objectivity.
I the sun was actually moving rather than it just being some sort of optical illusion it would be visible everywhere, not just from a few kilometers away.
You are closed-minded here. You limit yourself to two possible cases, "actual movement" and "optical illusion", not accepting that there could be more possibilities.
Yes we can counter claims by pointing out contradictions, which is what we can do with the Bible.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/test.html
Picked this at first glance to that list, among any whimsical things there are, and found out the ye olde mixup of request and demand. Tempting God is demanding from Him, requesting is okay. So, there are contradictions there, go clarify them.
*grins*