Religion
In reply to the discussion: "Atheism: A personal relationship with reality." [View all]humblebum
(5,881 posts)to do some research if you so choose. Now, if you choose to continue insisting that the arguments of all philosophers and scholars about religion through all of human history be rehashed, have a ball.
As far as first cause being a logical fallacy - no it is not, but it is an argument and has been recognized as such for a very long time. It is also known as the Cosmological Argument. It is no more special pleading than an argument using Logical Empiricism, which automatically eliminates the use of certain types logic, or rather makes a special pleading for the nonsensical nature of intuition, apriori, etc.
Epistemologies, ontological and teleological arguments can all be made and have been, but there is still no objective evidence empirical or otherwise for or against the existence of God. You referred to "high degree" of evidence, I believe. What standard do you use to determine what constitutes high degree?