Everyone has their interpretation of being an apatheist. Their assumption of God, of doubts, questions, and their construction of why they reject some part of God. But when you can 100% understand everything about God, then it is definitely not a God. Do you see the problem here?
God, by its definition, is above objective proof. If I'm an atheist, even if somebody shows me objectively that He can raise the dead, fly like Superman, or turn water into wine, I still wouldn't believe.
If He's benevolent and helps save billions of people, would that be proof enough? If He has the unlimited ability and can do anything, would that prove His omnipotence? If He knows everything and can answer any question we put to him.
Sure, He can be benevolent and save the whole universe from any further suffering, He can answer all the questions and exhibit all the godlike abilities, I agree with all of that, I just think that we people could never confirm that He's a God nonetheless. We aren't able to visit every corner of the universe to confirm that there indeed isn't any suffering anymore—not to mention we have to formulate a universal agreement about suffering, that what is the final definition of suffering first. We can ask God only the questions for which we already know the answer. We can ask God to grant us all the ability to fly, but, as I said, maybe God can do this because He's very powerful and He can trick us into thinking that he's a God, but maybe that's only a small fraction of what a real God could do.
One would have to be omni-aware to experience the true evidence of omnipotence godship. I just can't imagine anything that would be an ultimate proof of God's existence. If we are to prove beyond any doubt that He's a God, He would have to demonstrate this by doing everything there is to be done and answering all the questions there are to be answered. But this would take an eternity, there would always be another thing to be done, and another question to be answered. God is purposely not detected or discoverable by the efforts of flawed fallen human intellect. That would mean He would be confined to intellectuals alone. Not a good godlike to rally to.
There is no evidence that is so compelling and obvious that anyone would be convinced. Atheists do not have that and neither do theists. Anyone who thinks they do have ventured into almost magical thinking.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that the true proof of God's existence is beyond the capacities of humankind. We are too limited to confirm that He/She/It really is a God. I think the only way for a God to prove that He's a God, is to turn somebody else into God. This way the person (who is now a God) would get the ability (and equality) to confirm the successful demo of the original God. I would probably have to become a God myself.
The things is, you can't eradicate anything with even the most obvious truths. If that was the case then there would be no flat earthers. Humans can raise their skepticism to irrational levels and suppress the truth and that is why no amount or quality of evidence would eliminate unbelief. Atheism wouldn't suddenly disappear with the arrival of the elusive evidence. Instead, there'd be holdouts saying, "Surely, this is something else." You, we, I, have only our personal spiritual experiences which are of no value to others.
When I was a fundamentalist atheist, I realized I was wrong. When I was a fundamentalist Muslim, I realized I was wrong. When I was a liberal Muslim, I realized I was wrong. When I realized I don't know much of anything, that may be the first time I was actually right.
