The evidence is from morality.

peace,
I had a question about the evidence from morality that the rabbi presents on the site. From what I understood from your words, the evidence from morality is that it is not possible to learn norms from experience. And assuming that morality is objective and binding, then it exists in a prescriptive medium. Therefore, it is sufficiently refined. After all, how can there be a commandment without a mitzvah?! And in any case, it is appropriate to assume that there is a mitzvah behind it that wrote the morality "in white fire on black fire."
But I am very surprised that the rabbi did not mention the famous appeal to this conclusion. After all, the traditional truths are necessary (as a logical necessity).
For example, the idea that it is forbidden to kill people is true for our world, but we also believe that there could not be a parallel world that is completely similar to our world from a physical point of view, where killing people would be a neutral act.
In any case, this teaches us that moral understandings are correct and necessary truths. So hitting people just like that must be forbidden.
And once these are necessary truths, it shows that morality is true no matter what the case. Therefore, we cannot argue from the existence of moral laws for the existence of God.
The only argument that can be made is an argument on a physico-theological level that without God it is unlikely that we would know the truth of morality.
And 33
Tuvia