Nothing in that definition says something requires evidence to be a fact. So based off of this definition, why doesn't God fit it?<quoted text>What you fail to understand about what is considered a fact is, a fact might not be the truth.
Evolution is considered fact by the scientific community. Evolution is considered fact by the courts. Now lets say hypothetically that evolution is not the truth. This does not mean it is not considered a fact by the definition of the word.
Now you might consider god a fact, but god has zero evidence, so it really does not fit the definition of fact.
Now do I need to spell out what a scientific theory is?
But it does say that something is in actual existence to be a fact. Doesn't that mean truth?