Some of the latest statements supporting the “fairytale” side of the question compel me to counter.

I read no valid arguments, only preexisting opinions or maybe wishful thinking.

People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive. But truth is not a subjective matter of taste—it’s on objective matter of fact.

Truth is not dependent on our feelings or preferences. Something is true whether we like it or not. Being WILLING to take an honest look at the evidence is essential. Evidence cannot convince the unwilling.

When I read statements like: “...imaginary deity sounds like an asshole,” it leads me to believe that they feel a need to be morally comfortable. After all, by not believing in God, there’s no moral accountability.

Regarding God’s existence, am I correct in presuming that you have moved from your reply to TheHallow1 a while back (when you stated “While there is no proof of God…,”) to believing His existence is plausible?

Or is you belief now factual—when you write; “The most logical explanation -- which I personally believe -- is a divine Creator?”

As you mentioned when writing about the mysteries of the mind; this would, in my opinion, add proof to God’s existence and creation.

Even Darwin had this quotation concerning creation:

“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”

So without being too technical with my response, you're saying from goo to you via the zoo?

OK, plausible it is. If not God, by whom was the Universe created? I am assuming here that you believe the universe DID have a beginning.

The question concerning the existence of God depends on the five most consequential questions in life.

1. Where did we come from?

2. Who are we?

3. Why are we here?

4. How should we live?

5. Where are we going?

One thing that must be agreed upon is that there are intellectual, emotional and volitional obstacles to both sides of the debate. A person must be willing to make a thorough investigation of the evidence with an open mind.

Many suggest that only science delivers truth and deals in matters of fact while religion stays in the realm of faith. No matter your position on the existence of God, it’s virtually impossible to know everything about a particular topic, and it’s certainly impossible when that topic is an infinite God. So there has to come a point where you realize you have enough information to come to a conclusion, even if unanswered questions remain.

Because we are limited human beings with limited knowledge, faith DOES have a role in this debate. The less evidence you have for your position, the more faith you need to believe it (and vice versa). Faith covers a gap in knowledge.

However, it must be acknowledged that evidence alone cannot convince some people. We humans have a tendency to try to adjust the truth to fit our desires rather than adjusting our desires to fit the truth.

With this said, IS THE TRUTH REALLY KNOWABLE? I say it is. Contrary beliefs are possible, but contrary truths are not. We can believe everything is true, but we cannot make everything true.

God does exist based on the following: the beginning (yes it had a beginning) of the universe; the design of the universe; the design of life; and moral law.

Examine the evidence.

If there is no God, why is there something rather than nothing? If you honestly study the evidence, we are left with only two options: either no one created something out of nothing, or else someone created something out of nothing. Which view is more reasonable?

The question concerning the existence of God depends on the five most consequential questions in life.

1. Where did we come from?

2. Who are we?

3. Why are we here?

4. How should we live?

5. Where are we going?

One thing that must be agreed upon is that there are intellectual, emotional and volitional obstacles to both sides of the debate. A person must be willing to make a thorough investigation of the evidence with an open mind.

Many suggest that only science delivers truth and deals in matters of fact while religion stays in the realm of faith. No matter your position on the existence of God, it’s virtually impossible to know everything about a particular topic, and it’s certainly impossible when that topic is an infinite God. So there has to come a point where you realize you have enough information to come to a conclusion, even if unanswered questions remain.

Because we are limited human beings with limited knowledge, faith DOES have a role in this debate. The less evidence you have for your position, the more faith you need to believe it (and vice versa). Faith covers a gap in knowledge.

However, it must be acknowledged that evidence alone cannot convince some people. We humans have a tendency to try to adjust the truth to fit our desires rather than adjusting our desires to fit the truth.

With this said, IS THE TRUTH REALLY KNOWABLE? I say it is. Contrary beliefs are possible, but contrary truths are not. We can believe everything is true, but we cannot make everything true.

God does exist based on the following: the beginning (yes it had a beginning) of the universe; the design of the universe; the design of life; and moral law.

Examine the evidence.