stu and shimrod are trying to charge me with dishonesty when I say that their's is a faith position.
not a shred of evidence for a creator, say they, when there is not a shred of evidence that something popped into existence when there was [supposedly] absolutely nothing before.
it's the biggest creation myth around.
it does not even have the benefit of any kind of first cause.
it IS ACCEPTED BY FAITH, whatever scientific sounding spin they put on it.
if you think it can happen - show us your evidence.
in the meantime ,I don't see anything illogical about saying that , anything that has a beginning, must have a sufficient cause.
that ,admittedly does not prove there is an eternal creator but sure seems a lot more logical than it all came from nothing via no one!.

and if you want to go down the path of equating creation Christians with dangerous evil, I am more than happy to remind you of the evil of some Darwin believers in recent history.
and on what basis do you call something evil. was, nt it dawkins who said that there was,nt good or evil, just blind pitiless indifference.