A fatal logical flaw in creationism?

desdamona writes:Yes,when you view it that way,but the same is true when you tell yourself that there is no God.We just want to know whats true about life and that truth isn't always easy to get at.
Since we cannot know all evidence,it is possible that evidence exists that proves God's existence;( I have had evidence in my life)or at least supports his existence.Therefore it is possible that God exists.If it is possible,then faith has it's place.Some may believe that it is possible that there is no evidence at all for God.But this cannot be stated absolutely,since all evidence would need to be known to show there is no evidence.
Since all evidence cannot be known by any one person,it is possible that evidence exists that supports theism.

desdamona writes:If you have not decided what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable,then you cannot state that there is no evidence for God.

desdamona writes:If you have decided what evidence is sufficient,what is it?

desdamona writes:Does christianity fit with within that criteria? If not,why not?

desdamona writes:Is it possible that your criteria for evidence is unreasonable,like asking God to appear to you in blazing Glory?If he did,would you believe it,or think you were having an hallucination,or some sort of trick played on you? How would you know? Could you prove it?

desdamona writes:Does your criteria put a requirment on logic that is not realistic? Do you want him to make square circles,or some other self-contradictory phenomena,or make a rock so big he cannot pick it up?

desdamona writes:If God does exist,He has created the laws of logic.He cannot violate those laws.