Can we be 100% sure there is/isn't a God?

Yes I think this interpretation of the universe's origins is correct. I don't really BELIEVE in it, but in the same sense I don't believe in photosynthesis, gravity etc. I'm not sure if a person can really believe in science. Theories can be proven untill there is just a symantic difference between fact and theory, but I don't think its right to become to attached to any one theory. For example, if someone was to bring up proof that can't be explained away for scientific creationism, then I would be the first to jump on board with them. Did Ken Ham tell you to ask that? I've been on the Scientific Creationist side of the fence too.You don't have to witness something to prove it happened. Take forensic science for example.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

another good point... now I have more to ponder, thanks alot MP , (I'm not entirely sure I will have quite the same view when I post again about this)------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

I keep mulling this issue over, and I keep on coming back to the Augustinian defense...That God allows what happens for the greater (eternal) good. This argument is inherently impossible to debate with because you can't balance an evil that is present, or in the past for that matter, in the world against a probable evil in the future. No matter how bad it is now, one can always argue that it would be worse in the future.This seems like an argument for predestination, but I don't think so. I think God works with probabilities, not an absolute certain future.This way of thinking would also allow for God's intervention in the world. How would we know that God hasn't worked in the past to save us from some horrible miserable end?------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

This is a self contradicting statement. This is exactly my arguement. Well I'm glad I don't hold God as being less than omniscient/omnipotent.On your fallibility, I think MP answered it exactly as I would have. Its my will that his will becomes mine. This is the concept of Holiness. It still is exclusive. I can do whatever I want at any time... Its just that I don't want to. This is kinda hard to talk about with someone with no frame of reference... But the closer you get to God, the more your want your two wills to be one.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

This is as equally justified as saying that the universe wasn't created by God.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

sorry its been so long... I'm writing a report on a semester's worth of observations of the the Eastern Phoebe... The fact that his actions might result in a greater good does not justify them. Now if he meant for his actions to be for the greater good that is different. In this case, if he meant for rape to be for the greater good, than I would question his sanity.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

I believe this is one of the cases where I would have to start questioning their sanity. When you act totally against the moral and ethical values your god has set up, how can you expect your actions to be justified? I think problems like this come into play more when there is a missinterpratation of their religion.Now, obviously I'm not an Islamic scholar, so I don't know what exactly the 'right' interpretation of their religion would be, but I do know that must Muslims do not agree to such terrorist acts.I, being a logical rational being (or so I would like to think) know that God would never tell me to act against the moral law that he has established. Therefore, if i get the feeling that God wants me to throw my kill thousands of innocent people, then I would discount that as being God thats doing the telling.I'm still thinking on the second half of your post...------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

I really don't see God as having a gender. I guess you would have a good argument if you called him asexual. Like you said I refer to God as 'Him' mainly for historical purposes. It seems rather derogatory, at least in my opinion to call God 'it.'If I'm historically called 'Bob,' it will elicit an eye roll if you call me 'Mellisa.' Furthermore, it would elicit an eye roll if you insist on calling me 'Tom.'------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

I think that because the concept of the greater good is beyond the scope of our understanding, we have to act within the moral perameters that God has set up for us.Now, you also have to understand that sometimes God can work through moral and natural evils. For example: many times the death of a family member can drive other family members to look for answers. Many times it has been shown that they come to God. If one family memeber is saved, and they are used to save two more people which in turn save two more people...etc. than one event of moral or natural evil can save many. Of course this response is purely hypothetical and not based on a real understanding of what would be for the greatest good.hmmm... I'll see how this will fly. I think I'll need a beer after this is over, oh wait... I'm not old enough to buy beer, that suks.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

This is compatable to my view that there is no such thing as evil, just a lack of good.------------------
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein