Dwilt;
I don't know the phrase 'fully gifted creation', but this is something I have been going on about in various conversations with various people. Some people see god as a plate spinner, starting things and keeping things going; this is a traditional Christian concept. Others see god as a potter, who made it as you see it. Others still view god as a landscaper; one who worked out a plan, set it in motion, and stood back to let natural process make their vision.
Evolution and god are not mutually exclusive of each other. I cannot understand why people go for falsifiable theories or contradictory theories like Creationism (YEC and OEC) and Intelligent Design when they can believe in god and accept modern science as detailing the process used. All Moses (if it was he) was doing was detailing the process used from his cultural viewpoint and level of knowledge. There are SO many flaws in then first few chapters of Genesis any other interpretation is unsound.
Of course, there are many who cling to a literalistic interpretation of the Bible for ideological reasons, but the intellectual gymnastics that are required to try and match the evidence with the ancient texts are unconvincing.
I would say that there is a logical problem with a supposedly caring and loving god that has gone to every effort to make him or herself a mater of belief. The arguments used that belief is nessecary and the existence of proof would spoil this always smack of casuistry.
I would also say that there is no clear signal that the Bible is any more or less a divine book than any other major relgions divine book, or that the Isaraelites were anything other than a bunch of bronze-age ethinic cleansers, or that Jesus existed.
Once again, the existence of such doubts seems illogical given a Christian paradigm of god.
Obviously, god cannot be disproved. That is different from god existing. I frimly believe if it mattered we would KNOW, there would be no doubt - any other scenario puts god in a very dodgy situation as regards fairness.
Of course, god doesn't have to be fair. But the idea god is unfair is illogical, and if it turns out that way €uck it, a despot is a despot and I won;t live under a despot.
The possibility that we are actually not important to whatever created the Universe (if it was created) seems to be a option that few people consider; just as most human ideas of god are very petty and anthromoporhic, so to the idea that we MUST matter seems a rather arrogant assumption in the absemnce of any firm proof.
And finally, as you have learnt over the past few year Dwilt, it really is quite possible the Universe has got to where it is via naturalistic processes without divine guidance; I know you've not always thought this. How it actually started is moot, but if it's possible that once it's running it works as cosmological and evolutiuonary theories generally define, there is another possibility.
No god. That the Universe came into being via exotic physical processes, but still naturalistic ones.
This requires no more belief than in there being a designer, as the designer immediately gets us into a situation where a designer must be explained, and their designer must be explained, etc..
It comes down to there being a god who hides, a god who doesn't care, or no god.
The latter seems most likely.
