Burn,
As is usual in these debates, I could try to pick your reply apart and put my spin on it in a negative way, but I won't (or rather, I'll try not to), because I partially agree with you. I did unfortunately address more or less only one specific kind of deity, something I try not to do in my replies, but I guess some thought patterns remain. It is hard to find evidence of something supernatural in a natural universe using naturalistic means(!). Perhaps impossible, because alternative explanations to a Creator could be given in any instance by describing how that Creator did it.
I think my point though, was that only some of us have spiritual experiences (I'm talking about the more 'physical' ones here; the kind I don't think any JWs ever have, and not just a 'feeling'). And so they can't be used as proof for those who never experience them. And although the universe is complex, that can't really be used as evidence either.
I've been thinking about creation, and why the universe looks and behaves the way it does if created. In a human-centric creation, I think my original point holds; that God could have expended much, much less energy and created only what would be necessary for us. After all, we haven't really been able to see more than a few thousand stars until a few hundred years ago, out of "countless" millennia of existence on the planet. We still probably can't see a myriad of galaxies out there. So the trillions of stars out there wasn't for our benefit, at least. Of course, it could be said that perhaps other creatures were created out there as well (non-human centric view). But unless there's intelligent life on a planet around every star, I don't think it would be necessary even then. God could have added and expanded the universe as the need would arise, without actually detracting from our view of it. One could say that we don't know the reasons for God's actions, but that stifles any debate about anything God-related. People could then assert pretty much anything they'd want about God and say "Do you know the reason he did it this way and not that way? No, so shut up!".
Radiation is not only harmful in this creation, as you point out. But why is it harmful at all? Earth quakes (plate movements) are good for creating mountain ranges etc., but why is the earth created that way at all, since it's also harmful - why not create it solid and already mountainous? The earth's magnetic field and atmosphere is good for protecting us against radiation and rocks hurling through space, but why does it only protect us against some radiation and the smallest rocks? Why do the hurling rocks in space exist at all? Etc. etc. etc.
While I was a JW growing up, I rationalized the existence of our neighboring planets and the massive universe by thinking that it was all tied together by gravity. That - pretty much - if you removed one planet, it could all collapse, and that God therefore had to create it that way. That earth's 'perfect' orbit around the sun was kept 'in check' by the other planets, and they therefore all had to be there. I don't think this is a very scientifically defendable thought, and not really a very theologically correct thought either, but it was the best I could do as a young JW, trying not to rattle the cage too much. I mean - as for a theological argument, being the Creator, God could very well create one spherical object around another in otherwise totally empty space if he wanted, and hold them there with his power. As for science, we now know how planets arise around a sun, we know how that sun arises. Each planet was not fashioned individually as if from clay and put into its preferred orbit. So those things kinda shoot my old "theory" to heck. They don't shoot all concepts of a creator to heck, of course. But the immense, intricate and complex but at the same time 'violent' (harmful to life), and somewhat flawed universe does pose a few questions.
Anyway, I'm starting to ramble here. Points: 1) Only a few people have spiritual experiences. 2) Much in the universe could be said to be the work of a Creator, but many things don't make sense in that view also, in my opinion. We have to start making excuses and qualifications for God; if we can't find an answer, the answer is simply "He has a reason". Then he must have a reason for giving me the ability to think rationally. Am I abusing that ability by questioning his actions? Or questioning his very existence?
Do people really have blind faith? I don't think so. Apart from the notion that complexity must have been created, I think those who believe have often had spiritual experiences, or so they claim. So - they have evidence for themselves, not blind faith. In that kind of universe, one has to wonder why not everyone has those experiences. Are some people 'doomed' pretty much from birth? If so, what's the point of trying to convert anyone? How come anyone has ever been converted? If some have very real spiritual experiences, why does God keep the rest of us guessing? Why create a universe that makes one wonder about these things at all?
