I have read nothing in the replies to my posts which contradict what I have stated. There have been some alternative explanations, and many labels such as "God of Gaps", "assertion", "non sequitur", "personal inredulity" etc. But nothing which directly shows I am wrong in what I say. So there is still no credible alternative for me. As the Psalmist so aptly put it: In God alone is my soul at rest.
I, as do others, contradict your views at times, Alan(e.g. souls/animals, evolution) but I suggest that generally your views are so amorphous as not to be able to be contradicted. This of course does not make your views impossible, but simply to give God as an explanation for any supernatural element(x) is to give no explanation at all. Unless you can produce evidence that x exists, where it is located, by what means it interacts with the material universe, and, most importantly, exactly how God is needed for x to function, then you constantly lay yourself open to the cry of 'assertion'.
If, for instance, we take the hard problem of consciousness, which science has no answer to at the present moment, to say it comes from God does not explain anything unless you can provide its location, produce the mechanisms by which He makes it work(in detail) and for which He could only be responsible. Now science at least tries to answer these questions with, for instance, a range of hypotheses from the growing field of quantum biology, which can be argued about, tested, challenged, modified, rejected etc. If, on the other hand, I simply say that consciousness comes from God, and we don't need to examine it(notice I said WE not I) but accept it as a matter of personal faith, then all that can possibly mean is that I accept it without explanation. This then becomes the world of assertion.
Several times you have suggested that all you want to do is convince others on this forum of the possibility that your God exists. I think that it is a little naive on your part to think that others have not considered this themselves and come to their particular conclusions. For me, I have no problem in fully accepting the possibility that your God exists, so you are preaching in my case to the converted. I would, of course, have to say, in the interests of rational thinking, that there is always the possibility that any god exists. However, in my case and for many reasons, possibility does not lead to belief at all.
