Firstly, thank you enki for at least taking on the challenge I’ve being given out. I respect that, so I think it would be wrong of me to criticize in any way the outline of your journey. Therefore I’ll cover your points by using the quote at the end of your post, which I’ll break down:
My belief is that the cause was supernatural. Order from disorder can happen naturally (e.g. snowflake, sand dunes), but intelligence from non-intelligence? Laws from non-laws? Life from non-life?
Also my belief, based on what is written in the Bible. From the creation of the first human beings in Genesis right through to Revelation, one sees time and time again the Lord God interacting with human beings.
I believe that the way God demonstrated His love for us was by sending His Son Jesus Christ into the world to die on the cross for our sins.
The answering of questions bit is more tricky. I believe that some answers are to be found in the Bible and some answers I believe have been answered as a result of prayer. Not all of my questions though. Therefore, if I’m not getting an answer, does it mean that God doesn’t exist, or is there some other explanation. My thought is this: Does the lack of an answer affect the existence (or otherwise) of God as an objective truth? No.
It can’t in my opinion! We know from observation that things that have a beginning require a cause. Methodological naturalism requires intelligent order to come from disorder and things to create themselves from nothing. For me, a top-down model for explaining life on earth is consistent with observation. The first animals / plants / human beings are created with all the necessary functionality to live and propagate, including reproductive ability and genetic variation and / or loss results in the variety of life, DNA being the blueprint for all living organisms. Under this model there is no
Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
Which came first? The seed or the plant?
I was born from my mother, who was born from her mother, who was born from her mother, ... (how is this regression terminated?)
In contrast, I would suggest that all of these examples should falsify a naturalistic model. I would also suggest sexual reproduction should, because under the evolutionary model where things happen over a long period of time, at what point did life that didn’t reproduce sexually start reproducing sexually? How did male and female undergo the relevant anatomical changes at what would have to be the same rate in order to then at some point be able to mate?
Which, in a way illustrates why I have stayed with Christianity. Bertrand’s Celestial Teapot (and all arguments based on it) assume that there is no evidence (or even reasons to believe) for the Christian faith, i.e. blind faith is used. However, you would be surprised at what actions we human beings do in other areas, which suddenly become a problem for some when it comes to belief in God.
Firstly, there is written information (the Bible). Secondly, there is creation. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, human beings design and make things. What are the qualities of the things we make? Are there similarities elsewhere? If so, then an argument can be made. We have creation and I would also throw in moral laws (again, human beings make laws, why should we assume that we are the only one capable of doing so?). Are there universal moral laws? I would suggest so, and often a good way to illustrate this is in the way we react to things. If there are no moral laws, then where does e.g. that sense of injustice come from? Why is there any basis for having right vs wrong behaviour?
Since I keep on mentioning falsifiability, it’s only right that I apply it to my own Christian faith (although I have already mentioned it elsewhere). If Jesus Christ didn’t rise from the dead, then no Christian faith. Yes, I have to believe this by faith, but I’ve chosen to. I have no reason not to believe the Gospel accounts. For example: Why should I disbelieve the Gospel accounts from 2000 years ago, yet believe the claim of someone who says that “Life started in the sea 4 billion years ago” (Sir David Attenborough). I can’t even begin to verify that one!!
I would accept that personal experience can be unreliable, but personally I would find it hard to stay a Christian if e.g. I never felt that I had seen an answer to prayer.
Ok, that’s a summary. There’s much more I could add. It doesn’t mean that I don’t have lots of questions regarding my own faith, but that’s all part of the journey. 
This seems to me to be just a protestation of your own faith. And if you find it convincing then fair enough.
So, just a few comments:
I don't see this as a 'journey' for me, at all. It's simply my way of looking critically at the statements, assertions and arguments of those who suggest that their god actually exists.
The thought experiment was not created to suggest that this is what actually happens, but to suggest that this would be a means of convincing me that the supernatural does exist. Your suggestion that because this does not happen does not disprove the existence of your God is not is what was being asked for.
As everything needs a cause, then why do you stop at God?
Just because abiogenesis hasn't yet got an adequate explanation, does this mean that to say that God created life is an explanation? If so, can you explain(in minute detail) how he created the first life on this planet? Please take note, I'm not asking you to tell me what He did, but how He did it. Unless you can do so, then I'll stick with 'not yet knowing' thank you.
Everything I observe in the natural world suggests that rather than it being the result of a top down model, it is the exact opposite. Incidentally, there are still certain organisms which do not reproduce sexually.
I accept that you see the bible as being some sort of evidence for your particualr views. I don't.
If I were to accept your idea that because humans design things, and that the world shows evidence of design, suggesting a designer god also, then I would have to come to these conclusions:
1) The world, which, on this view, shows numerous examples of faulty design, would illustrate the imperfection of its designer.
2) As human beings have descended from much simpler organisms, then so should this designer god.
As I see morality as being relative, your question of where does our sense of injustice come from, would be answered as being associated with evolution. Ditto, for 'right' and 'wrong' behaviour. If you want a fuller answer, you will find my views and arguments for my position in Mess. 133, which was very kindly put on the 'Forum Best Bits' Thread in the General Discussion Section by Nearly Sane.
Unlike you, I don't take the view that the gospel accounts have to be believed in their entirety. I do think that there probably was a person called Jesus, who had a powerful effect on his followers. I don't see any evidence for the miraculous happenings which the gospels enunciate however, and don't see any evidence that his God(either in a unitarian or trinitarian mode) exists. On the other hand, there is a large amount of evidence that suggests that life started in watery habitats, leading me to the conclusion that this is probably, I repeat, probably, correct.
Finally, you can believe that your prayers have been answered by your God as much as you like, but there is a large amount of evidence that this, when it seems to happen, is purely the result of coincidence or correlation rather than causation. And of course this takes no account of the vast number of instances when prayers do not have any positive outcome whatever.
Faith is not an option for me. Your 'journey' as you call it, is up to you, and I wish you well.
