I’m not sure it’s true that “the evidence that our universe was “caused” by a deity or supernatural being however is not there”. It seems to me that if God exists (which I find reasonable based on various arguments like cosmological, design, moral, and personal experience) and the universe exists (granted), that God would be the best-fit explanation for how the universe came into being.

William Lane Craig explores the topic here:
Must the Beginning of the Universe Have a Personal Cause?: A Rejoinder

That leads us to say, what kind of properties would the cause for our universe must possess, which Craig briefly addresses here (video):
What Properties Must the Cause of the Universe Have?

I’ve written my own post on the subject here:
http://www.whyfaith.com/2006/11/11/what-about-natural-theology/

Do no such restrictions apply because we haven’t discovered them?

What evidence is there to support that God is unchangeable or that God is the only creator ever? Why does what Kreeft say have any legitimacy when it holds no basis in reality, has no tangible or recordable evidence, and is only backed up by extravagant claims without extravagant evidence?

The evidence that our universe had a “cause” is there (well, the evidence that it hasn’t always existed is there)…the evidence that our universe was “caused” by a deity or supernatural being however is not there, so why is that assumption automatically okay to make and can it be incorrect?

Why does God find faith pleasing, especially in the face of doubt or hardship or darkness? Of course God wants relationship with us. Of course we need relationship with God. But what is it about faith, which I would define as knowledge/belief of God without direct proof or certainty,… what is it about faith that is so important to God. Why does He want us to believe without seeing? “Blessed are those who do not see, yet believe”

Why would He reply to Mother Theresa’s life and work and faith with a feeling of “nothing” for so many years?

You see, it is not just faith and transformation that God seems to want but the “going out on a limb” for Him that seems to please Him.

I guess it depends how we define “faith”. If faith is belief in something that is not warranted by good reasons, then it is mere belief; aka, blind faith.

The kind of faith that I mean when I use the word (such as in the title of this blog, heh) is more like belief in something that, while not provable to the same degree as 2+2=4, is still based on good reasons; faith being trust in something trustworthy.

In terms of my own faith, I wouldn’t say that I ultimately have faith (trust) in a specific set of ideas; rather, those ideas describe a person[al God], whom after learning about, I’ve had the pleasure of getting to know. A person is not saved by accepting a certain set of ideas per se, rather in accepting the gift that God is offering us as necessarily described by certain ideas.

I don’t know if that makes much sense, but that’s how I think about it. Thoughts? It’s kind of late so I may not have phrased this as eloquently as I would’ve liked.

Without a world that needs faith, you have certainty, and without certainty, there is no free will. OK, so faith is the only way to experience God in a world with free will. But why only faith in specific set of ideas?