I often feel a sense of comfort, difficult to describe to one who does not believe. As for grace? That is belief.
I do not know, but I see no evidence to the contrary. Why, if he is a being who desires relationship, would he want to deceive me? No, I don't know his mind. If I did, I would not have to believe, would I?
That's not love. Plain and simple. Coerced or deceptive love is not true love.
I don't, but I see no proof of such ideas.
Again, I do not, I know only that which has been revealed.
If he was created by something else, he is not who he said he was. He is not I AM, if he had a beginning.
Well again it is a matter of belief, I don't claim to know anything.
You say natural, yet what is natural or logical about something obtaining existence from non-existence? I don't know the universe needs a cause, but it seems only logical. Things don't just pop into existence, even if granted billions of years.
What does that look like, for you?
"Pretty good" isn't enough if we are talking about truth, empirical or otherwise.
Evil is essentially a rejection of God and love. What you are really asking for is God removing any choice as to whether or not we love or accept him. God is not authoritarian when it comes to love. He does not force us to love him. Forced love is not true love.
Not if your understanding of omnipotence is by premise oxymoronical. Can I be evil and good at the same time? Rich and poor at the same time (in strict senses)? Of course not. This omnipotence hypothesis is flawed because it assumes that God can be both good and evil at the same time. Such an idea is illogical. Your premise suggests that if God is all powerful he must be able to be good, and he must be able to be evil. But if evil is by definition a rejection of God, how therefore can he be evil unless he somehow rejects himself?
To my question or his statement?