>>52
Of course they sound like total cop-outs, no doubt about it, but they are valid, unfortunately.
No, they're not. They are absolutely not.
In our prayer test, there was no difference in the condition of those 500 people who died. Either God doesn't exist, or he chose to let all those people die *just to confound scientists*. Just to keep us on our toes, to leave us without evidence, to require faith from us. Does that sound like the loving, caring biblical God?
At this point in our technological development (or in the very near future), census programs combined with the computerization of medical records will allow trivial state-wide statistical tests on the effects religion has on medical health. In other words, if He wants to stay in the dark, he's going to have to stop answering prayers. ALL prayers.
At some point, "God works in mysterious ways" means "God has no observable effects on the universe", in which case the whole point is moot and the question of whether he exists is nonsense.
You can't respond to the existence of million year old dinosaur fossils with "God planted them to test our faith". You can't respond to your God letting hundreds, thousands of people die just to hinder the advancement of knowledge with "God works in mysterious ways". Sorry, that's not valid; science does not work that way, and reality does not work that way.