Another apologist with his "clever" questions

[Whateverist]

I have never considered Ravi Zckerias a particularly compelling speaker. At the same time, I'm rather sympathetic to 1, 2, and 5.

Really?  Number one about the big questions remaining unanswered?  But assigning god as an answer to a question for which we have no settled empirical answer is simply positing a second black box within the black box whose mechanism we are wondering about.  I can't very well settle for that without asking about the mechanism accounting for the functioning of the second box.  From here there are only two dodges available:

1) the one you prefer, there are limitations to human capacities which make comprehension of the inner black box possible;

or 

2) it is just inner-inner black boxes all the way down.


If there are a in principle reasons why the functioning of the inner box cannot be comprehended then why not just say at the outset we don't understand how the initial black box works?