Logical Frustrations

I recently read Ray Comfort's introduction to the Origin of Species and came away highly frustrated. There is a certain type of misrepresentation here that I want to clarify. We can use this quote from page 39 as an example, " So if I was an atheist, I would see that I have an intellectual dilemma, If I deny that there is a God, I am saying nothing created everything, and that's a scientific impossibility."

First off, I do not claim atheism as I feel claiming there is certainly NO God is just as bold and unsupported as claiming there certainly IS a God.

Second off, the claim that denying the existence of a god is saying nothing created everything is also misleading in my views. I simply claim to not understand where everything came from, but propose to study and think openly in order to find a solution I can put some faith in. By thinking that it ABSOLUTELY came from a God, or from nothing I am limiting my understanding.

Finally, this idea of a scientific impossibility is one I dislike. It MAY be a scientific impossibility but it also MAY merely be a scientific impossibility within today's scientific understanding. 500 years ago we thought things were made of elements of fire and rock and earth and all that garbage. Our understanding of our own existence is far more complex and getting complexer everyday. Let's keep pushing for that rather than becoming complacent with one view or another.