First, although we are not sure why the universe exists, we have some pretty good ideas.
Why questions are philosophy not science.
Perhaps you mean "how".
It depends on the level of abstraction we are using in the discussion. In fundamental physics there is no concept of cause and effect. Everything is probabilistic wave functions, and we use the concept of particles and fundamental forces to define the interactions of these functions. If we confine ourselves to a discussion of fundamental physics, which would be appropriate to a discussion on origins, both universal and human, then the word how is appropriate.
But most regular people, including someone like yourself, don't use the language of physics when they talk about the emergent properties of the universe that we experience through our senses, which is the world of humans and trees and computers. In this layer of abstraction, we (usually erroneously) perceive cause and effect, and we often use the word why instead of how. So tell me, do you want to continue this discussion in the language of physics or in the language of everyday experience?
Inflationary cosmology gets us a long way towards explaining how the present day universe came to exist from a very small, very dense point, by describing how spacetime can expand exponentially through the action of quantum fields. We even have experimental data that supports such a hypothesis (look up 2013 Planck data).
You'll get no argument from me on that. The bible says the universe is expanding.
Really? I was not aware of that. Where does the Bible describe Inflationary and Big Bang expansion of the universe?
Also, you may be confusing inflationary cosmology with Big Bang cosmology. They are not the same. Inflationary cosmology describes the proposed mechanism by which our universe (or a tiny low entropy speck of spacetime) expanded exponentially in a trillion, trillion, trillionth of a second following t=0. This expansion is believed to have been driven by a scalar field similar to the Higgs Field. Big bang cosmology describes the much, much slower, steady state expansion of the universe which followed inflation, and which is driven by dark energy.
The point is that physicists have a model that describes the formation of the visible universe from a tiny, low entropy state to what we can observe today (about 90 billion light years or so). We have measurements that appear to confirm various aspects of this model. We are not certain if this model is correct, but a testable (?) hypothesis exists. Your assertion that atheists have no answers is a falsehood.
Your assertion that atheists in general, or cosmologists/physicists in particular, have no hypothesis is a falsehood.
Where did I assert that?
Here.
There are a lot of Christian and Muslim arguments that boil down to "I have an answer and you don't, therefore my answer is correct."
My position - even if I wasn't certain - would be that a weak hypothesis is better than no hypothesis. But if you're OK with ignorance, suit yourself.
At least, that is how I read it.
I haven't and wouldn't assert that someone has no hypothesis/theory/belief.
They can say so themselves. And claiming that the universe is uncaused IS a theory, so no way am I accusing atheists of having no theory.
But what I DO contend is that 'a' theory is better than no theory and that, if you don't know, you're not in a very strong position to declare that nobody knows.
A search of current literature on physics and cosmology dealing with origins will yield you no results for causation. None whatsoever. Because, at the fundamental level, our universe is not described by cause and effects. It is all wave functions and interactions. And, as I have just pointed out, physicists do have models that appear to answer at least some of the origins questions.
The "theory" that the universe was created by the god described in the Bible has no evidence to support it. Prove me wrong, show me your work. Explain
1. How you can verify that this god creature exists, and
2. Provide details on how this god created the universe.
Simple. Yet theists refuse to get the point. Your Biblegood is about as likely to be the universal creator as Bantu, the Supreme Cosmic Toad, which allegedly farted the universe into existence. Your "theory" is not just unsupported, it has no explanatory power. It avoids the questions of our origins rather than trying to come up with a real answer.
Second, the holy books that Christians and Muslims look to for answers are compilations of mythology and folklore, mixed in with stories that their authors made up. That is obvious from even a cursory, unbiased review of the Bible and Quran.
Nope. Firstly the book came after the events described IN the book.
Moses didn't read about God in "The Bible"
Job didn't trust in a God he discovered in the Old Testament.
Secondly, your claim that everything in the bible is "made up" mythology is just that. A claim.
Thirdly, you don't get to conflate atheism with the word "unbiased". Neither do you get to assume that biblical theists aren't unbiased. It is quite circular to argue that someone only believes the evidence because of their biased predisposition to
believe the evidence.
The supernatural claims in these books are unsupported by evidence or even reason.
They are actually very well supported by evidence and reason.
Then stop dicking around and show us the evidence. Show us your god, or a reasonable facsimile, and explain how this god exists and does stuff. You won't do this because you have no evidence, just a book of old stories that you have indoctrinated yourself into believing.
Christians and Muslims have a hard time believing that the universe exists because of naturalistic causes that could someday be completely explained by science,
God is entirely natural.
And I know very few biblical theists who think it's an irreconcilable choice between science OR theism.
Just as science discovered how electricity 'works' so too will it eventually discover that there's nothing really all that
miraculous about the abilities of a Higher Being.
Show the caveman a cigarette lighter and he thinks the flame is a miracle.
If aliens show up in a time machine and anti-gravity hoverboards are we all going to bow down and worship their miracles?
No. We will assume that they know stuff we haven't learned yet.
What other 'miracles' might those alien life forms be able to do? Change water into wine? Heal disease using their mind?
The scientific mind says mysteries can be solved/understood. It says sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
So why would we dismiss as fiction something in the bible we don't understand?
Why so skeptical as to the possibility that;
I am skeptical of that possibility because I have seen no evidence. And because the Bible is contradicted by reality in many of its claims, supernatural or otherwise. The Bible reads exactly like you would expect a book of mythology written 2,000 years ago to read.
Theists like yourself will keep on typing post after post but cannot be persuaded to provide evidence to support your beliefs. How hard can it be? I will post my sources on how physicists believe the universe came to be if you would like me to. Show me yours and I will show you mine.
...an intelligent, self aware, technologically advanced entity capable of creating universes just happens to exist.
Where's you open mind?
I am open to the possibility. All you have to do to convince me is to provide evidence to support your claims. Why are you so unwilling to do that?
While it is hypothetically possible that our universe was created through the agency of some intelligent entity that exists outside its boundaries, it is virtually impossible that said entity resembles the gods described in the Bible and the Quran, or that the authors of these old books had any knowledge of this entity.
I agree it's very unlikely God resembles your interpretation of what they wrote.
The god described in the Bible is a petty minded tyrant and despot who does not hesitate to order genocide and mass murder, and will torture everyone who doesn't bow down to him for all eternity. He is also a complete fuckup who cannot get a project done right. He also has an unhealthy interest in people's sex lives. Biblegod sounds just like the kind of god that our ancestors from 2,000 years ago might invent. Would you like me to elaborate and quote passages from the Bible that support my statements now?
