OK, God created the Universe, Time, Space, Energy, etc .. Fine. That still doesn't explain why there is not nothing. Deal with it, theists.
Sounds like you didn't understand the observation. "God" does not answer the question, despite constantly being offered as the answer. God is something. He can't be the answer to why there is something rather than nothing.
Then what is the answer? There is nothing science offers as an answer. But, philosophically God can be the answer. Why? Because science has no answer. Unless one is a scientist then one need not even grapple with this dilemma. And even then the scientist knows that man's study of the universe is not complete. Mankind has only scratched the surface of the knowledge of our own universe so how can science answer any questions beyond that? It cannot. Believing in the existence of God is perfectly acceptable.
No one knows. No, he can't. God is something. God can only exist in a reality in which there is something rather than nothing. He can't possibly be the answer for anyone with the critical thought capacity to realize this. Whether or not science can answer the question has literally nothing to do with this observation. Nothing. At all.
God created spaghetti to show us he was real, one just has to open their eyes to the truth at one time the world had no spaghetti, that was to make us appreciate his creation all the more be thankful we live in a time spaghetti is plentiful
How do you know where God can and cannot exist? Science does have a theory of many dimensions, some we are not aware of. You need to keep in mind that the reality we perceive is based on a certain number of dimensions. If other dimensions exist, that could present an entirely different reality than what we perceive. Yes, God can be the answer in a philosophical sense. Even if mankind cannot use science to explain our existence, here we are anyway. Do you think gravity did not exist until humans observed it and gave it a name? Of course not. If one observes the "life force", if you will, and wants to call that God then so be it. Science does not explain many mysteries of our existence yet here we are.
God is something. If God exists, there is something rather than nothing. Get it? Yes. And? Only if we abandon all critical thought and ignore the question entirely. No, we don't. Because if God exists, there is already something rather than nothing. As true as it is completely unrelated to anything we are talking about. Yes. And it still is completely unrelated to anything we are talking about. Neither does God. At least not this particular mystery. I repeat, and I predict you will ignore this again: If God exists, there is already something rather than nothing.
I see the talk about other dimensions went right over your head..... Sorry but the universe we live in had a beginning. This has been proven over and over.
If I look inside a soda can and do not see evidence of a person, does it mean that person does not exist? By the OP logic they would not exist.
Sure, but believing in God does not explain why there is not nothing. The same logic must ask why even God exists, or the nature of existence that predates the Universe that this God supposedly exists in accordance with exists. Ultimately, I find it impossible that something could come from nothing. Therefore, I believe time/space/matter/energy has always existed.
Why do we exist? I'm not sure but I trust a scientist's fact based reasoning more than the pope's faith based reasoning. Science has no evidence for a God at this time and little evidence for creation of the universe. Religions don't have much evidence either. The bible is not a reliable source.
Well, the thing with the cosmological argument is that it relies on the statement "everything must have a reason", otherwise there isn't a conundrum in the first place. If God didn't require a mover/cause, then that statement is broken, and the argument fails.
I don't think there is anything about science here. The cosmological argument is that for anything to exist, it needs to have a cause (there are many variations on this theme). There are things that exist. God is postulated as the first cause, violating the first premise, that everything needs to have a cause. No scientific method in there, it's mostly logic. There are a couple of variations, but they can all be addressed in this way.
You are talking about things in our existence. We are bound by the laws of this universe we live in. God is not.
If there is any context in which the rules don't apply, then the rules are not universal and cannot be used to uphold an argument, so the cosmological arguments break. The cosmological argument relies in the idea that everything must have a cause, if there is a context in which something (like god) does not need to have a cause, then that idea fails, and cannot be used to construct the argument in the first place.
The rules of our universe are the rule of our universe. Science does not even know all the rules of our existence. With that fact, science is not qualified to answer the question of the existence of God. Gravity existed way before science gave it a name and acknowledged it. Before science acknowledged gravity it was called "falling down". Until science acknowledges the origins of the universe it is perfectly ok to say God created it.