1) There is still always the question of where to start when looking at evidence. In terms of the question that started this thread, different people find it w

1) There is still always the question of where to start when looking at evidence. In terms of the question that started this thread, different people find it worthwhile (or not) to spend time considering particular questions based on past experience and assumptions. For people wanting a good place to discuss various topics, is that really what you want or do you want people who don't value that discussion to value it? What prevents people who want to discuss the topic from actually doing so? Possibly that many more people are willing to offer a piece of their perspective than spend much (or any) time considering alternatives? That is basically what I have to offer on religion. I looked at your site and a few things I didn't see are a discussion about how identifying as Christian affects your daily life, how you came to consider Christianity as an option, how "cosmic coincidences" are evidence of any god, or even if so how those cosmic coincidences translate into your particular religious actions such as quoting the bible. My perspective is that most religions have been spread primarily by violence and these violent interactions explain the overall picture of religion in the world today independent of the truth of the deistic claims of any particular religion (but potentially related to effectiveness of particular religions as a psychological hack to enable optimal violence for spreading that religion). 2) Why do you consider "a creator" as helping with that question? I am not particularly interested in "why something rather than nothing?" because I can't even imagine what a satisfying answer could possibly be.