He is capable of thinking for himself.
I’m not sure what cosmology has to do with it or why you think we can look to cosmology for the answer. You are only ever going to find what happened, interesting as that may be.
If that was unlikely to happen do we need an explanation? Or is it a bit like the lottery in which what ever happens is unlikely, so we’d expect that?
And is it explanation enought to say this is what we’d expect to find? Does it really tell us why one thing happens rather than another?
I think these are mostly philosophical questions and you are just not interested in philosophy. But your belief system is based on it interested or not.
Way back early in this thread Adonai wished me luck getting him to think. His arguments consist of nothing more than cutting and pasting from web sites. He even uses quotes from nonbelievers (Steven Weinberg being the most cited example) to back up his claim that an invisible sky daddy created the universe. That is not thinking, it is action from indoctrination.
As for cosmology versus philosophy, I disagree with you. This is a science question. Explaining the origin of the universe is well outside the expertise of philosophy and religion. Any philosopher who thinks he can succeed in explaining how the universe came into existence is going to fail. We cannot know why until we learn how, and as I’ve said before why may by nothing more than a philosophical solipsism. It is quite likely that any clues about the origin of the universe were destroyed at t=0 and we’ll never have an answer.
If we do figure out what happened at t=0 we’ll then have an even greater mystery. What happened before t=0? When we get there cosmologists will be hard at work finding the answer, and philosophers will be on the sidelines talking.
Philosophy has its place. I don’t like philosophy when philosophers dabble in science and think they are doing something meaningful. That makes as little sense as looking for ethical laws in physics.