Told ya.
\
At least TBF, it is more honest to state there will be no satisfactory answer and go straight to the scornful dismissal part.
I try really hard to only scornfully dismiss claims that can in no way be demonstrated to comport with know reality and any attempt to claim the reasons one believes are sound and that I should believe too.
Has anybody done that in this thread?
Physicists have absolutely theorized of fundamental forces that exist outside of space and time. In fact, some think that spacetime is an emergent product of some more fundamental force or component.
Where you’d likely get pushback is that this logically means the existence of, say, a Christian God. But something existing outside of, and unconstrained by, spacetime is not necessarily some fable created by theists. If you called the very notion an act of faith, you’d likely get a raised eyebrow from many physicists.
As a notion, yeah.
But as a definite answer to “Where is God?” Given by those without anything close to the proper scientific background?
It’s
Why do so many people still believe in God?,
not
Why do so many posters in this thread still believe in God?
So many people still believe in God because we seem to have an innate need to believe in something bigger than ourselves, something we can’t easily explain, and the sense that someone is in our corner, helping us along. Doesn’t matter if it’s real or not, as long as we believe in it.
People believe in god because the night is dark and full of terrors. People believe in god because they miss their dead loved ones. People believe in god because they can’t wrap their head around non-existence. People belive in god for many reasons, but no one ever came to believe in god because they were shown proof that it exists. People believe in god because they need to.
I’ve been both a devout fundamentalist Christian and an atheist.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but the universe makes no sense to me. There is no satisfying answer to the problem of existence.
I think that God can be a very satisfying answer for some people. I was listening to a podcast about cults the other day and it described “voluntary surrender” as effectively when people cede control of their life to something to bigger because it’s easier than having to make decisions all the time. Part of the draw of religion is that you don’t have to suffer with uncertainty and there’s a whole book telling you what to do with your life, which is very handy.
As an atheist I suffer with uncertainty that I didn’t when I was a Christian. But I also found that Christianity couldn’t support the weight of reality - God is not a satisfying answer to the problem of existence, either. We have no answers. We have to live with that. Do I blame anyone for running away from that cold reality? Not really. To believe is human. The problem for me comes when you start trying to force me to live according to your religion. Then we’re gonna fight.
I read an interview with a deist in Skeptic Magazine a while ago, and this was his reason. He knew enough about the universe to not believe in any western god, but he clearly had a need to believe in some god, so deism was an honest choice. Martin Gardner was a deist also.
I think it is genetic. The universe makes no sense to me either, but that doesn’t bother me in the slightest. But I understand why people find this unsatisfying.
Just want to second / third this.
The fact that anything exists is mind blowing. We can’t see past cause and effect, nothing else seems to make sense, and yet that cannot be the end of the story.
Some will invoke god to try to terminate this cause and effect, some suggest an infinite chain, some will say the universe “just is”…all of these are really different deflections rather than a true explanation (e.g. if the universe is eternal, why this universe or multiverse?)
So personally I just accept we don’t know.
Sometimes this fact seems terrifying. Other times I’m just awestruck that, whatever the story is of this universe, whatever the mystery is behind its existence, and other mysteries that I’m not even aware of yet…I get to be a part of it for another day 
I don’t remember him using that word about himself. I believe he called himself a “philosophical theist.” If anyone cares what he believed and why, consult his Wikipedia article for the short version or read his book The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener for the long version.
Speaking of which, quite a few thoughtful, well-educated people have written about why they believed in God (as well as some who have written about why they did not believe). The reasons given are not identical by any means, though there are some common themes which arise.
Follow the money.
I’m very good friends with a Presbyterian minister. I am all the time asking him religious and philosophical questions because I’m very interested in how people make sense of this mysterious universe. We always joke that asking him a theology question is like summoning an esper (old Final Fantasy VI reference where you basically summon a god to fight for you.) Well, now I’m going to have to ask him, “Why do you believe in God?” That may be the most lengthy conversation yet.
On a smaller scale, this is why conspiracy theories are popular, or why the flat earth thing is growing; people would much prefer to just believe something unsupported but comfortable than accept that they do not know, or that something may be too complex to fully understand, or that NOBODY knows.
Personally I have no problem whatsoever with accepting that there are things I don’t know and that no one knows. I see the universe as being probabilities, not certainties. Doesn’t bother me in the slightest, and that is likely the vast majority of the reason I’m an atheist and a skeptic. But that’s just me and I don’t know why I am like that.
There’s a huge difference (at least I think it’s huge) between “I want to believe” and “I believe”. Sure, it would be fun to believe all kinds of interesting stuff that doesn’t actually exist, which Is why fiction is so popular. Actually believing it is a different matter, especially when we’re talking about things that have been disproven, like the vast majority of conspiracy theories, as opposed to something like God, which may not be amenable to scientific study depending on one’s definition.
You may (or may not) be getting at this,
“Nonresistant nonbeliever” is really a shorthand for someone who is (i) not resisting God and (ii) capable of a meaningful conscious relationship with God, and yet who does not (iii) believe that God exists (Schellenberg 2007).
And it’s a problem for gods with certain attributes.
It also runs into the equivocation fallacy with regards to the word believe.
I.E. There’s can be a very big difference between;
I believe god exists, and I believe in god.
But indeed looking back into the OP question, it mentions nothing about proselytism or about imposition upon others. It only speaks to the notion of continuing belief in spite of changing understandings of the world.
I, too, oppose those seeking to force me to live by their teachings or to prevent me from challenging those, and I’ll especially oppose those belief-based teachings and actions that implicate self-harm or harm to others.
OTOH the mere non-falsifiable belief in something beyond the material, based on faith and subjective experience and not reproducible evidence(*), is by, in and of itself, not something I feel I must condemn.
( * and which, again, does not HAVE to be that which American Evangelical Christians preach about)
I’ve observed that many of these people, who have not had much success in life, feel good “knowing” something that the masses do not know. It makes them feel like part of an elite.