The want of an answer, is not sufficient grounds to just make one up. I am content with "I don't know".
Evolution/Atheism, by removing the Creator from the course of events has ended up with a huge Creator-sized hole in their theory that none of their naturalistic explanations can touch.
The theory of evolution does not propose an answer to the question of the origins of the universe. Only the progressive development of species, suggesting natural selection as a model, and random mutation as an engine.
You don't get something from nothing in the natural world at all. Even if there are protons, those are SOMETHING.
I'd agree. You don't get something from nothing.
And anything complex requires a creator.
So who created the creator?
And who created the creator's creator's creator?
And who created the creator's creator's creator's creator?
And who created the creator's creator's creator's creator's creator?
And who created the creator's creator's creator's creator's creator's creator?
And who created the creator's creator's creator's creator's creator's creator's creator?
I think you get the point.
You object to simplistic explanations of "something from nothing", so long as no one applies them to your Giant Invisible Bearded Guy.
For what it's worth... I find all scientific explanations of the origins of the known universe to be remarkably unsatisfying. But that doesn't mean I find assertions that it was created by a Giant Magical guy who gets really peeved if you do not properly genuflect and grovel before him, any more satisfying.
Demands for groveling and genuflecting sound to me like the worst traits of a man, and not the best traits of a God.
And the personal coming from impersonal matter?
I find the question of "nothingness to matter" to be as yet unanswered.
I don't find the question of "matter to man" all the puzzling.
And the idea of an objective basis for morality?
Not at all puzzling.
Sad point of view.
There is nothing sad at all about the fact that you will serve to nourish microbes after your death. The fact that you wish for, or even yearn for a magical mystery place for you to go after you die, where the floor is made of fluffy marshmallows, and butterflies are everywhere, and everyone is perfect... won't make it so. It is a wonderful fantasy, and these fantasies bring comfort to many... but fantasies they are.
It isn't objective.
Yes, it is.
It may be rationally derived, but it is derived from human beings preference and opinion- subjective elements which vary from person to person, group to group. As such, morality changes as society changes. There is no stable objective moral code in atheism.
The axioms (foundational truths) upon which I established the aforementioned moral code, do not "vary from person to person". That is what makes them axioms.
And I find it equally curious, that you assert your God as the source of the only one true and "objective" moral code, even while the guy halfway round the world asserts some Blue-skinned six-armed elephant-headed God as the source of the only one and true "objective" moral code.
And yet the codes are different.
And the only thing separating your advocacy of a Giant Cloud Walking Bearded Guy as the author of the only one and true morality, instead of a Blue-skinned six-armed elephant-headed guy as the author of the only one and true morality, is the fact that you happened to be born here, instead of there.
Had you been born elsewhere, you'd even now be attmepting to convince me of the truth of some other God.
And what is reality?
In order to be recognized as real, an entity must be tested by observation. As such, reality does not include Giant Cloud-Walking benevolent guys, and Blue-skinned six-armed elephant-headed creatures.
How do you test what reality is in order to know that reality is "real"?
In order to be recognized as real, an entity must be tested and its existed demonstrated by observation. An entity for which existence can be demonstrated, is real. An entity for which existence cannot be proven, does not qualify for recognition as "real". An entity whose very nature (God for example) is asserted to exist outside the domain of our ability to test (Magical Heaven for example) is arbitrary.