Rogel Alper

Thank you for the important discussion.
A point I was missing
Rogel Alper constantly pointed out, rather disdainfully, that the arguments and evidence for the existence of God are merely intuition, and it is difficult to lead an entire life according to this, compared to certain and proven science.
The problem with this argument is that all of science is built on exactly the same intuition of causality as the everyday things mentioned at the beginning of the discussion, and the correlations he saw yesterday are not an induction of what will happen tomorrow as the everyday thing claims.
On the other hand, Rogel Alper constantly talks and writes about morality and lives by it, when morality is also the fruit of intuition and has no proof, and he also leads life according to intuition. (Not that this would bother a follower of continental philosophy, for whom the question of creation only concerns him to the extent that it arouses wonder in him.)