I have just read the late Isaac Asimov's book on "Guide to Earth and Space". He was a Humanist a philosopher, thinker, and a well known prolific writer. Known for his works of science fiction and popular science. I ordered his book because of my interest in the Universe and found it very informative reading on the subjects of the formation of Galaxies, Red Giants, White Dwarfs, Supernovas, Nebula our own Solar system, the Sun it's Planets and of course our own home of Earth and Moon.
However our views on beyond the Big Bang are poles apart. In this book he casts aside the concept of Creationism but also grappled as with many Scientists the question of what was beyond the point of the Big Bang.
Such a shame for a great man in his book "It's been a Good Life!" that he died without finding the answer that is God, and hence he was behind the Beginning of our Universe.
As with many others grappling with this problem the eventual answer for them has been the concept of the Big Bang having taken place in a vast, illimitable sea of nothingness has been assumed. Yet presumably within this sea of nothingness there contained energy, hence a tiny point of existence appears where the energy just happened. By blind chance of the forces of random changes to have concentrated itself. Scientist are still struggling with this model to inevitably solve and patch it up as the question as where the energy in this vacuum a sea of nothingness came from,
In Isaac Astimov's own words; "It won't help us to suppose that at that point there was a supernatural creation. For then we would be taking a step backwards to answer where the supernatural entity came from. The shocking answer to which is usually.
"He did not come from anywhere, He always was".
Is that a any more difficult to visualize than that of our existence happened where energy just appeared and combined with blind forces of random changes.This all supposedly occurring within a vast illimited sea of nothingness. Surely the idea of God creating the Universe is more believable and likely than believing in blind forces of chance that would not have existed prior to the creation of the Universe.
After detailing all the facts and information that he has within this book including the laws of nature and the Universe that bind and hold everything in unison, to all that we see here on Earth and beyond. He would as a profound thinker have seen beyond what can be seen, into life beyond.
As the British physicist James Jeans (1877-1946) once stated;
"The universe appears to have been designed by a pure mathematician" As mathematics appears to be almost too effective in describing and explaining not only the Cosmos at large, but even some of the most chaotic of human enterprises.
"How is it possible that mathematics a supposed product of human thought that is independent of experience fits so excellently the objects of phyical reality"? Albert Einstein
In his book "Time and Eternity", Professor William Lane Craig defends the remarkable conclusion that God is indeed timeless.
I think it would have helped this intellegent man and the others who doubt to have acknowledged that God does exist and He is the answer to the Creation of the Universe, it's laws, and everything that holds it together down to our very being and life on Earth.