The following does not disprove the idea of some kind of deist god who started everything off, but it does remove the need for such a being.
Thus scientists are falling into the same trap as the blind followers of religion, which is they are implicitly defining a role to God as the 'one who makes things work'. Since scientists have explained how things work the question of God does not arise. Those who argue from this angle have falsely assumed an attribute/essence of God in the same way Christians say God has a son or is love.
But with this method, scientists can eliminate certain gods from the discussion. For example, if the Bible says that every animal was made as we see it today, and that humans were created 6000 years ago, evolution and the evidence for it removes Yahweh from the picture. I think the koran teaches humans were made as we see them today after coming from a clot of Allah's blood. So Allah too can be removed from the discussion.
When we look around at everything we can sense, these things share one factor, and that is that they are all limited. By limited we mean that they have restrictions, a starting point and an ending point, and they all have definable attributes, i.e. they are finite. Man is born and he dies. There is no one alive who will not die. During his life span, he will grow to a certain shape, height and volume. The universe is defined as all the celestial bodies... All these objects have a certain mass, shape, volume and so on. The life span of a star may be very long, but a point in time will come when it will cease to exist.
Perhaps it should be worth repeating what many people may have forgotten from their school lessons. Energy cannot be destroyed, but it can be transferred. For example, when animals die, their bodies decompose in the ground and transfer their energy. The energy is not destroyed. It becomes food for other animals, etc. When a star dies, it gives off a burst of energy/matter which helps to create new stars. While things are finite in the way we observe them, they are eternal in that they change in some way and help new things to 'arise'.
....No matter how hard we try, man is unable to find anything unlimited around him. All he can perceive is the finite and limited. A further attribute of everything around us is that they are all needy and dependent in order to continue existing. They are not self-sustaining or independent.... Nothing man can perceive is self-subsistent. So things exist, but do not have the power of existence....
We may be perceiving an infinite universe. While ours certainly had a beginning, the universe itself (as in everything outside this one too) could be infinite. Our sun is self sustaining, in that it doesn't get its energy from outside itself. But it is limited in how long it can sustain itself, I'll agree.
There is one fact that emerges from all this. If something is limited and finite, and does not have the power to be self-subsistent then it must have been created.
An alternative would be that the universe has always existed, and has always passed on its energy in different ways to keep things moving along. It may be hard to fathom, so what's helped me is to look forwards for a moment instead- I believe the universe will always exist in some way or another. Even if it looks nothing like it does now, the components are here, the energy is here, it can be self sustaining. I look backwards in the same way. If the future is eternal, then why can't the past be eternal? Like numbers. We can count 1, 2, 3 and so on forever. We can also count -1, -2, -3 and so on forever.
Dependent on something to start and sustain life, and something to plan and develop life.
If this universe has been planned to sustain life, how is it that out of a billion billion planets, only one that we know of supports life? How come the life on this planet would die instantly in any other part of the universe except for within this atmosphere, on land that is not too cold and not too hot on a planet which has more oceans than land, near to drink and food sources and which needs to make shelter for itself much of the time because the elements in the nicest places still aren't nice enough? As planning goes, it isn't a good plan.
Some scientists challenge this with a theory that everything depends on something for existence, which in turn depends upon something for existence, and so on ad infinitum. This theory is irrational, as it...uses an idea of 'infinity' that we know does not exist in reality....
But we don't know this. While things within the universe can die out, they help new things come to be. The cycle continues. Whatever happened just before the big bang could still have been a natural event. There may be countless universes, with the death of one helping a new one form. There could be one, which expands, is destroyed, yet passes on all its energy in creating a new big bang. There are many many theories, none of which require a god. It will be exciting to find out what really happens.
Hence, looking at any planet in the universe, contemplating on any phase of life, or comprehending any aspect of man provides a conclusive evidence for a Creator, what Muslims call Allah(SWT)
Of course if it turns out there was a god behind the big bang, it certainly won't be Allah. It's more likely to be Atum, who people believed made the universe by ejaculaing it into existence.
