It seems to me that the title of the thread puts the cart before the horse. The current favourite is a big bang creation, and there are observations which seem to support the theory, but there are those who argue that some observations, e.g., the CBR, support other theories, and that the BB has several flows which can only be overcome by assuming several improvable parameters such as dark matter and energy, a variable speed of light and universal constant of gravitation, strings, and a much higher z value than those observed at extreme distances from our position in space, to name but a few, besides the unanswerable question of what was it exactly that banged?
First creating a god or gods to credit them afterwards with the creation of a universe of some 4.2 x 10^52 kilograms seems to me like sweeping the embarrassing questions under the carpet. Nor is a syllogism or a philosophical discourse by Aquinas or Anselm or anyone else, a substitute for good scientific research.
Perhaps cosmologists shall one day discover a solution for the rapid expansion of a big bang universe which does not require the prior creation of a god, or that infinite space has the property of producing, without the agency of a god, neutrons at regular intervals which degenerate into hydrogen atoms (the building blocks of the universe) and parcels of energy, in a continuous creation process, at the rate of 9.656E-38 grams / cubic meter / sec, to give us the steady and slow expansion rate (not a bang) of 71.3 kms / sec / megaparsec, which limits the radius of the visible universe (from our point in space) to 13.7 billion light-years.
