Looking for the Truth wrote:...and the universe began (was created, through the Big Bang), and scientists appoint the Big Bang as being the most correct theory about how our universe began, why don't they believe in some kind of Creator? This may be a silly question, but isn't it obvious that God exists if the universe was started? The question "what existed before the Big Bang" doesn't belong to the realm of science but rather for the realm of theology, and thus obviously some kind of deity (biblical or not) why God is still denied by scientists?
A begin does not require a beginner. In quantum mechanics, virtual particles wink into existence all the time. Real particles disappear. The world is not static, and these events have real world consequences. The smaller an electronic circuit, the more likely it may be susceptible to failure due to quantum effects. The world is NOT deterministic.
I know a few scientists deny the existence of God. I am inclined to think most would remain agnostic on that issue, however. Does God exist? This question has not lent itself to suitable tests in these modern times. I know in the old days some prophet built an altar on a mountain top, then doused it with water, such that the water filled a trench around the altar. The prophet prayed for rain, and God struck the altar with fire from heaven such that the offering was burned, as was the pile of fagots upon which the offering rested, and the stones from which the altar was built, and the water in the trough around the altar, and the trough. Quite a fire.
Prophets of Baal had before this performed a similar rite, dancing around their altar and cutting themselves, but without success. This scientific test demonstrated Baal lacked the power to control fire, but the God of the prophet (the God of Abraham) did.
I am not aware that anyone has conducted such a test today. If they did, and the altar was consumed, would the test be repeatable? If not, could the initial consumption of the altar by heavenly fire at the moment of the conclusion of the prophet's prayer be nothing more than a remarkable coincidence? In the case of the Bible story, we have no sure fire way to convince ourselves the account was not simply entirely invented. We may choose to believe or disbelieve the account as we see fit, just as today a few oddballs disbelieve Americans set foot upon the moon despite the abundant evidence they did.
God did not sign the universe. If I were God, I might have arranged it so that the stars spelled out my name in every written human language. I might have made earth's orbit precisely 100 pi days long (314.14159265), rather than 365.2422 days long. Why that particular odd number? What does that signify? I might have encoded long prime sequences into immutable strands of intronic DNA, or better yet, essential DNA, such as the DNA responsible for cellular respiration in all organisms. That would be pretty clear and compelling evidence all creatures great and small were designed and were of recent origin, rather than are the product of long and gradual evolutionary change.
Wonder why God never thought of any of these things. I don't believe it is because God does not exist. I believe it is because God's purpose is not to convince us He exists. We probably have not yet guessed God's purpose. I am disinclined to think God's purpose involves some weekly ritual or the adoption of a bizarre and illogical creed. Some religions seem to me to compete with each other on which can get the most people to believe the silliest things. If you don't agree, then explain Scientology to me in some other context. I don't mean any offense to Scientologists here, but again, if I were Creator of the universe and were founding a new religion, I wouldn't pick a second rate science fiction author as my primary prophet.