First I will provide my simplistic answer, and then I will try to support it on a more sophisticated level, although I prefer simplicity.
Now, to answer the question of “does God exist?”, you will have to hypothesize so let us do that, and I will make hypothesis 1 ‘yes’ and 2 ‘no’.
The simplest answer is:
What if hypothesis 2 is true? What did I lose? The clear answer is nothing; in fact there was much for me to gain by being a believer (things like mental stability, peace of mind, having some being to rely on when I need to, amongst many other gains) and then we will all turn into dust. Someone may say that you lost the freedom to do what you please with no fear from someone overmatching you. I find that no one has this absolute freedom, after all we fear from the police, the IRS, the CEO or supervisor, and many other things. Also, to have bounds and limits is good for the soul, whereas indulgence in the worldly pleasures is destructive, and it leads to loss of purpose, hedonism, boredom, depression and much more. (Depression and suicide rates in the West are much higher than they are elsewhere.)
Now, what if hypothesis 1 is true? What did I gain being a believer? That depends on your belief, because each religion claims salvation only for its followers. For sake of the argument, let us say that my religion is the true one then without knowing what my religion is, you will be able to expect what the gains could be like.
Now let us go to the dry part of this discussion (rationalization)
First of all I agree with you that there is no such thing as creation science because science studies material and the physical laws of the universe and, creation is not about any of that. (This also applies to explaining the immaculate conception of Jesus; I usually say to people who doubt it, God makes the rules but, He doesn’t have to go by them.)
In other words you cannot explain the making of something out of nothing on any scientific basis.
The universe is probably more than a few thousand years old and, we don’t have in Islam any indication that it is. On the contrary we have indications that it is much older.
There are questions that we shouldn’t be asking because, obviously we don’t have the power to comprehend and, it is wise to respect one’s own limitations. In other words we have not seen God or examined Him with any of our senses so there will be a lot of questions about Him that we will not be able to answer.
I disagree about religion being the most pernicious myth in history but, I agree that so many atrocities were committed in the name of religion. They are simply because of human tendencies to be unjust to the other so, before the Romans were burning my Egyptian ancestors to convert them from Orthodox to Catholic they were doing the same to them and many other nations for a myriad of other reasons. After all Hitler was not motivated by religion, neither was Churchill who said: “Britain reserves the right to bomb the nigers.”
Now Does Creation Make More Sense or an Eternal Universe?
First I have to remind you and myself that the scientific theories are not facts and the two get mixed up a lot so, despite that the scientific facts are few, the theories are innumerable.
From a scientific perspective the creationists were under the wheel in the 19th century. Now they are on top since the latest developments in cosmology and many other type sciences are not in favor of an eternal universe. Let me quote some of the most devout atheists confessing to this:
Anthony Flew, an atheist professor of philosophy at the University of Reading and the author of Atheistic Humanism, makes this interesting confession:
“Notoriously, confession is good for the soul. I will therefore begin by confessing that the Stratonician atheist has to be embarrassed by the contemporary cosmological consensus. For it seems that the cosmologists are providing a scientific proof of what St. Thomas contended could not be proved philosophically; namely, that the universe had a beginning. So long as the universe can be comfortably thought of as being not only without end but also without beginning, it remains easy to urge that its brute existence, and whatever are found to be its most fundamental features, should be accepted as the explanatory ultimates. Although I believe that it remains still correct, it certainly is neither easy nor comfortable to maintain this position in the face of the Big Bang story.” (Henry Margenau, Roy Abraham Vargesse, Cosmos, Bios, Theos, La Salle IL: Open Court Publishing, 1992, p.241)
The English materialist physicist, H.P. Lipson, unwillingly accepts the scientific fact of creation. He writes: “I think …that we must…admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (H. P. Lipson, A Physicist Looks at Evolution, Physics Bulletin, vol. 138, 1980, p. 138)
Besides these discoveries in cosmology astronomy and quantum physics there was the collapse of the 19th century type theories of Darwin, Marx, Engels, Nietsche, Durkheim and Freud.
That is why someone like the American geneticist, Robert Griffiths, acknowledges this fact when he says, “If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn’t much use.” (Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, p. 123)
You may now say that you do not agree with those I have quoted and I would not blame you because, after all I would have challenged the scientific community of the 19th century and early 21st century but, what fair people should agree on is that you cannot use science to prove or disprove the existence of God.
I would say that the following statement makes perfect sense, ‘If something exists now then something must be eternal’. Is this God or the universe? I would say that it makes perfect sense to say it is God. Why? Amongst many other reasons I personally found the two following reasons to be most convincing:
a) We have examined this universe ourselves including the most intelligent species, man, and have found it to be in need of a creator to exist. The same does not apply to God because, we have never seen him so, you can’t judge that which you have not seen and examined.
b) The unpredictability and arrhythmia of the natural phenomena such as wind, floods, etc., testifies to the existence of an intelligent being that did not only create but also is in control.