https://sekharpal.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/who-created-god/ It basically says : "Real God is a bunch of several zeroes; zero does not have to come from anything."

-- This is an interesting perspective... but me not being a scientist or a physicist cannot verify my suspicious nature when I read it.. something seemed a bit off, too me. So if there is anybody who has a basic level of physics that can help me out on my suspicions and justify why I feel like such?

-- Link below could also help but not necessary (which is what Ben from the comments thought about it): https://ben-bennetts.com/2015/01/19/the-religion-business-extract/#comments

-- This article with MICHIO KAKU on Stephen Hawking's book The Grand Design will help out our position. It outlines that is is more logical to think that our universe could have created itself and slapping a supernatural cause in is just laughable and not needed. As Hitchens always says.. We have a better and more natural explanation for many of these questions without going to absurd assumptions of the supernatural. Everything works without the assumption of a creator. Occams Razor. http://bigthink.com/dr-kakus-universe/can-a-universe-create-itself-out-o...

My thoughts on the subject:
-- Every time I look back at this argument: It always boils down to: So the theist used a rule of science to explain god but then denounces that rule in the same sentence to also explain god.

-- But if a theist can say "God made the universe" and not need any real evidence, why can't I say "The universe made itself". Theists always say "well where did THAT life come from?". In which case, why can't I ask the same about God? Where did God come from? It's a two way street, the only difference is science does not claim anything it doesn't know to be certain truth. Science is always under question and skepticism and inquiry and never make a truth claim without logic and evidence.

-- The simple answer to all of this, in my opinion is, that we do not know if god exists and let alone who created god and to say he always existed is special pleading when theists don't consider the fact that their reasoning that something cannot come from nothing (or everything must have a cause)... and not apply it your your god (which is unproven).. is what we call special pleading and in turn illogical and laughable.

-- That is my answer but as you guys can see I have not related it to the article in question. Any thoughts on it?