You Want Proof?

Note: I finished my read through the NLT, so I plan to go slowly through the prophets in the ESV Study Bible.

Isaiah 1:2
(2) Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; for the LORD has spoken: "Children have I reared and brought up, but they have rebelled against me.

Skeptics are famous for demanding proof. How can we say that there is a God when we can produce no proof? I would submit that this verse points to the proof. The fact that there is a created order indicates some kind of driving force. At least that works for me.

However, that does not convince everyone. For example, here is an email I got from the owner of a skeptic website when I asked about what I consider the need for first causes:

The problem of trying to explain first causes with a god is that it doesn't explain first causes. Even in your own logic, if there has to something "eternal" to the reality then the same goes for god. It's the same problem! If god is real, then what is that something external to "Him"? Moreover, you can't explain the origin of a complex entity by introducing even more complexity. Humans (and all life forms) are complex entities and if a god created them, then that god would have to be even more complex. It doesn't work.

Moreover, the idea of something existing outside time and space doesn't make sense. Reality is *composed* of matter-energy and time-space. The only thing outside of reality is unreality! Things outside of reality don't exist! So if you want your god outside of reality then you have to concede that he doesn't exist. Your own logic proves that god doesn't exist! It also agrees with observation (or more accurately non-observation). No one has ever detected a god.

Quantum mechanics has the best chance to explain existence and the origins of complexity. If there was a Big Bang, it had to have started out in a quantum state. Physicists know that quantum particles come into existence and and out of existence by pure chance. Quantum particles leads to atoms and molecules. Molecules lead to suns and planets, etc. Order and complexity comes out of chaos (galaxies, solar systems, planets, stars, etc.), and out of order comes evolution and natural selection. This explains first causes out of less complexity rather than more complexity. Less complex entities evolve into more complex entities. It is self consistent and doesn't require an infinite regress as does the god hypothesis. Lastly, (and more importantly) this agrees 100% with observation.

I'm not sure how this jives with the laws of thermodynamics. Nor does it explain to me how this first quantum particle came into being. I thought that matter and energy were sort of two sides of the same coin, but could be neither created nor destroyed.

Does this make sense to you? Which is the more satisfying explanation?