"We [as humans] can decide to do something, we can wait for a certain time before acting, we can wonder about our future actions; but such possibilities cannot arise for [an eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent] God. In his case there is no gap between desire and action, nothing stands in the way of his activity; and yet we are told by al-Ghazali that God suddenly created the world. What differentiates one time from another for God? What could motivate him to create the world at one particular time as opposed to another? For us, different times are different because they have different qualitative aspects, yet before the creation of the world, when there was nothing around to characterize one time as distinct from another, there is nothing to characterize one time over another as the time for creation to take place." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes#cite_note-muslim_encyclopedia-63
wtf...? So how 'bout those Eagles? You pop your head up and this is what you got? Get back down to the ET basement already.
"The Argument Against Creation " God created and maintains everything. There is no argument at all. God knows the answer, of course. But nobody knows or understands how and why about everything including creation. Why would we think we should be able to know and understand everything? God is everything - including everything we know, we don't know yet (e.g. ET), and we can never know; everything we see, we can't see yet (e.g. dark energy/matter), and we can never see; everything we understand, we don't understand yet (e.g. avoiding wars), and we can never understand, etc, etc. Everything also includes what we call Creation, which is just one of God's mysteries! We shouldn't waste our time/ energy in certain things, as we should be doing so many other more meaningful and productive things. Some people including asylums are still homeless! That is the kind of practical issues people should spend time and energy in with priority. lol
PS: If an ant says God makes ants in God's image, a tree would think that saying is a good humour. And an ET is just confused!
your note states "This is not to say that Ibn Rushd denied the Creation; rather, he proposed an eternal creation. Oliver Leaman explains Ibn Rushd's argument as such:" conventional science states our universe had a beginning and time began after the big bang. that there was a big bang was pretty much confirmed by the finding of background radiation showing what the early universe was like. For scientists "before" the big bang is an unknown. Our science does not go back that far. At the moment our science began just after the big bang.
Without existence, nothing , including creation, or God, can exist. It is because existence exists, creation exists. The all powerful God doesn't exist as it needs existence as predicate to exist before it can.
Without existence, who would be there to perceive reality or question this existence. So the only epistemic belief one can have is that they exist, everything else is as Kant said, as it appears to us rather than the reality. But then the question is, it appears to who, who is the perceiver and how is a distinct perceiver comes into being.The problem of first cause is unsolvable.