I asked @Sherlock-Holmes a few questions to explain this, here (below) are the responses, as if it is all one giant appeal to mystery, that he cannot explain at all, and has no rational argument for, and can demonstrate nothing but subjective assertions to support. Like his assertion that there can be no natural or scientific explanations of the universe, as if he can possibly know what was and was not possible prior to the big bang, and then of course as above, his false dichotomy between that and his god assumptions, to use an argumentum ad ignorantiam claim.
Note his claim a thing cannot be an explanation for itself must therefor also apply to imagined deity, and parenthetically as we see below, @Sherlock-Holmes can offer no explanatory powers from the claim, nor can it’s purported existence be explained at all.
Everytime he lies he has offered rational inferences I want to burst out laughing.