Most of what I’d like to to say has already been said here, so this will likely be short.

OverclockedJesus and man-man put it succinctly. “Who made the universe” begs the question, and it’s illogical to stop an infinite regress by making up something out of whole cloth.

Shii, you attempt to solve this problem by defining something outside of nature, which is irrational on the very face of it. As there is nothing outside nature which has even approached demonstrability, let alone a “supernatural creator” to whom one might ascribe a number of other characteristics, it is wholly unscientific to bumume such a thing exists. We do, however, know that the universe exists – so with the data we’ve got at hand, it makes the most sense to bumume that it has always been around and always will be.

Finally, there was no “before” the universe, because the universe exists in no less than four dimensions. I’m talking about time, here. To say something like “before” the universe or “after” the universe is a non-sequitur of the very worst kind, in the same way “outside” or “past” the universe is absurd.

These questions boil down, ultimately, to faith. Faith is an unsubstantiated belief; something which one holds to be true in spite of a lack of evidence. There is evidence for the universe, clearly, and so it behooves us not to make things up which would violate all known laws of physics. We leave that to quantum mechanics.

QED.

If I’ve screwed something up, it’s the beer talking, and I hope someone will correct me. It’s just that I find first cause arguments to be so ridiculous as to be unworthy of extensive thought.