The problem is we have a book which introduced a universe changing paradigm called creationism, namely a universe created by a singular, infinite and omnipotent universe maker; this at the least theoretically resolves the issue what can precede the universe - as opposed to a NO ANSWER.
2,000 years ago, this was true for many questions. Supernatural forces were used to explain the path of the Sun in the sky, why water boils, the fermentation of wine, and lightning. How did that turn out? It would seem to me that the God-of-the-Gaps approach has been a spectacular failure throughout history, so why are you relying on it once again?
The need for proof cannot apply here - it is neutralized by its antithesis also having no proof;
No proof equals no explanation. Period.
Creationism is a 100% sound premise . . .
False. It is backed by zero evidence, therefore it is the opposite of sound. Even worse, asserting supernatural forces in the absence of an explanation has proved to be a very poor way of finding answers.
™ Version 4.2
