Some contemporary intellectuals, relying on scientific explanations of the universe’s formation and sufficing to natural causes, have contributed to the rise of atheism. Conversely, based on the same empirical evidence, some theologians aim to affirm the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo (creation from nothingness) by explaining big bang as an initial point of creation of the universe. Thus, both theistic and atheistic groups uphold a belief in creatio ex nihilo. Yet by examining the metaphysical foundations of science, we come to a conclusion that the Christian doctrine of creatio ex nihilo and generally speaking, belief in creation in sacred texts, do not imply a “singular” point of origin. Accordingly, the Big Bang merely explains one phase of the temporal emergence of the cosmos. Thus, from both theistic and atheistic perspective, creation from absolute nothingness is not possible. Ultimately, adherence to the metaphysical foundations of science offers a path toward a monotheistic explanation of the universe while refuting atheistic interpretations. It becomes evident that the "beginning" of the universe cannot serve as proof of a transcendental cause. Hence, it is not necessary for the theologians to prove a beginning of the world to justify creatio ex nihilo. Simultaneously, by resolving the ambiguity surrounding cosmic origins, atheists are not allowed to use the infinite cosmic models as evidence against God’s existence. In conclusion, by adhering to the metaphysical foundations of science, a solution to resolve this doubt can be presented. A methodological approach to science and theology can prevent such ambiguities from arising in both disciplines.