the idea of something being created from nothing (big bang-immaculate conception) is ridiculous and we do not see this in our reality.

A good point you make, thank you.

I just jiggled with this very notion while reading other related sources, like this one.

Atheists have not felt compelled to embrace the view that the universe came into being out of nothing for no reason at all; rather they regard the universe itself as a sort of factually necessary being: the universe is eternal, uncaused, indestructible, and incorruptible. As Russell neatly put it, " . . . The universe is just there, and that's all."

This came after the paragraph where this was said:

John Hick: a necessary being is an eternal, uncaused, indestructible, and incorruptible being.

My own thoughts I just finished in a text file. But since you pointed towards this exact topic, allow me to forward them to you:

How, in the face of the universe, one can conceive of it as "just there", as if talking about a pebble one happens to stumble upon, says more about the unwillingness to be amazed than about the fact that one could not also questioningly call "an entity" a "universe". Since the universe seems unreal - even from the earthly limited perspective. Both in its mental grasp and when one gazes into the gigantic starry sky at night.

In this way, one can also understand oneself as "simply there" and not feel any astonishment or wonder about what is "normal", namely one's own birth just like the births of others. But the very fact that the self-evident, when one pauses, can suddenly become something mysterious, downright inexplicable, is what one can call an "inspiration", which suggests that such a "spirit" wants to be a divine spark. Those who find it unimpressive that this inspiring spark simply comes to visit, or ascribes it to their own genius, fail to realise that everything an adult human being has ever thought has always been thought by others, often more educated than oneself. And that "thought" itself, and thus the discipline of thought, is not called a "discipline" for nothing. Who would deny that theological thinking was and is not a high discipline, if he takes the manifold writings of the theological sources close to his mind?

For me this is the big question, are all our decisions already pre-programmed in and we are just following the script? Or do we really decide our own fate?

I would like here to answer with a question:
How relevant is this question to you when you have to make an important decision of conscience in your life (who to marry, for example, or how to bury someone who has died, for example, or if you want to be a father, or other significant things)? How do you advise yourself on things that set a particular course in your life?