How Much Evidence Will It Take You To Believe In God???

[Mister Agenda]

Since you are too intellectually lazy and incurious to read a Wikipedia article on the topic: The Big Bang or Initial Expansion describes what happened when the previous state of affairs, a hot, dense, energetic, compressed universe; suddenly started expanding and eventually formed the universe we find ourselves in. The theory doesn't describe why the universe expanded, how long it was in its previous state; whether a moment or an eternity or in-between; but what it does describe is based on astronomical observations and it has been confirmed by finding additional phenomena that the theory predicted we would find if it's true. It's not a theory of ultimate origin. We do not have the physics to describe with certainty what preceded the 'Big Bang'. We have plausible hypotheses, almost too many of them, and as yet no way to confirm which, if any of them, are true. The BBT doesn't try explain what you seem to think it does.

Exactly, my point is the big bang theory fails to give us where all this matter came from? How it exploded and created all this order and laws in the universe? Why it exploded? If the Big Bang is true, then how did it happen?  Would you say that out of nothing came something; that when nothing existed, somehow something came into existence?  Or would you say that the Big Bang has no explanation "yet;" but that, by faith, some scientist in the future will prove how it happened, even though it violates the laws of known physics?

How exactly can a theory fail to explain what it's not trying to explain? The theory explains astronomical findings that indicate certain facts about the early state of the universe. It's not a theory of the origin of energy, so it can't fail at being that theory when it's not supposed to explain that in the first place. It's like saying the Germ Theory of Disease fails at explaining gravity.

We don't actually know the ultimate origin of the state of the universe that preceded the Big Bang, and we may never know. The only honest thing a mere mortal can say honestly on the topic is 'I don't know'. If some hypothesis or another seems more convincing to you, you can be forgiven for leaning in that direction; but it would be arrogant to think you know it for a fact.

And again, please investigate 'Argument from Ignorance'.