I have a question

[Silver]

it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

Not when there is no evidence for the existence of god.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

No. Astrophysicists say that it started with a Big Bang.

I'm not sure but they make a better case than some silly-ass "god."

Wow, lets not be disrespectful here, but are you sure it makes a better case? I mean, it sounds quite unreal, it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

Is this your best argument? That it sounds unreal?

I've studied physics and astronomy very briefly in university. This sounds more real than your god. Silly ass or not.

[Jackalope]

No. Astrophysicists say that it started with a Big Bang.

I'm not sure but they make a better case than some silly-ass "god."

Wow, lets not be disrespectful here, but are you sure it makes a better case? I mean, it sounds quite unreal, it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

Why would that make more sense when we lack evidence to support such a conclusion? Or for that matter, when it's unclear whether any such creator is even necessary (in other words, if what existed prior always existed, no creator is necessary).

[yoleeena]

There was no "explosion".....

Simply a sudden expantion of matter, time and space out of a singularity.

If you dont even understand the concept of the thing on which base your questions, what makes you think that you are qualified to ask questions on the subject, let alone to have them answered?

Well okay, but the Big Bang theory isn't that difficult to understand.
Do you realise how silly that sounds? Such a perfect universe came about by 'a sudden expantion of matter, time and space'? Really? Things can't just happen suddenly for no reason, something must cause them to suddenly happen

[Minimalist]

No. Astrophysicists say that it started with a Big Bang.

I'm not sure but they make a better case than some silly-ass "god."

Wow, lets not be disrespectful here, but are you sure it makes a better case? I mean, it sounds quite unreal, it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

Absolutely sure.

And if you stick around long enough you'll see what "disrespect" really is.

[Bad Writer]

No. Astrophysicists say that it started with a Big Bang.

I'm not sure but they make a better case than some silly-ass "god."

Wow, lets not be disrespectful here, but are you sure it makes a better case? I mean, it sounds quite unreal, it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

That would be filling in the gap in knowledge with something that can't be proven to exist. This presupposition is begging the question, so it's better not to jump to conclusions and just admit that we don't know how it happened.

In times past we didn't know how solar systems and planets formed, but we have since stopped assuming that god made it happen, for we found out that these natural occurrences require no such deity. This has been the case with every such "unexplainable" phenomenon, and we suspect the same holds true for the Big Bang Theory. Saying "godidit" is simply lazy and ignorant.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Are we going to get anything more than just "that's so silly!"?

[Silver]

Things can't just happen suddenly for no reason, something must cause them to suddenly happen

We have recently heard the same illogical argument from SoC. If things cannot just happen suddenly for no reason, then what created your god?

[Kayenneh]

Do you realise how silly that sounds? Such a perfect universe came about by 'a sudden expantion of matter, time and space'? Really? Things can't just happen suddenly for no reason, something must cause them to suddenly happen

Well, if the universe was created by a god, who/what/when made the god? If gods can't be created and they have always existed, why can't the same apply to the universe?

[yoleeena]

it makes more sense to say God created the 'thing' the started the Big Bang, no?

Not when there is no evidence for the existence of god.

But say God wanted to make this life a test for human beings, do you honestly expect Him to come down on earth and say 'Look people, Im here!'?
The evidence IS here, but you are refusing to consider it, evidence does not necessarily mean something you can hear, touch or see, you people must realise that, for example you know have a great-great-great-great grandmother for example, even though you cannot see, hear or touch her because you use your logic
In the same way, we look at the signs to say God exists, for example

The slant of the earth, tilted at an angle of 23 degrees, gives us our seasons; if the earth had not been so tilted, vapors from the ocean would move north and south, piling up for us continents of ice. If our moon were, say, only 50,000 miles away instead of its actual distance, our tides might be so enormous that twice a day all continents would be submerged; even the mountains could soon be eroded away. If the crust of the earth had only been ten feet thicker, there would be no oxygen, without which animal life must die. Had the ocean been a few feet deeper, carbon dioxide and oxygen would have been absorbed and no vegetable life could exist.

This means there is intelligence behind the universe, therefore we call that intelligence 'God'

I think many of you don't know who 'God' is, God isnt some guy with a long beard+hair who watched over the world, your idea of God is totally distorted