That definition of the big bang theory is fine but for one point. The evidence suggests that in the past the universe was smaller, everything was closer together and the energy density was much larger. Whether or not this corresponds to the origin of the universe is still an open question.
Many common claims based on the big bang theory, such as "the universe came into existence out of nothing", "before the big bang, space and time did not exist" and so on are completely unscientific.
By introducing the creator, you are not addressing the problem, but simply moving it. In fact you're not just moving it, you're making it worse, because now you not only need to explain the origin of the creator, but you also have to demonstrate that the creator exists.
The lack of a competing explanation does not promote a poor explanation to a satisfactory one.
Many common claims based on the big bang theory, such as "the universe came into existence out of nothing", "before the big bang, space and time did not exist" and so on are completely unscientific.
Quote:Yes I am sorry as I have yet to explain why I really hold a theistic belief. To be honest, the smoking gun for me has always been the origins of the universe. From what I read I think the Big Bang Theory holds the best current explanation for the origins or non origins of the universe. Now I haven’t actually gone out an experimented with this idea so my beliefs are based on what you would call "authority" (those that have much more experience than I do). I think the idea that the universe had a beginning implies of a creator of some sort.
By introducing the creator, you are not addressing the problem, but simply moving it. In fact you're not just moving it, you're making it worse, because now you not only need to explain the origin of the creator, but you also have to demonstrate that the creator exists.
Quote:I do not believe that there is a "naturalistic" explanation that can adequately explain this.
The lack of a competing explanation does not promote a poor explanation to a satisfactory one.
Galileo was a man of science oppressed by the irrational and superstitious. Today, he is used by the irrational and superstitious who claim they are being oppressed by science - Mark Crislip
