Debate: Was the world really created by god or the big bang theory?
Side: Big bang theory

"I really don't think that I am merely assuming that the universe is finite in time. A quick google search should confirm that for you."This argument shows me that you haven't understood the point I was making. Time is a property of the universe and therefore you can not confine the universe itself to the property of time. Outside the bounds of the universe (or more accurately, I should say back until the point of the big bang) you cannot speak authoritively about time, and this is why I keep telling you that you are making assumptions. The big bang happened in a finite time in the past, but everything pre-big bang is speculation."When astronomers and astrophysicists speak of the big bang, they are speaking about the beginning of the universe."No, they are speaking about the rapid expansion from a hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past. Everything from the big bang onwards is finite. Pre-big bang is purely speculation."So you are right in saying that the Big Bang does not equal the universe. But you are assuming that something physical , the singularity, existed prior to the beginning of matter. That is simply absurd."You tell me that this is absurb, then go on to say that science is blind to t=0. Which one do you want it to be? Do you want to assume to speak authoritively about a pre-big bang universe, or do you want to stick with your (correct) statement that anything pre-big bang is purely speculation?"Again, I am not merely assuming God's timelessness, it is established by the arguments."You're yet to show me why."The fact that the universe is finite in time is well established in scientific literature."No it isn't. The fact that the big bang happened at a finite time in the past is well established. I can see now that you are confusing the big bang with the "beginning". The big bang is an event that took place which may have been within the existing universe OR maybe have actually created the universe. To say that it is the absolute beginning of everything though is simply naive. We don't know what caused it (whether it be matter outside our universe, matter within our universe, a big crunch from an existing universe, collisions of branes, etc) or what may have been there previously. And as I keep saying, everything pre-big bang (t<0) is purely speculation on your part.Do you entirely reject, say, brane cosmology models? How about chaotic inflation? You obviously do (and you seem to think you do so with authority), as all of these models speak of the big bang as just an event that happened which created the birth and then expansion of our universe from collisions between pre-existing branes or random explosions in quantum gravity foam. To say that my speculation (and I'm willing to accept that I am simply speculation a possible scenario) of matter existing pre-big bang is absurd would put in the very small group of people (I'll give you a hint, the group includes ONLY you) who know what happened pre-big bang.I shall say it again, and this time I hope you will be sporting enough to accept it; your arguments are all based on assumption and speculation. You and I both have no idea what happened t <= 0.