Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisXP
More of a Halton Arp type, so I'm a milder form of Hoyle and Gold. 
But seriously, the reason why I want a good cosmological debate isn't so much to argue the points to infinity (many threads online already beat that horse to death), but wanting all three sides to discuss their points efficiently; as either the Big Bang is discussed solely upon "scientific" grounds or religiously. Believe there's more room at the table than just black and white thinking between the poles. Interested in reading/discussing more than just statistics/equations | bible/scripture, like why with all the tools mankind has he still can't answer the basics like, "where DID I come from and why?" |
IMHO, the Big Bang Theory (so named by Hoyle himself because it could be construed to be religious in nature) is much more scientific than religious. Even Lemaitre would not allow it to become a religious argument (he was, after all a Jesuit and they thrive on being just Catholic enough to avoid excommunication). I have to take exception that its being rammed down anyone's throat. It has its adherents and its detracters with neither side claiming the other side is the spawn of the devil. I believe from my readings that BBT is gaining more acceptance in the scientific community because it answers questions about the expanding univese that steady state does not.
As a Christian I personally find BBT to be more acceptable than Static and Unchanging. BBT does not specifically state the univese was created by God, only that it was created in an instant and is constantly expanding.
Be of good cheer