My criticisms of the big bang are scientific but there's much confirmation bias in your thought process and straw man rhetoric that keeps you somewhat shielded cozily from criticism and an irrational worldview which tops it all off.
You've a biased reading of history in that you virtually accuse creationists as inquistionists.
This, of course, is nonsense. Galileo was a scientist who believed in the bible had truth and wanted to show that the Copernican (heliocentric) system was in line with it. He was against the views of his day with regard to the Bible which, blinded by some aspects of Aristotelian philosophy, did not do justice to the biblical word. Galileo wasnt trialled for going against the Bible but for disobeying papal orders. What the galileo affair does is to show that its not about the relationhip between religion and science. We now know both Galileo and the Copernican system were well regarded by the church. Galileo could be nasty and vindictive and full of arrogance. What happened arose out of the jealousy of his colleagues and the personal politics of Pope Urban who had been a great benefactor years before. But Galileo wrote him into his play and made a mockery of him. So Urban was very upset. It also shows the authoritarian paganism of his day which is reflected in the authoritarianism of atheist naturalist evolution today which must not be questioned.
Ever hear of " nature discovered how" ," nature learned" ,"nature built ", " science teaches" etc . In all the science journals we see examples of this.This is an example of reification fallacy which attributes 'a mind'or 'a thing' to something immaterial. An idea is being spoken of as an actual thing or person. This is not just figure of speech . Science is not ' a thing' . It is knowledge which we all appreciate and are glad for. But science or knowledge of where the universe came from is easy to figure out.There are no gaps when we talk about time ,space, & matter having a beginning which must posit a timeless ,spaceless, immaterial , omnipotent, personal being as Creator.
But you guys make nature your idol which is deification and thus " exhange the truth of God for a lie and worship and serve the creature rather than the creator "
Materialist atheism is not difficult to argue against. Nature is all there is on this worldview. It says there is no transcendent Creator. Most atheists think their worldview rational. Atheism wrecks the possibility of knowledge, science and technology. If atheism is true then you couldn't prove one thing.
Reasoning uses laws of logic which are laws of thought or reasoning . One of them is law of non contradiction. Why should there be immaterial laws of thought ? For the Christian there's an absolute standard for reason. Laws of thought reflect the way God thinks. We are to model our thoughts after God's. The laws extend from God's non contradictory nature. "God can't deny himself " ( 2 Tim). The laws are abstract ,universal,invariant,immaterial, non conventional apply in all locations. They touch upon God as He is the Logos. But they are not fabricated by Him. Reasoning would be impossible without these Laws and without the biblical God.
The materialistic atheist cant explain laws of logic. He believes that everything that exists is material—part of the physical world. But laws of logic are not physical. You can't touch or feel one.
Laws of logic cannot exist in the atheists world. But he uses them to try to reason. This is inconsistent. He is taking from the religious worldview to argue against the religious worldview. The atheist’s view cannot be rational because he uses things (laws of logic) that cannot exist according to his materialistic worldview.
