Thanks. Am having a watch of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr6nNvw55C4 now at your suggestion :)

>It’s a theory that describes how the universe began

No, unless im misunderstanding something here? How are you defining 'began'? Because if 'began' is T=0, then no, the big bang doesnt describe that. Right? It describes the initial rapid expansion happening while the universe was in a certain state.... its quite a jump to assume said state should be labelled as 'began' - as if nothing came prior.

>that almost any brilliant theory could be presented and evidence to support it could be found... And it may be that this brilliant theory with heavy reference to theological concepts takes us all the way to an answer or even a new discovery.

Can have some fun with stuff like this.

​

Theory: The universe as we know it (via the big bang) came about via the final death throes of a dying God, who effectively committed suicide. (lets call the physical sub-atomic singularity this entity occupied something catchy, like.... The God Particle).

Said particle existed as everything and anything in a state of perfection, but eventually grew tired of an Omnipotent state of being.. and yearned for freedom from the burden of embodying unyielding perfection.... wishing its own destruction upon itself..... setting forth an event/act humans would one day come to know as creation / The Big Bang.

In the ^ fan fiction, none of that is actually provable to be untrue, correct? We can say the Big Bang (or great expansion) came about as a sudden expansion of the universe from a hot+dense state from the earliest moments, but that doesnt preclude the possibility that said state at T=0 was the physical embodiment of God itself. (I just like the idea of juxtapost idea of It destroying itself in an act that would later be regarded as creationary) ;)

Which, as you said, brings observations that creationary theory from a science POV can be surprisingly compatible with theological fanfic concepts.

Thats a good point. But I wonder how many people, in a random sample of X size, would know the Big Bang more accurately should be interpreted to refer to 'an expansionary event' instead of 'a creation-ary event'.

Sorry I refuse to read that wall of text. Insert some paragraphs, then i'll come back to read it.