>
> The scientific "Steady State" theory of cosmology would deny that the
> universe had a beginning, but one could make an argument that it had a
> large component of philosophy inherent in it.
Even if it didn't have a physical beginning, since time is also a creature that
view wouldn't rule out God, or an answer to the ontological question. Many
Christians actually faced this issue back when the Steady State view was in
vogue.
The Big Bang theory might
> be a candidate for a scientific theory that defends the creation of the
> physical universe out of nothing, as long as one does not posit that the
> world was eternal before the expansion at 10^(-43) seconds
Atheists will posit an eternal universe, irrespective of the Big Bang (Hawking,
Linde in a recent article in Scientific American, etc.). Concordists will see
in the Big Bang a vindication of Genesis 1:1. My point is that the fallacy for
both is the (hidden) assumption that Genesis is talking about cosmology, instead
of theology.
>
> This is a theological/hermenutical view not shared by all evangelicals.
That's unfortunately true, and some of us are trying with great difficulty to
educate the evangelical community about that. We are trying to recover theology
*as it is*, and warn people who are "mingling things divine with things human",
as Francis Bacon put it.
P.S. to Juli: Sorry. See why you can't get things cleared up via email?
Paul Arveson, Research Physicist
73367.1236@compuserve.com arveson@oasys.dt.navy.mil
(301) 227-3831 (W) (301) 227-1914 (FAX) (301) 816-9459 (H)
Code 724, NSWC, Bethesda, MD 20084