Why would you "Enter God..." when there is no evidence at all that one exists?<quoted text>
That's the assumption anyway, but it doesn't explain what "caused" the big bang.
So the story goes, but science cannot explain where this really small SOMETHING came from, or why it suddenly expanded to form the universe.
Science does not acknowledge a "something else" leaving one to assume that NOTHING caused this very small SOMETHING to expand. To say everything came from the Big Bang is like saying babies come from maternity wards, the theory doesn't go back far enough.
Like the big bang theory, there is an hypothesis: "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve." - Max Planck
Enter God, a primary nonphysical gestalt of consciousness, which was, is and will always be. And which exists within and behind all systems and universes. What it boils down to then, is whose THEORY is more believable and makes more sense. Primary consciousness is more believable and makes more sense than NOTHING.
that would be like Einstein throwing in his cosmological constant to explain what he couldn't figure out; his greatest mistake...