Earth vs. the ‘Let There Be Light!’ Big Bang.

[D2wing]

Ultimately I don't think it matters.

If God can create a fully grown man, in an instantly grown garden.
Why can he not create an old looking universe?

We observe things the way we can see them at face value, not necessarily the way it is.

Either way, it doesn't debunk the creation story. Using it as an argument against it is flawed, and quite frankly unintelligent, if I may say so.

And I don't think Stephen Hawking is quite as smart as everyone seems to think he his.
He may be fairly smart, but I think we need to understand that he isn't all knowing.
What he says isn't truth automatically, just because the great and powerful Hawking said so.

6000, 13.7 billion. I don't care. I know God did it, I know the God of the bible is The God. There is no reason to put a pointless date on how old the universe is. Because it is pointless, it proves, or disproves, nothing else but how old it actually is.

If you proved 100% the earth was 6000 years old, there would still be Atheist.
if God wrote a message in the stars, the Atheist would say "Those clever Christians".

No amount of evidence will convince the unwilling.
Sad but true.

I am reading a book by Hugh Ross called "The Improbable Planet" that explains the why the exact position and timing of Earth's and our Galaxy's unique structure and history are essential to life. In it he quotes Hawking who said the rest of the universe is a waste and proves him wrong. Hawking was wrong some things but the press will never say so.

 

[bobharms]

Earth verses the big bang is the epic, David and Goliath battle, of God’s Creation story. God created Earth first, then the ‘Big Bang’, ‘Let There Be Light!’. Atheist scientists hate this part of God’s Creation story and disallow the thought of earth being created apart from their ‘Big Bang’. The thing is, for us, one week’s time, creationists, the way God explains it, we have two separate events. Two separate events allows for Time Dilation, big time!, in God’s Creation of everything that exists.

God created the earth. Earth existed for a while before light was created by God. God ‘s ‘Let There Be Light!’ is the ‘Big Bang’ going off. All of a sudden, next to earth, was the mass of one septillion stars on the head of a needle. Some say that God is not powerful enough to accelerate a planet the size of earth to light speed. I say, God popping into existence the mass of one septillion stars on the head of a needle is, light speed for earth accomplished! The gravitational pull of the mass of one septillion stars, on the head of a needle, is enough force to put earth into light speed, immediately. Or God can simply have created earth into existence already traveling at the speed of light. Science tells us that empty space probably flowed out into existence in front of the Big Bang. There is earth, traveling at the speed of light, through empty space, riding the wave of empty space coming into existence. Surfs up Dude!

With the explosion of the big bang, now earth has a light source to revolve next to, and thus day and night, equaling the passage of time; or in other words, days going by and the passage of time. God’s clock, as well as our clock on earth, even scientists with theoretical starships, is our revolving earth past a light source. God did not put the sun and stars into earth’s sky until the fourth day of creation. For four days, the 'Big Bang' was earth's, day vs night, light source. Using Time Dilation, the earth, traveling at the speed of light, and the big bang, traveling at a much slower velocity, then billions of years of star formation can occur in four days. This is Time Dilation. It only makes sense for God to do it this way. The explosion of the ‘Big Bang’ needs time to cool off before God inserts earth into the ‘big bang’ Cosmos. Besides that, even traveling at the speed of light, light is going to need some time to travel the billions of miles from the stars to earths target area of our sun’s orbit. So earth traveling at, or near, the speed of light, only makes sense for God to do it this way, while billions of years of star formation come into existence, for every day/night rotation on earth.

After a couple days on earth, which equates to many billions of years at the lower velocity of the big bang, earth enters into the the big bang debris field. Stars have already been born, lived, went super nova, and died in this debris area. Remember, earth, traveling near the speed of light is only seeing days go by while the big bang Cosmos has already experienced many billions of years of elapsing time, due to Time Dilation. Earth is absorbing some of this, billions of years old, debris like bugs on a windshield. The reason earth looks five billion years old is due to this, bugs on a windshield, effect on young earth that was born before the big bang, traveling through the billions of years of debris of the big bang. Earth herself is only days old while the debris she is runing into and absorbing is billions of years old. This is Time Dilation.

Finally, earth is captured by our sun’s gravitational pull and imprisoned in our sun’s orbit, on the fourth day of creation. A couple days go by on earth and God put man on earth. And God said, ‘It is good!’.

Anything can happen when God and Time Dilation are involved.

Creationists are not asking atheist scientists to say that this is the way it happened. Creationists are only asking atheist scientists to confirm that seven days of creation by God is a plausable and acceptable theory.

Time dilation and space flight​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation


​

Setting the stars in place leads to speculation about pre- historic theory and speculation
We have a compilation by man inspired by God that shouldn't be open to doubtful scrutiny, but if you are inclined so be it...Theory that has not been deemed a law of science shouldn't be seen as factual, but an idea that needs confirmation, but even philosophy thrives on theory as the study of knowledge...And is more for debate than the search for Truth...To simply study what is for the sake of argument and debate is boring. Faith in God is never boring. Quit your job, sell your house and give it to the poor now you want to talk about excitement. Ha...I laugh at those who do not trust Jesus. Trust in man made religion and you put confidence in man or an idol..I not talking about that at all..Jesus is not dead



..

 

[D2wing]

Steve, I am impressed why what you say. I have held that the Big Bang is proof of God, and while I did not know about time dilation it fits My idea that at the edge of the expanding universe it is still the first day. Also Quantum I am interested in your work as well.
One of the ideas that I have is that while time may seem like a thin plane moving in linear fashion it is actually curved. when we see a car drive by, when the image is seen the car is no longer in the exact place. everything we see is in the past, the further away the further in the past. So much so that stars we see may no longer exist. Or may be far different. I also think that time was invented in the big bang. Without time there is no distance, no speed and everything is in one place.
It is exciting to me to see that science agrees with the Bible.

 

[D2wing]

Bob, it is good that you have set your mind on the eternal. Some of us are interested in how the temporal confirms the eternal. We do surrender to the falsehood that the Bible is a myth. Nor do we say that observed science false. Some of us believe there is an answer that torments so many. But if it remains a mystery so be it.

 

[QuantumCreation]

I am reading a book by Hugh Ross called "The Improbable Planet" that explains the why the exact position and timing of Earth's and our Galaxy's unique structure and history are essential to life. In it he quotes Hawking who said the rest of the universe is a waste and proves him wrong. Hawking was wrong some things but the press will never say so.

 

[QuantumCreation]

Those who are already Christians may not have a personal need to know or care about the Big Bang or science, because they already have belief. However, there are millions of people who don't believe, as well as our youth, that are being influenced by poor, outdated science to say that God does not exist. I believe it is vitally important for Christians to have a voice in this area. It isn't a gospel message for everyone, but it is important.

 

[bobharms]

Bob, it is good that you have set your mind on the eternal. Some of us are interested in how the temporal confirms the eternal. We do surrender to the falsehood that the Bible is a myth. Nor do we say that observed science false. Some of us believe there is an answer that torments so many. But if it remains a mystery so be it.

Amen, yes the thrill of the pursuit of knowledge, it is a wonder to me, and I am in awe of those who devote their lives in the dedicated manner they do. I believe that those who seek the Truth will find it. In my heart I encourage everyone in such things, thanks

 

[expos4ever]

Hello Strathos,
Atheist Cosmos scientists demand that earth came about from, and within, the 'Big Bang'. God's story of creation tells us that earth was here first and before He said, 'Let There Be Light!', which is what scientists see as the 'Big Bang'. So as long as you and I agree that earth was here before the 'Big Bang', we are cool.

The idea that the earth was here before the big bang is certainly at strong variance with the evidence. I believe there is substantial evidence that the earth - like other planets - condensed out of a swirling cloud of matter. There is no known process for the synthesis of the heavier elements that make up the earth other than the fusion process inside stars. So, based on the evidence, and without assuming anything "magical", the most reasonable conclusion is that the earth was formed after the big bang from elements created within dead stars.

I am not an expert about this but I believe I am representing things accurately. If I am wrong, please feel free to correct me.

I also think it is untrue to imply that "atheist" scientists demand anything - they simply create theories to best explain observations. And I would be stunned if any credible expert would believe that the origin of the earth can be explained in a manner that coheres reasonably with the evidence through any means other than the earth forming long after the big bang (and "within" the universe).

 

[expos4ever]

I study quantum and string physics.

Hi. I have no objection at for attempt to "reconcile" elements of the standard "scientific" model of the world with what we see in the Bible.

However, I am sure you will agree that this is an area where it is easy for people who are not appropriately qualified to mislead others. Can you please tell us the specifics about your credentials in respect to understanding quantum physics. What university did you attend? What type of degree do you have.

I am no expert and while I did find stuff in your post that I am quite sure is correct (specifically the stuff about light not aging), I would be shocked if many of your other assertions were considered plausible by the overwhelming majority of credentialed experts.

I could certainly be wrong, however. So can we please start by you telling us what your qualifications are.

 

[rockytopva]

The universe is about 15 billion years. However, the earth just did not appear at the big bang. It had to expand out from a point of origin. This is the timetable that I would put together...

I believe that the universe is about 15 billions years old and is the result and in response to Lucifer's rebellion.

If... E = mc2 ... Then m (matter) = E/c2 (energy)

Therefore, for the big boom to have occurred the matter had to have been there before the light and energy (E/c2), as the scripture says...

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. - Genesis 1:2

I would imagine, with these words... 'Let there be light (Genesis 1:3)', that the earth (the mass) turned into energy and light (E/c2) and expanded out from a point of origin, turning into what solar systems the Father willed it to. So the plasma (E/c2) is actually mass that has changed state.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. - Genesis 1:4,5

I believe that 15 billion years took place between Genesis 1:3 and Genesis 1:4. God divided the light and the darkness by putting the earth in orbit around the sun thus creating the first day of the Earth's creation. But... The universe was created 15 billion years (give or take a few billion years) before that.

***So... The 7000 year theory and creation story, in my mind, begins after Genesis 1:3***

4300 - 2644 BC - Adam to the great flood: About 1,650 years
2644 - 1730 BC - The Patriarchs - From Noah to Joseph: About 1,000 years
1730 -1450 BC - From Joseph to Moses: So Joesphs bones were in Egypt about 300 years
1450 - 33 AD - The time of the Laws of Moses was about 1500 years.
33 - 66 AD Ephesus – Apostolic – 33 years, not long! “All they which are in Asia be turned away from me…” – II Timothy 1:15
66 - 312 AD - Smyrna – Martyrs – Persecutions ten days… Foxes Book of Martyrs describes ten Roman persecutions. Ended with Constantine
312 - 800 AD - Pergamos – Orthodox – A pyrgos is a fortified structure – Needed for the dark ages.
800-1450 AD Thyatira – Catholic – The Spirit of Jezebel is to persecute, control, and to dominate. Began with Charlemange
1450-1700 AD Sardis – Protestant – A sardius is a gem, elegant yet hard and rigid. Doctrine in the head, little in the heart.
1700-1940 AD Philadelphia – Methodist – To obtain sanctification was to do so with love. Anabaptists -Weslayan -Moravian
1940 - 2060 AD Laodicea – Charismatic – Rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing?
2060 - 3060 AD - The Millennial reign

The time of the horseman runs with the last couple of church ages...

1. White - Democracy - Came about along with the Philadelphian church
2. Red - Communism - Note the red flag, hammer and sickle.
3. Black - Islam - Note the desire to disrupt the global economy.
4. Pale - Anti-Christ - A brief 3.5 year reign.

Isaac Newton picked the 2060 AD end date and I will go along with him with the following disclaimer...

“And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half.” –Daniel 12:7

From a folio cataloged as Yahuda MS 7.3g, f. 13v:

"So then the time times & half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years & an half, reckoning twelve months to a year & 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060.” – Isaac Newton

As Charlemagne was crowned king on December 25, 800 by Pope Leo the III so the day of Christ's coming will be on Christmas Day, 2060. If the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) occurs seven years before the time of Christ’s coming the date of the rapture 12.25 2053. However… Isaac Newton notes…

“It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fancifull men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, & by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, & it is not for us to know the times & seasons which God hath put into his own breast." –Isaac Newton

4,300 years - Time of the ancients
2,060 years - Isaac Newtons Christ return prediction
1,000 year - Millennial Reign

I have 7,360 years from the time of the earth's cooling until the time God will disassociate the universe back into the E/c2 from whence it was forged....

Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat - 2 Peter 3:12

Our God is an eternal being. 15 billion years between Genesis 1:3 and Genesis 1:5 is no big deal for him. I believe that God gave Lucifer free run of this known universe... But Lucifer's time is growing short. I think also, in 15 billion years, many of the fallen angels have lost track and forgotten their original state. The hearts are hopelessly hardened and quite evil!

 

[StevenMerten]

I used to participate in Christian chat rooms years ago and found that rather than witnessing to the unsaved who were there to learn (or just to fight), that some Christian without fail, would bring up evolution and everyone was off and running! Every single time. Forget about discussing sin and salvation. The atheists who believed in evolution were becoming more and more turned off by the Christians. I think the enemy uses this topic for division and to get the focus off Jesus and salvation.

Personally I believe that God created all. How he did it does not matter to me and is certainly not worth arguing with non believers because it is a major stumbling block to so many who already have a hard time with Christianity.

Hello Mary,
The whole message of Creation in the bible is that all that exists was created in preparation for, free willed, love for God capable, man. The world has turned this around to the thinking that man was something that accidentally evolved. God is not out surfing some super nova on the other side of the Universe. God's focus is right here on earth, seeking out love from, love for God capable, mankind. All the created universe is insignificant to the overwhealming importance of having love for God in your heart. I think putting God's creation of mankind back to the central focus point of creation is a great ministry.

 

[StevenMerten]

Thanks to all who posted. I read everyone once, some twice. Now I am contemplating.

 

[paulmojo]

I believe, from Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, in order for the Universe to be millions of years old, it would have had to be in existence before the earth, Genesis 1:16 says otherwise, God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. And there was evening, and there was morning--the fourth day. So the Sun, Moon and stars which make up the Universe were not around until the 4th day, that also knocks out the big bang theory. I laugh when science tells us they know how we came to be and use the big bang to prove it, when the facts are that the big bang is a theory, and a theory is not factual but an "I think this is how" to think something does not make it fact, and man idolises scientists as if their gods when the bible calls them (those who are atheist like Hawkins) fools. If we take the Hebrew calendar as Gods calendar the evening and the morning one day, one day means one day, any doubts we only need go to Exodus 20:8 and 11 "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Blessings

 

[expos4ever]

I laugh when science tells us they know how we came to be and use the big bang to prove it, when the facts are that the big bag is a theory, and a theory is not factual....

There is a lot of misunderstanding, and perhaps some intentional misrepresentation, by fundamentalists about this whole "it's just a theory" thing.

From Scientific American:

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are not expressing reservations about its truth.

In short, the "it's just a theory that hasn't been proven" line of reasoning is deeply misleading.

There are mountains of evidence for the big bang theory. To say "it's just a theory" is like saying "it's just a theory that the dog chewed my shoe while I was at work today" even though:

1. The dog was alone in the house and there was no evidence of a break-in;
2. The teeth marks on the shoes match the pattern of my dog's teeth;
3. My dog pooped out a shoelace the next day.

 

[Sammy-San]

Ultimately I don't think it matters.

If God can create a fully grown man, in an instantly grown garden.
Why can he not create an old looking universe?

We observe things the way we can see them at face value, not necessarily the way it is.

Either way, it doesn't debunk the creation story. Using it as an argument against it is flawed, and quite frankly unintelligent, if I may say so.

And I don't think Stephen Hawking is quite as smart as everyone seems to think he his.
He may be fairly smart, but I think we need to understand that he isn't all knowing.
What he says isn't truth automatically, just because the great and powerful Hawking said so.

6000, 13.7 billion. I don't care. I know God did it, I know the God of the bible is The God. There is no reason to put a pointless date on how old the universe is. Because it is pointless, it proves, or disproves, nothing else but how old it actually is.

If you proved 100% the earth was 6000 years old, there would still be Atheist.
if God wrote a message in the stars, the Atheist would say "Those clever Christians".

No amount of evidence will convince the unwilling.
Sad but true.

Was the universe being created the start of time or God is infinitely in the past too?

 

[Mary7]

Hi mary,

You wrote:



While I agree with that statement, over here in the 'CHRISTIAN ONLY!' forums, we are not discussing with atheists or other non-believers.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

I understand and I agree with what you said. I was just expressing my views about creation and also sharing a mistake I have seen Christians make around non Christians. Maybe someone might remember that if ever in a future situation.

 

[paulmojo]

There are mountains of evidence for the big bang theory. To say "it's just a theory" is like saying "it's just a theory that the dog chewed my shoe while I was at work today" even though:

I agree with you on the dog chewing the shoe example, but not on the mountains of evidence for the big bang. The dictionary gives other words for theory, such as, hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, none of them are factual meaning words, like theory they mean the same thing, "we THINK this is how" or "MAYBE it happened this way" and just like the big bang its all conjecture. No proof, no evidence, no fact. No human being was around to see it happen. God was though and as I also pointed out in my post, from the bible, he told us how it went down and there was not one word about a big bang, the earth was here first, and he made the universe around it on the 4th day, that was, according to the bible, 6000 years ago give or take, he rested on the seventh day, and the 7th thousand year will bring in the millennial reign of christ. the 7th thousand years, 7 in scripture is the number of completion. If as some believe it might have been 6 thousand years of creation, none of us from birth to death would rest a day as we would be waiting for the sabbath to arrive at the 7th thousand year and it would be a thousand year rest. But I clarified that with the Exodus 20:11 verse. Blessings

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Earth verses the big bang is the epic, David and Goliath battle, of God’s Creation story. God created Earth first, then the ‘Big Bang’, ‘Let There Be Light!’. Atheist scientists hate this part of God’s Creation story and disallow the thought of earth being created apart from their ‘Big Bang’. The thing is, for us, one week’s time, creationists, the way God explains it, we have two separate events. Two separate events allows for Time Dilation, big time!, in God’s Creation of everything that exists.

God created the earth. Earth existed for a while before light was created by God. God ‘s ‘Let There Be Light!’ is the ‘Big Bang’ going off. All of a sudden, next to earth, was the mass of one septillion stars on the head of a needle. Some say that God is not powerful enough to accelerate a planet the size of earth to light speed. I say, God popping into existence the mass of one septillion stars on the head of a needle is, light speed for earth accomplished! The gravitational pull of the mass of one septillion stars, on the head of a needle, is enough force to put earth into light speed, immediately. Or God can simply have created earth into existence already traveling at the speed of light. Science tells us that empty space probably flowed out into existence in front of the Big Bang. There is earth, traveling at the speed of light, through empty space, riding the wave of empty space coming into existence. Surfs up Dude!

With the explosion of the big bang, now earth has a light source to revolve next to, and thus day and night, equaling the passage of time; or in other words, days going by and the passage of time. God’s clock, as well as our clock on earth, even scientists with theoretical starships, is our revolving earth past a light source. God did not put the sun and stars into earth’s sky until the fourth day of creation. For four days, the 'Big Bang' was earth's, day vs night, light source. Using Time Dilation, the earth, traveling at the speed of light, and the big bang, traveling at a much slower velocity, then billions of years of star formation can occur in four days. This is Time Dilation. It only makes sense for God to do it this way. The explosion of the ‘Big Bang’ needs time to cool off before God inserts earth into the ‘big bang’ Cosmos. Besides that, even traveling at the speed of light, light is going to need some time to travel the billions of miles from the stars to earths target area of our sun’s orbit. So earth traveling at, or near, the speed of light, only makes sense for God to do it this way, while billions of years of star formation come into existence, for every day/night rotation on earth.

After a couple days on earth, which equates to many billions of years at the lower velocity of the big bang, earth enters into the the big bang debris field. Stars have already been born, lived, went super nova, and died in this debris area. Remember, earth, traveling near the speed of light is only seeing days go by while the big bang Cosmos has already experienced many billions of years of elapsing time, due to Time Dilation. Earth is absorbing some of this, billions of years old, debris like bugs on a windshield. The reason earth looks five billion years old is due to this, bugs on a windshield, effect on young earth that was born before the big bang, traveling through the billions of years of debris of the big bang. Earth herself is only days old while the debris she is runing into and absorbing is billions of years old. This is Time Dilation.

Finally, earth is captured by our sun’s gravitational pull and imprisoned in our sun’s orbit, on the fourth day of creation. A couple days go by on earth and God put man on earth. And God said, ‘It is good!’.

Anything can happen when God and Time Dilation are involved.

Creationists are not asking atheist scientists to say that this is the way it happened. Creationists are only asking atheist scientists to confirm that seven days of creation by God is a plausable and acceptable theory.

Time dilation and space flight​

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on earth. For sufficiently high speeds the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home. Indeed, a constant 1 g acceleration would permit humans to travel through the entire known Universe in one human lifetime. The space travelers could return to Earth billions of years in the future. A scenario based on this idea was presented in the novel Planet of the Apes by Pierre Boulle.

Quoted From: Wikipedia Time Dilation


​

Actually, you should refer to God's creation as the six day creation and not the seven day creation because God created everything in six literal 24 hour days and not in seven days. God rested (stopped) from his work on the 7th day. I heard a Christian artist sing a song (talking about the creation) and they made the mistake by saying that God created everything in seven days; But that is simply not true.

Anyways, the words "evening and the morning" lets us know that these are 24 hour days being spoken of within the six day creation and not long periods of time. You have to do gymnastic twists with the words "evening and morning" all because you favor outside worldy ideas over what the Bible actually says plainly.


...

 

[paulmojo]

As Charlemagne was crowned king on December 25, 800 by Pope Leo the III so the day of Christ's coming will be on Christmas Day, 2060. If the rapture of the saints (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17) occurs seven years before the time of Christ’s coming the date of the rapture 12.25 2053. However… Isaac Newton notes…

"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.Matthew 24:36. No offence brother, but its not a good idea to date set.

 

[John Hyperspace]

There is a lot of misunderstanding, and perhaps some intentional misrepresentation, by fundamentalists about this whole "it's just a theory" thing.

First let me be clear that I'm not a "fundamentalist" and am strongly in the camp of "Who knows, who cares?" when it comes to these topics; BUT

From Scientific American:

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are not expressing reservations about its truth.

That is an misleading paragraph. The first thing to note is that any and all theory is approximate and tentative, it is not an expression of "truth" as the word popularly means "certainty": the paragraph also uses the word "scientists" as if all scientists are in perfect harmony with the general theory of the status quo: they are not. If a "scientist" is using words like "true" or "certain" with regards to any theory, then they are a fraud.

In short, the "it's just a theory that hasn't been proven" line of reasoning is deeply misleading.

That phrase itsn't misleading, it is accurate in terms of popular meanings of words, which supersede jargon. Meaning, that line is using the word "theory" by way of popular definition, to mean "something not certain/factual" and "proven" to be "demonstrated as fact of the matter": in this regard the statement is accurate. In general scientific jargon, the terms "theory" and "proven" are not the same in definition as they are in popular useage.

There are mountains of evidence for the big bang theory. To say "it's just a theory" is like saying "it's just a theory that the dog chewed my shoe while I was at work today" even though:

1. The dog was alone in the house and there was no evidence of a break-in;
2. The teeth marks on the shoes match the pattern of my dog's teeth;
3. My dog pooped out a shoelace the next day.

Though there is supporting evidence for the inflationary model of the "big bang" theory, it is very little (I would ask for these "mountains" to be stated: I am aware of perhaps three lines of evidence in support) and is contested by many in the field, and is anything but "conclusive": there is no uniform acceptance of the theory, and there are several competing alternatives. Each have their supporting evidence, each explain what others do not. To make it seem that "big bang" cosmogeny is some sort of "truth" is highly misleading.

Note I'm neither affirming nor denying any specific theory, but simply stating that it is by no means "proven" or "true" or "certain" in any regard whatsoever. Personally, I gave up on these things precisely because they are so convoluted and contested by legitimate persons in the field. When it comes down to where the rubber meets the road: no one knows, and no one will ever know. It's all just speculative conjecture; most of it biased and imaginary.