After the Big Bang Theory was introduced & embraced, were atheist

[AvidReader]

physicists correct to complain that BBT....? .........was inherently theistic because a scientific declaration that the universe had a beginning [as Stephen Hawking emphasized in his A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME] leads to the natural conclusion that a moment of creation implies a creator?

Why or why not?

 

[somathus]

No, because we only theorize what happened the moment after the Big Bang. before that, all the Laws of physics and Thermodynamics breakdown.

It doesn't mean we had a creator. It doesn't (and never claimed to) mean that something came from nothing.

We probably got crapped out through from a black hole.

 

[Vincent G]

No, because the big bang theory says nothing about the conditions and causes that lead to the big bang itself.

And, just to make the point, Stephen Hawking did state that a god is not necessary:

But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator? [Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam, 1988), p. 140-41.]

This doesn't prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary. [Stephen W. Hawking, Der Spiegel, 1989]

 

[Ladys Man 2.0]

The universe as we know it was made from pre-existing matter. Since the universe, as it exists now, with its current laws, began at the moment of the singularity expansion we refer to as 'the Big Bang', anything predating it is of little consequence to our universe, because it can have no effect on it.
There is nothing to suggest divine intervention in the events of the big bang.