I think a lot of people here are correlating the concept of "nothing" with the concept of what happened before the Big Bang. That's not necessarily accurate. If something served as the impetus for the creation of our universe and the beginning of our time, that just means that there was something there before it (think B.C.E and C.E.), and we haven't yet gone far back enough to reach the beginnings of anything. Think bigger than the Big Bang as the beginning of all time, but rather just of current time.

Well, if you want proof, I'll give the best I can:

Job 40:15-24 sounds like a descirption of a Dinosaur, which weren't discovered until the 19th century.

Job 28:35 says the air has weight, which wasn't discovered until the 17th century.

Genesis 17:12 says to circumcise on the 8th day of a boy's life, which has been proven to be the best day.

Genesis 15:5 says the stars are uncountable, which turned out to be true.

Isaiah 66:7–8 implies that Israel would be reborn in a day, which happened in 1948.

I just want to add in my two cents, so yes lets go deeper.

Now all of our actions are caused by the cells in our brain. If we go down a little further, then we could say all of our actions are the result of atoms, or electrons, or smaller particles we haven't even discovered yet.

Are those atoms and electrons still us making a decision?

At what level how different are we from the air?

/thread

I think the main difference between the religious and scientific thoughts is that religion tries to explain the world while science tries to describe the world.
By that i mean ideas like god give you an explanation of how and why the world exists. This is of course without proof and depends on your faith in that explanation. On the other side science doesn't claim to have an explanation for anything that can't(yet) be proven, but science is there to describe how the world looks like(where and why ever it came from)

I think the main difference between the religious and scientific thoughts is that religion tries to explain the world while science tries to describe the world.
By that i mean ideas like god give you an explanation of how and why the world exists. This is of course without proof and depends on your faith in that explanation. On the other side science doesn't claim to have an explanation for anything that can't(yet) be proven, but science is there to describe how the world looks like(where and why ever it came from)

Let me add-on to that.

The way how i see it is that if we don't understand something or can't explain why something is happening, then religious people will say its because God is doing it, and because the Bible says so.

However, over many years people used to believe the sun rises every morning because of God, and that the Sun goes around the Earth. Well, due to science and physics we learned it is not so at all. So, with that said, I say whatever we don't understand right now, science will eventually figure it out in the future just like how we learned why the apple fall to Earth, and why the planets move through the solar system.

The great and powerful Spurge, crossing his arms, pouting his lips and kicking the sand? Really? :C

So much good stuff in this thread. I really enjoy (lurking) in these large threads and reading the discussions. They're almost always pretty darn deep, and people on both sides usually have really good points.
Ah, vgchartz... You give me the news, you give me the charts, and you give me the discussions. <3

Disproven beliefs from earlier days are a strong hint (if not even evidence) towards that the bible is just a story written down by men instead of being a true message from god.  I think we agree on that.

Nevertheless, i do not think that science will ever be able to give an answer to the why or world and/or life is existing.

E.g. gravity: As the behavior of gravity is understood quiet well, we can now calculate the paths of planets etc. But we still don't know why there is gravity at all. And then again, when we in future will find the graviton (or if not the graviton then some other mechanism that transports the force of gravity between the masses) you can ask for the reason behind the graviton and so on. 

The same goes for any other subject, whenever you learn something new and know what the reason for some phenomenon is, you can immediately ask the next question.

I believe that even if science should come to a point of a unified theory that's perfectly describing our world without any phenomenon left which cannot be explained by it, we still would not be able to answer the question why the world is like it is and not any different from that.

-