Hoyle was at least honest about it. Others are not. The simple truth is that the big bang defined all of the universe. Prior to it, the laws of nature weren’t defined. The theories behind the big bang explain, very clearly, that at the energy levels involved in the creation of the universe, the masses of particles and the energies of the fundamental forces of nature become meaningless. The only way to know what happened in the big bang is to recreate it, which we will not do for obvious reasons.
I have no trouble believing that God can create a universe that is 13 billion years old or 5,700 years old. I have sincere peoblems with athiests who claim that since we can not understand the beginning of the universe, it proves that there is no god. That’s not just illogical, it’s stupid.
As to the origin of life, we can’t even define life. Have we determined if viruses are living things yet? I think it was Robert Heinlen who threw a lovely monkey wrench into the definition of life in Stranger In A Strange Land, although I could be wrong about the book.
Might I suggest that you visit the Astronomy Picture of the Day threads? (I post them.) The science of it is linked and often insightful, and the pictures are really cool. :)
Your post is quite reasonable. I agree.
When atheists say, for example, "no need to posit God, because we have an explanation for matter, it is made of such-and-such..." to me just begs the question, "Who set up the framework for this to occur? Who invented space and time?
If God did it, then, how absurd is it to argue about the universe being billions or thousands of years old? He invented the time by which we primitively try to measure a handful of things.
We ultimately know very little, and certainly not enough to say for a certainty whether or not God exists."
Difficulties in clasification are expected in a continuum. The more you learn about history, the finer the gradations.