[ALS]

"Asking what was before the big bang makes as much sense as asking what is north of the north pole."

Depends on who you ask.

Since you can't even prove a "big bang", you can't even begin to prove when time began.

Sooo.. the Shlock Doc is wrong and so be thee.

[djf]

And there is nothing to prove that our universe is not simply the inside of a black hole that collapsed some 18 billion yrs ago. From where we are, we can't see beyond the horizon. Doesn't mean there isn't anything beyond the horizon.

[BMCDA]

Well, we can't prove the big bang because we can't prove anything in science since proof is only reserved for mathematics and formal systems.
What we can do however, is to observe the effects of the big bang and as far as I can tell the observations are in good concordance with the current cosmological model.

[Dataman]

Since you can't even prove a "big bang", you can't even begin to prove when time began.

BTW, the phrase "before time began" is only a problem for the materialists. It makes no sense when they use it since matter and its motion are all there is. Creationists, however, acknowledge the existence of the Other which allows for the creation of time. It's an unfair advantage, isn't it?