Again, I would strongly object to this viewpoint. You can be a young earth creationist or you can be an evolutionist, those two are strongly mutually exclusive. However, a belief in evolution doesn't automatically preclude a belief in God. The only thing it really precludes is a literal interpretation of a particular translation of the first chapter or so of Genesis.
You're thinking of the big bang as an explosion from a tiny dot in some existing space, whereas actually the "big bang" was the process by which space itself came into existence, before any elements were formed, let alone compounds such as water. All the mass of the universe wasn't directly bound up in this infinitesimally small space, but a ridiculously large amount of energy was, and this is what pulled space itself apart (and indeed is still pulling it apart today.)
I'm actually of the opinion that "big bang" is a bad name for it for that reason - since it's not really an explosion or anything else that we associate with a "bang". It's a bit misleading in that sense of the word.
Incorrect - scientists say that *energy* can neither be destroyed nor created, and matter and energy are essentially equivalent (under the right conditions, one can be converted into the other.) So yes, you could say that the energy used to create the fundamental particles such as quarks, leptons etc. which created the protons / neutrons, which created the atoms, which formed various compounds, which eventually formed us, was present at the big bang. I think it's personally a bit of a stretch to use that to say "we" were all there, though I can see where you're coming from.
Of course, no-one was alive anywhere near the big bang, so we have to work backwards with what we have - and that's where we end up at the theory. We see stars being gradually formed through gravitational fields pulling gasses together, we see those stars harvesting "rocky matter" through gravitational fields of their own, and this matter in turn forming planets. We can therefore extrapolate backwards from what we observe, along with the expansion of the universe, and conclude that at one time, space itself was very small - infinitesimally small. We call this "start" the big bang. What happened to cause it, and even what happened before around 1E-30 seconds after it started, we have no idea. Physics isn't there yet.
As I've said already though, I see no reason for the two to be mutually exclusive. If you accept the idea that the universe was (somehow) created by God, which I personally do, you then naturally end up with the question of *how* God created this. This then gives you a choice as to whether to stick to a literal interpretation of a particular translation of Genesis, or you get really stuck into it: marvelling at it, wondering at it and working out our understanding of the scientific details behind it. If God didn't want us to do that, I don't believe he would have given us the minds that he has.
Everyone has a soul. Even heartless, horrid, people, have souls lol... If you don't have a soul, then you won't need to worry about heaven 
