Forex360:
Can someone please help me and summarise this epistle in 3 sentence

Lie, lier Mohammed, liest scientist.....

Vyzz:




Wasting alot of money chasing this..


Is not even clout




MODIFIED
On a serious note, I have making ftc like crazy, and I have been waiting for the money the give to people that make ftc.


Who should I send my bank account details to?

I taya o!
What are they really out for, all this archaeological researches are never useful at all.
SMALL TIME NOW, THEM GO CONTACT ANOTHER UNKNOWN DISEASE, WEY DEY SLEEP ON IN OWN. - DINO-20

gaskiyamagana:

Scientist lie past that CERTAIN INFORMATION MINISTER because Scientist lie to the world but the latter lies to Nigerians.

You get sense jare

espn:
They should stop all this stupid and nonsense jor...na 1 trillion years no be 110millìon years...

These animals or creatures died out during the great flood (Noah's flood). That's why we noticed that they died enmass at the same time or era, with food in their mouth, washed out to sea or river beds/shores and dead but with little or no sign of trauma (because they died through drowning).

By the way, this 110 million years ago talk or calculations are rubbish estimates. These creatures died a few thousand years ago during the biblical flood.
A description of 2 of them could be found in the Bible book of Job 40 vs 15 to the end of job chapter 41.
It describes a beast called behemoth and Leviathan (a dragon that spits flames).

fairfora:
in as much as there are veritable information and discoveries brought about by science, some claims cannot be substantiated. Example of this the dinosaur era.

There are a couple of baobab trees in south Africa which are over 4,000 years old. The trees are still waxing strong. There were dangerous animals that are now in extinction but not as old as some scientists had exaggerated.

Some of them out of their myopic minds posited that, when Israel left the Egypt, the red sea was shallow and that was why they didn't get drowned at the time of crossing and my question is, why did the same red sea swallow pharaoh, his army and chariots in same red sea? Till date, they've not been able to find an answer to that. I respect science which I'm a part of but some claims dont just make sense.

Who said the Red Sea was shallow then? Such person is void of understanding wonder working power of
God. Even though what really happened at the Red Sea is not well postulated in the Bible, one that understands his or her Creator should be able to tell what happened. After the Red Sea split, the sea floor rose to the ground level so that the Israelites could pass.

Crysthaniel:

Yes man.. It depends on how you define your own science.. Apostle paul already answered this kind of question in the bible 1 Corinthians 15:35-38
Says..
Nevertheless, someone will say: “How are the dead to be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming?” 36 You unreasonable person! What you sow is not made alive unless first it dies. 37 And as for what you sow, you sow, not the body that will develop, but just a bare grain, whether of wheat or of some other kind of seed; 38 but God gives it a body just as it has pleased him, and gives to each of the seeds its own body

Before any seed grows, it has to die or spoil first
And it then germinates and form a new life... Yet you find it hard to believe in resurrection don't you think that the one who programmed the seeds can raise the dead?? That verse 38 explains that God can always give us a new body

You keep going back to ONE book. The book is just a collection of uplifting stories. There is nothing scientific about it. It does not explain how a dead person is brought to life. Why is it that in this modern day we live in such miracles do not take place any more? It sure would be nice because that would make believing a whole lot easier ...

light099:
Scientists with their Carbon 14, Carbon dating bullcrap.
Extraordinary bullcraps, only valid until another bullcrap invalidates the former.
Continue searching, you would never discover anything of tangible relevance to your search, you would only end up more confused and misinformed every time.

As a human, you would always have to believe in one shit or another, either the religious shit or the scientific shit. No side seems to be devoid of shits, except that one shit is obviously the way to go, while the other is nothing more than futile bullcrap.

It's more sensible to believe the allegory of a snake talking in a garden than theories of how fish turned into man;
It's more sensible to believe this masterpiece universe is designed and fabricated by a creative, wise, intelligent, supernatural mind than to believe it created itself and exists on it's own. More ridiculously originated from a tiny bang. You don't mean it?
It's more sensible to believe a path that tells us the purpose and future of the world, not one which doesn't know why we're here, where we're coming from and where we're heading to.
It's sensible to believe a great designer somewhere knows a lady should have two breasts, curvy figure and thinner voice, while the man should be more masculine with thicker voice. Or you mean nothing figured that out and also fabricated it?
All these are very shallow details by the way. It would take some tangible time to describe the minutest parts of life and infinite time for the whole vast universe.

Life is no doubt a great masterpiece of art, epitome of extraordinary creativity, climax of skillful fabrication, nexus of complex functionality and unbelievable compatibility of distinct contrasting vastness.

Science is only good in fabricating inanimate objects and making life better, that is where it belongs and it should strictly stick to that. But when atheist scientists come explaining cardinal aspects of life with science. I tell them, never mind, because you really suck at that.

Some people would mock you for being so gullible for believing in a sky daddy, until later you realize who is really more gullible.

.

obonujoker:


Another atheistic lie trying to demean the power of God.

God created man in one day, a special creature... Nothing is too hard for God to do

You lots are so quick to judge without understanding, why would you think im an atheist and a lair
If God created the universe in one billion years does it make God less powerful than if it was created in one second? Are you the one to determine if God is powerful or not? Have you created anything on your own? If you choose to judge Gods Power within your human limits and understanding...thats your problem.
No where in The Bible did it say the world was created in a 24hour cycle as you blindly think, go read the creation story in Genesis properly before you argue blindly, the "sun" was created on the "fourth day", so the use of the words "morning, evening, night" in the creation story has nothing to do with the "sun" and "moon", and certainly not our 24 hours cycle we know. All we are told is man is created from dust, how exactly or how long we dont know, and if you think the earth is 6000+ years how do you explain the races, mutations, volcanoes, fossils, etc?
Besides if you read Gen 3:22-25 its obvious there are many things we really dont understand. It says theres a tree of life somewhere with Angels gaurding it, what exactly do you think is this tree of everlasting life? Something physical or spiritual? Or you think it was destroyed with Noahs flood? Or God uprooted it?

Crysthaniel:


Whether you like it or Not Science can never explain the origin of life through Evolution theory

...but if you are sick today you'l still run to see a doctor, what makes you now think science itself isnt a miracle? Stop being narrow-minded

light099:
Scientists with their Carbon 14, Carbon dating bullcrap.
Extraordinary bullcraps, only valid until another bullcrap invalidates the former.
Continue searching, you would never discover anything of tangible relevance to your search, you would only end up more confused and misinformed every time.

As a human, you would always have to believe in one shit or another, either the religious shit or the scientific shit. No side seems to be devoid of shits, except that one shit is obviously the way to go, while the other is nothing more than futile bullcrap.

It's more sensible to believe the allegory of a snake talking in a garden than theories of how fish turned into man;
It's more sensible to believe this masterpiece universe is designed and fabricated by a creative, wise, intelligent, supernatural mind than to believe it created itself and exists on it's own. More ridiculously originated from a tiny bang. You don't mean it?
It's more sensible to believe a path that tells us the purpose and future of the world, not one which doesn't know why we're here, where we're coming from and where we're heading to.
It's sensible to believe a great designer somewhere knows a lady should have two breasts, curvy figure and thinner voice, while the man should be more masculine with thicker voice. Or you mean nothing figured that out and also fabricated it?
All these are very shallow details by the way. It would take some tangible time to describe the minutest parts of life and infinite time for the whole vast universe.

Life is no doubt a great masterpiece of art, epitome of extraordinary creativity, climax of skillful fabrication, nexus of complex functionality and unbelievable compatibility of distinct contrasting vastness.

Science is only good in fabricating inanimate objects and making life better, that is where it belongs and it should strictly stick to that. But when atheist scientists come explaining cardinal aspects of life with science. I tell them, never mind, because you really suck at that.

Some people would mock you for being so gullible for believing in a sky daddy, until later you realize who is really more gullible.

Flesh and blood did NOT reveal this to you...how the supposed 'enlightened' atheist wannabes want me to believe that this complex universe down to the very complex microbes that exists in the soil, ALL coexisting together, all PERFECTLY designed...look at the wonder that is MAN..a being that has the ability to invent, to study, to teach, to love and to hate..a being whose compassion goes beyond it's own specie...you tell me man came from a random, inanimate,thoughtless explosion?? That this life sustaining earth came from an unplanned, one in a billion billion unique explosion? That the spacing of the earth from the sun to sustain life is all one fvcking act of luck and chance that only happens in a billion billion billion billion billion Russian roullete? And somehow this makes sense to them??

saraki2019:
Only physics make sense in science, the rest are just bullcrap

Biology makes the most sense..it deals with the living body..it's something you can actually observe on your own body.

JustforMen:


I would say that believing in religious fairy tale may be inaccurate but at least it approaches the reality of truth.

Abeg explain how a fairly tale about a God (any of the Gods) coming out of nowhere and creating with his mind, hands and words approaches reality?

Scientific fairy tales of something coming out of nothing does not even rise to the dignity of an error. It is worse than nonsense.

How then do a God coming out of nothing rises to the dignity of an error?

We must posit a first cause, according to scientific truth, for any sort of motion to be initiated and we know that the first cause must be outside the body its influencing. So how sensible is a 'big bang' without a first cause?
Religious narrations can be taken as metaphors but the scientific fairy tales of the beginning of life requires more 'faith' than religion to believe.
I would say aspects of both religion and science are true and correct but both have some aspects of truth that have not been discovered.

Why must we posit the first cause? Why must there even be a first cause?
The hypothesis that the first cause must be outside the body of the cause is just mumbo jumbo. First cause is first cause, there is no other cause before it, else you tell me God also must have a cause (even if it is outside the universe).
Scientific principle follows evidence and data. It attempts to provide the best explanation for observable data. Oya, use your God to explain red shift of distant objects and the microwave background radiation.
If religious explanations are simply metaphors, what then are the actual explanations? What are they explaining?

incogni2o:


Science is based on evidence that is at first believed by Faith.

Same as the Bible.

No one (including you or aristotle) would ever have the time to prove every of the person's belief.

Not everything you believe in science is what you prove.

There are lot of electricians who dont know physics.

I have known Man to the point to say some things are just known by instinct and further study makes us call them science.

Science doesnt control the world. A mind does.

Science is just the evidence we see.

I dont get your point.

This confirms the biblical revelation of a pre Adamic race that was wiped out before the process of re creation. The account of Genesis 1 is not the beginning of creation but re creation. After God created Adam, he was told to go and replenish the earth pointing to the fact of the existence of an old earth that was destroyed.

saraki2019:
Only physics make sense in science, the rest are just bullcrap

Carbon dating is physics. And if you are dumping this as a bullcrap, you're also dragging physics with it.

I wonder why we choose the science we want to believe and that which we don't want to believe.

People should either agree carbon dating is true or false instead of being selective about the field of science where it is right and that where it is wrong.

light099:
Scientists with their Carbon 14, Carbon dating bullcrap.
Extraordinary bullcraps, only valid until another bullcrap invalidates the former.
Continue searching, you would never discover anything of tangible relevance to your search, you would only end up more confused and misinformed every time.

As a human, you would always have to believe in one shit or another, either the religious shit or the scientific shit. No side seems to be devoid of shits, except that one shit is obviously the way to go, while the other is nothing more than futile bullcrap.

It's more sensible to believe the allegory of a snake talking in a garden than theories of how fish turned into man;
It's more sensible to believe this masterpiece universe is designed and fabricated by a creative, wise, intelligent, supernatural mind than to believe it created itself and exists on it's own. More ridiculously originated from a tiny bang. You don't mean it?
It's more sensible to believe a path that tells us the purpose and future of the world, not one which doesn't know why we're here, where we're coming from and where we're heading to.
It's sensible to believe a great designer somewhere knows a lady should have two breasts, curvy figure and thinner voice, while the man should be more masculine with thicker voice. Or you mean nothing figured that out and also fabricated it?
All these are very shallow details by the way. It would take some tangible time to describe the minutest parts of life and infinite time for the whole vast universe.

Life is no doubt a great masterpiece of art, epitome of extraordinary creativity, climax of skillful fabrication, nexus of complex functionality and unbelievable compatibility of distinct contrasting vastness.

Science is only good in fabricating inanimate objects and making life better, that is where it belongs and it should strictly stick to that. But when atheist scientists come explaining cardinal aspects of life with science. I tell them, never mind, because you really suck at that.

Some people would mock you for being so gullible for believing in a sky daddy, until later you realize who is really more gullible.

Science and religion don't even exist on the same plane.. Only black people have this level of arrogance coupled with ignorance and it's funny and embarrassing at the same time. Science is grounded on stuff we can physically show to be true. That you don't understand how they arrive at their findings doesn't mean it's a lie. An evolutionary biologist from any part of the world should be able to pick up their paper and break things down for you. No mago-mago here.

Our education system really failed us. I see posts like yours everyday online and it makes me grateful that I don't live in Nigeria. Life for don tire me by now.

DedeNkem:
Dinosaur can't be found in the bible. Another evidence that shows religion is a fallacy.

You're soooooo confident in your ignorance it's actually amusing! Have you heard about the beast called a behemoth in book of job 40: 15-24??
It was a beast that job actually knew(because the book of job is said to be older than moses)..behemoth was a known animal that had these characteristics
1. It was huge
2. It had tails like a cedar tree(a big tree)
3. It's strength was in its belly (again meaning it was big animal)
4. It ate grass( a herbivore)
5. It could wade into the Jordan river without fear and drink from it
6. It's bones were as strong as brass...tell me any known animal with such descriptions??

Grandmeister:

Flesh and blood did NOT reveal this to you...how the supposed 'enlightened' atheist wannabes want me to believe that this complex universe down to the very complex microbes that exists in the soil, ALL coexisting together, all PERFECTLY designed...look at the wonder that is MAN..a being that has the ability to invent, to study, to teach, to love and to hate..a being whose compassion goes beyond it's own specie...you tell me man came from a random, inanimate,thoughtless explosion?? That this life sustaining earth came from an unplanned, one in a billion billion unique explosion? That the spacing of the earth from the sun to sustain life is all one fvcking act of luck and chance that only happens in a billion billion billion billion billion Russian roullete? And somehow this makes sense to them??

I don't even know where to start to begin to address your ignorance. It's so bad, that one probably needs to start from kindergarten.

ALL are not coexisting perfectly designed. The universe is a very chaotic place, with no evidence of design. 99.9% of plants and animals that have lived on this planet are extinct - destroyed. That microbe, you and the earth will one day be gone - destroyed.
It's the billions of explosions going on in the sun every second that sustains ALL life on the earth.

The spacing between the sun and the earth is not constant and is gradually extending outwards as the sun losses mass. It's presently in the habitable zone, which is the temperature where water can exist in all 3 states. It a few billion years, it will leave the habitable zone. It will be too cold to sustain life. Venus will then enter the habitable zone (whether venus can sustain life even in the habitable zone is another matter. It was believed Mars was once in the habitable zone and that it contained life.

Flier:
You are just a stack illiterate along with all your mates on this thread! If you know how these scientists are changing the world everyday you won’t be posting nonsense or doubt them
You that can not make ordinary toothpick was here blaming people who could make a plane and mobile phones

Oh come of it with your pseudo intelligence! Archaeological findings are worlds apart from nuclear physics! Don't ever put an archaeological research in the same context with neuro surgeon...not to talk of one full of estimates of over a 100 million years ago..

wirinet:

I don't even know where to start to begin to address your ignorance. It's so bad, that one probably needs to start from kindergarten.

ALL are not coexisting perfectly designed. The universe is a very chaotic place, with no evidence of design. 99.9% of plants and animals that have lived on this planet are extinct - destroyed. That microbe, you and the earth will one day be gone - destroyed.
It's the billions of explosions going on in the sun every second that sustains ALL life on the earth.

The spacing between the sun and the earth is not constant and is gradually extending outwards as the sun losses mass. It's presently in the habitable zone, which is the temperature where water can exist in all 3 states. It a few billion years, it will leave the habitable zone. It will be too cold to sustain life. Venus will then enter the habitable zone (whether venus can sustain life even in the habitable zone is another matter. It was believed Mars was once in the habitable zone and that it contained life.

You are educated but like many educated Nigerians you lack the ability to actually THINK for yourself and question dogma..you lack the ability to learn and unlearn what you've been taught in school..that is why Nigeria is were it is today..so many graduates and professors, little to nothing to show for it....that you believe that 'constant little explosion' is the reason life happened on earth is ridiculous...my question is HOW DOES AN INANIMATE EVENT CREATE LIFE?? We all know what explosions are...they are thoughtless, they destroy and do not create...so these random, inanimate, thoughtless explosion SOMEHOW formed the earth and SOMEHOW made both it's external and internal environment to be able to breed and sustain LIFE, all by CHANCE?? From the ozone down to the minerals in the soil and the LIVING billion microbes that makes the plants to sprout forth...it all came about by a billion billion billion billion billion chance? From a random thoughtless inanimate explosion?? If you actually believe this then you CANNOT be helped..

TruthinAction:
This confirms the biblical revelation of a pre Adamic race that was wiped out before the process of re creation. The account of Genesis 1 is not the beginning of creation but re creation. After God created Adam, he was told to go and replenish the earth pointing to the fact of the existence of an old earth that was destroyed.

Hmmmm

light099:
Scientists with their Carbon 14, Carbon dating bullcrap.
Extraordinary bullcraps, only valid until another bullcrap invalidates the former.
Continue searching, you would never discover anything of tangible relevance to your search, you would only end up more confused and misinformed every time.

As a human, you would always have to believe in one shit or another, either the religious shit or the scientific shit. No side seems to be devoid of shits, except that one shit is obviously the way to go, while the other is nothing more than futile bullcrap.

It's more sensible to believe the allegory of a snake talking in a garden than theories of how fish turned into man;
It's more sensible to believe this masterpiece universe is designed and fabricated by a creative, wise, intelligent, supernatural mind than to believe it created itself and exists on it's own. More ridiculously originated from a tiny bang. You don't mean it?
It's more sensible to believe a path that tells us the purpose and future of the world, not one which doesn't know why we're here, where we're coming from and where we're heading to.
It's sensible to believe a great designer somewhere knows a lady should have two breasts, curvy figure and thinner voice, while the man should be more masculine with thicker voice. Or you mean nothing figured that out and also fabricated it?
All these are very shallow details by the way. It would take some tangible time to describe the minutest parts of life and infinite time for the whole vast universe.

Life is no doubt a great masterpiece of art, epitome of extraordinary creativity, climax of skillful fabrication, nexus of complex functionality and unbelievable compatibility of distinct contrasting vastness.

Science is only good in fabricating inanimate objects and making life better, that is where it belongs and it should strictly stick to that. But when atheist scientists come explaining cardinal aspects of life with science. I tell them, never mind, because you really suck at that.

Some people would mock you for being so gullible for believing in a sky daddy, until later you realize who is really more gullible.

please eh I am not allergic to intelligent people and certainly you are one of them judging from this post of yours. I am following you please follow back

veeshock:

You lots are so quick to judge without understanding, why would you think im an atheist and a lair
If God created the universe in one billion years does it make God less powerful than if it was created in one second? Are you the one to determine if God is powerful or not? Have you created anything on your own? If you choose to judge Gods Power within your human limits and understanding...thats your problem.
No where in The Bible did it say the world was created in a 24hour cycle as you blindly think, go read the creation story in Genesis properly before you argue blindly, the "sun" was created on the "fourth day", so the use of the words "morning, evening, night" in the creation story has nothing to do with the "sun" and "moon", and certainly not our 24 hours cycle we know. All we are told is man is created from dust, how exactly or how long we dont know, and if you think the earth is 6000+ years how do you explain the races, mutations, volcanoes, fossils, etc?
Besides if you read Gen 3:22-25 its obvious there are many things we really dont understand. It says theres a tree of life somewhere with Angels gaurding it, what exactly do you think is this tree of everlasting life? Something physical or spiritual? Or you think it was destroyed with Noahs flood? Or God uprooted it?

Bro... The counting of time began when Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden. No one said the Earth is 6,000+ years.... No one! This is because the Bible clearly stated, "waters covered the whole Earth, and darkness was upon the face of the deep".

So, it could millions of years before the Lord God created the Earth, or it could be million of years Adam and Eve stayed in the garden before they were cast out!

However to question that God used a day to create man doesn't make sense, since he's the all powerful God, and like the Lord Jesus Christ stated in Matthew 19:26, "with men this is impossible, but with God, all things are possible

Judybash93:


How?

Noah's flood

Judybash93:

You know that's gonna be a major breakthrough right? The claim has been debunked many times.


http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/bogus.html

https://www.foxnews.com/world/noahs-ark-hoax-claim-doesnt-deter-believers

Also in those days, the Nephilim were wiped out too... And there were proofs of Giants too.

Grandmeister:

You are educated but like many educated Nigerians you lack the ability to actually THINK for yourself and question dogma..you lack the ability to learn and unlearn what you've been taught in school..that is why Nigeria is were it is today..so many graduates and professors, little to nothing to show for it....that you believe that 'constant little explosion' is the reason life happened on earth is ridiculous...my question is HOW DOES AN INANIMATE EVENT CREATE LIFE?? We all know what explosions are...they are thoughtless, they destroy and do not create...so these random, inanimate, thoughtless explosion SOMEHOW formed the earth and SOMEHOW made both it's external and internal environment to be able to breed and sustain LIFE, all by CHANCE?? From the ozone down to the minerals in the soil and the LIVING billion microbes that makes the plants to sprout forth...it all came about by a billion billion billion billion billion chance? From a random thoughtless inanimate explosion?? If you actually believe this then you CANNOT be helped..

I just opened my mouth by the amount of ignorance being displayed in a few lines. Why not grab a basic geography book to learn the basis of how the solar system works. You will find some useful information in SSS 3 geography text book.

Energy from the sun comes from nuclear reactions from the conversion of hydrogen into helium at the core. The covert ion relation follows the E = MC2 law, so energy is produced in the former of electromagnetic rays. These rays leave the sun surface and reach the earth in about 8 minutes. It's these rays (energy) that gives life to all living things on earth. Plants and phytoplanktons take energy directly from the sun, animals take this energy from the plants and phytoplanktons and other higher animals still take this same energy from the animals. Without the sun, there will be no life on earth.

Also learn a little bit about the formation of the solar system. The sun and the planets formed about the same time.

You talk about where Nigeria is today. Nigeria is in the mess we are in today because we apply faith to scientific problems. We have people like you who discourage scientific learning and education in favour of religious indoctrination. You guys and Boko Haram discourage learning in favour of religious indoctrination.

I guess the earth is such a massive graveyard!

obonujoker:


Also in those days, the Nephilim were wiped out too... And there were proofs of Giants too.

Where are the proofs of the Nephilims, are there skeletons, fossils or DNA? Except you want us to Gorgons, Centaurs and Vampires because they are written in a book.

obonujoker:


Bro... The counting of time began when Adam and Eve were cast out of the garden. No one said the Earth is 6,000+ years.... No one! This is because the Bible clearly stated, "waters covered the whole Earth, and darkness was upon the face of the deep".

So, it could millions of years before the Lord God created the Earth, or it could be million of years Adam and Eve stayed in the garden before they were cast out!

However to question that God used a day to create man doesn't make sense, since he's the all powerful God, and like the Lord Jesus Christ stated in Matthew 19:26, "with men this is impossible, but with God, all things are possible

The simple question is how did you know God created man in a day of 24hours? Or is that not what you mean? No one said The Almighty who created the universe isnt capable of that, but where did you get that from?

GOFRONT:
Pls can we see its last Urine??

Seconded!

And the last saliva

decatalyst:
Please what about it last shit?


Between these scientists and a certain information minister, I don't know who lie pass.

Brain dey pain

wirinet:

Abeg explain how a fairly tale about a God (any of the Gods) out of nowhere and creating with his mind, hands and words approaches reality?



How then do a God coming out of nothing rises to the dignity of an error?


Why must we posit the first cause? Why must there even be a first cause?
The hypothesis that the first cause must be outside the body of the cause is just mumbo jumbo. First cause is first cause, there is no other cause before it, else you tell me God also must have a cause (even if it is outside the universe).
Scientific principle follows evidence and data. It attempts to provide the best explanation for observable data. Oya, use your God to explain red shift of distant objects and the microwave background radiation.
If religious explanations are simply metaphors, what then are the actual explanations? What are they explaining?

Q1.Abeg explain how a fairly tale about a God (any of the Gods) out of nowhere and creating with his mind, hands and words approaches reality?

Ans: by definition God is the uncaused cause whose reason for existence is in himself. The source of all things without whom there will be nothing in existence. As a theist, I believe that I do not understand completely, the nature of God but from the nature of reality, the experience of life and things in existence, the precise order of the universe, the relevance to my existence, there must be an intelligent creator by whatever name. This is the substance of my faith and a fact for which I am willing to gamble.
The belief in God(a creator) approaches reality because you cannot point to any physical thing with intelligent operation that was not caused or created. So reality indicates that things have to be created or caused to exist. To believe otherwise, is to have much more faith than even a theist.

2.
How then do a God coming out of nothing rises to the dignity of an error?

And: because you can only say that I am wrong but you cannot deny the neccesity of a first cause.(from elementary laws of newtonian Physics)
So I could have believed in error but your position is simply impossible, not relevant to existence and does not appear to be the reality that we see, know and experience so it is not even an error. It has to make sense to be defined as wrong or right.

Q3. Why must we posit the first cause?
Because of the basic laws of motion: "if a body is at rest or moving at a constant speed in a straight line, it will remain at rest or keep moving in a straight line at constant speed unless it is acted upon by a force."
To answer with an analogy, if assuming you find yourself in space say, a virgin jungle, never visited by any creature before you. And you find a perfectly working chronometer on the ground. An intelligent and rational human that I know you to be cannot conclude that the watch created itself or that it came from nothing.
Now consider the complexity and precise workings of the universe, can you honestly claim there is no intelligent design governing it? Then is it outlandish to attribute the intelligent design to an intelligent designer? I chose to call him a creator, God.
For even the big bang was actually some particles in motion before they 'banged'.
Atheist do not yet have a rational explanation for their source unless they are claiming that they are 'uncaused causers of the big bang' in which case then we both believe in an uncaused first cause which we may choose to call by different names, I choose to call the first cause God.

Q4.Scientific principle follows evidence and data.

Ans: pray, what is the evidence of the big bang or any other bang?

Just to add, you have only disagreed with my beliefs about the existence of God and the existence of the universe.
What is your explanation of the origin of the particles that originated the big bang. We cannot start from the big bang when there were things existing before the big bang happened. The big bang cannot rationally be the beginning without some faith involved. Faith being the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." - The Bible