I said IF I accept the Big Bang which translates I do not accept it.<quoted text>
So it boils down to you accepting anything that agrees with you and reject anything that doesn't. You don't really care about the evidence, or the reasoning involved; you only care about whether there are points you agree with or not.
In the case of the Big Bang, we know the universe is expanding. We know it was once much hotter and denser to the point that nuclear reactions happened *everywhere*. We know that it cooled to the place where light could get through about 300,000 years after the start of the expansion. But you reject all of this and only accept that the universe had a beginning. You reject the evidence that supports this conclusion and ignore the limitations and caveats to that conclusion. ALL you care about is whether you can twist it to support something you believe in.
Sorry, but rational discourse doesn't work that way. Science doesn't work that way. Only religion works that way and THAT is why religion and truth are frequently at odds.
Next, you claim the universe *must* have a cause. Why? What, precisely, do you mean by the term 'cause'? Why must everything that has a beginning have a 'cause'?
To be more clear: causes are things that happen *in time* and according to *physical laws*. To even discuss a cause, you need time and physical laws. But time is a part of the universe, not something outside of it. And physical laws only make sense in the context of physics. So the very notion of 'a cause of the universe' either requires some sort of multiverse with physical laws and time OR it is simply meaningless. I suspect you don't like either conclusion, so will reject this argument without giving any actual alternative conceptualization of the term 'cause'.
Yes you are right, I reject all the things you claim to know. You do not know what happened 5995 years ago let alone 300 000years after the so-called Big Bang. I reject outlandish claims & am not hoodwinked by their appearance in scientific language & texts. Total nonsense.
Talking about religion, it's you that is religious. Just look at your claims. Christianity is NOT a religion, religious people killed Jesus.
Your understanding of "cause" is warped by your religious convictions to what science can know. Here's a list of what your religion blinds you from: simultaneous cause does not happen in time. Mathematical relationships are not caused by laws of physics. Laws of physics are not caused by physics & the beginning of time did not happen in time. This is not hard to figure out once one shakes off his religious fundamentalism.
Of course the universe had a cause & that cause was not any laws of physics neither was it in time.