Arguments Against Creator God

[Angrboda]

How is either claim illogical? Is it just simply because they're counterintuitive? And given eternalism, the first claim doesn't apply anyway.

Because there is no such thing as an infinite number of anything concrete. That would include the cause/effect events that the existence of physical material necessitates. There is nothing about physical material that make it necessary (could not have failed to exist). Eternalism, even with all of its inherent problems, still does not avoid a beginning of the universe (space/time). All of the most promising (as in fit the most observations of the universe) cosmological models have a beginning of the universe. 

In theoretical physics, the Hartle–Hawking state, named after James Hartle and Stephen Hawking, is a proposal concerning the state of the universe prior to the Planck epoch.

Hartle and Hawking suggest that if we could travel backward in time toward the beginning of the universe, we would note that quite near what might have otherwise been the beginning, time gives way to space such that at first there is only space and no time. Beginnings are entities that have to do with time; because time did not exist before the Big Bang, the concept of a beginning of the universe is meaningless. According to the Hartle–Hawking proposal, the universe has no origin as we would understand it: the universe was a singularity in both space and time, pre-Big Bang. Thus, the Hartle–Hawking state universe has no beginning, but it is not the steady state universe of Hoyle; it simply has no initial boundaries in time nor space.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartle%E2%...king_state