The absolute absurdity of God

[SteveII]

I said that because of (6) that without an intention, something either causes or does not cause the universe. Otherwise, there is no way a cause capable of creating the universe can delay its ability to cause the universe. So, if there is no capacity to decide to create, the effect would be co-eternal with any cause. But we have the hurdles of the universe being infinite in the past. To say it another way, we have a timeless cause and and non-timeless effect that are co-eternal. 

Your last sentence is an equivocation.  You're using co-eternal in two different senses simultaneously.  God is eternal in the sense of being timeless.  The universe is eternal in the sense of being a potential infinite.  This is the same equivocation which Ghazali and Craig made, and which was previously pointed out to you.  But the more substantial problem is that what happens within time does not constrain what happened before time existed.  There is no "delay" occurring in a timeless state as the concept of delay does not apply to a timeless state.  For there to be a delay, time has to exist, otherwise the concept is incoherent.  You're continuing to fail to make the distinction between God's activity in time, and God's activity in its absence.  There is no delay in a timeless state, so your argument for the personal nature is fundamentally incoherent.  We might be able to reason backward from the effect to the cause, but that's not what you've done.  You have assumed that things which apply to God when the universe is in existence necessarily apply to God when the universe did not exist, and that is simply not the case.

Piecemeal answer. Sorry.
I would say God is eternal in the sense of beginningless. I want to make the distinction because I believe that at the point he created something he became temporal. The universe is only potentially infinite in the future direction. 

I think you misunderstood my point. You are suggesting that an impersonal cause could have created the universe. My response what that if an impersonal cause is sufficient to create the universe, then it just does. If that cause was past-eternal, then it created the universe an infinite time ago. There are logical problems with a temporal/material object existing infinitely in the past. So the reasoning goes that the cause must somehow be separate/distinct from the effect to preserve the beginningless-ness of the former from the finite beginnings of the later. Intention seems like a reasonable solution. 

If we say that God existed timelessly with the timeless intention of creating something, he certainly existed 'prior to' the universe.