I agree with the post because I don't believe in an infinite regression either.
Why does the cause have to be supernatural?
Because I think that matter and energy would not be able to self-organize themselves into living things without an intelligence acting on them (even if through evolution). I think there has to be something intelligent in the universe that causes a collection of lifeless particles to turn back on itself and to perceive itself. I know it can be explained by evolution. Even the universe can be explained by the laws of physics. However, either the laws created themselves or they were always there - and whichever of the two it is - there should be a simpler explanation for the laws until we are left with one, single law which explains every other law in the universe. This ultimate law could be God Himself which was always present and didn't need to be created.
This is also interesting:
A Critical Evaluation of Prof. Dawkins’ Question: ‘Who made God?’
Why does the cause have to be supernatural?
Because I think that matter and energy would not be able to self-organize themselves into living things without an intelligence acting on them (even if through evolution). I think there has to be something intelligent in the universe that causes a collection of lifeless particles to turn back on itself and to perceive itself. I know it can be explained by evolution. Even the universe can be explained by the laws of physics. However, either the laws created themselves or they were always there - and whichever of the two it is - there should be a simpler explanation for the laws until we are left with one, single law which explains every other law in the universe. This ultimate law could be God Himself which was always present and didn't need to be created.
This is also interesting:
A Critical Evaluation of Prof. Dawkins’ Question: ‘Who made God?’
