First order logic, set theory and God

[Belacqua]

But it still wouldn't get us to the logical need for a supernatural "sustainer" of the universe. 

That's the question at hand. I'm glad to see this formulation of it, as it is accurate about the First Cause argument. "Sustainer" not "beginner." 

I dunno. There are elaborate arguments as to why there has to be an end to the chain of causes in this sense. And, as I said earlier, whereas science is content with "that's just the way it is" after they get past a certain point, metaphysicians aren't. 

I have read some attempts to argue for an end to the causal chain. Why at some point there must be an uncaused thing that causes all the following causes. Sad to say, while I could kind of make out the reasoning, I am not clever enough either to show that the reasoning must be true or to show why it's false. 

Mostly I just make noise by whinging when people mis-describe the argument, since I can't manage any more than that. 

The most elaborate, careful, and (I suspect) easy to understand argument is in Edward Feser's book Scholastic Metaphysics. I read it. It made sense at the time. I can't say why it's wrong. But that isn't enough to overcome my skepticism.