A former agnostic, with doubts?

[Madness20]

Crap, i was building extensive replys on a wordpad document this week, but it seems i forgot to save it and lost it in a power shutdown xD. I'll try to be synthethic this time.

Argument for first cause:
Universe has a cause - we all agree on that.

Not necessarily. Again, it's entirely possible you're forcing a temporal framework upon a system that is incompatible with it. What if causation began with the big bang? What then?

Not to mention that, in cases like this where we don't have sufficient evidence to make a determination about causes and what have you, the honest answer to give is "I don't know," not "I know there was a cause."

The causation beginning with the big bang, would make the universe an "uncaused" causual loop, is that what you are suggesting? Wouldn't that be contradiction?

Now what i'm transposing too, is that whatever created the universe, let's call it multiverse, either had a cause(begin), or always existed. By infinite regression, we'll either have a systematically continuously transcending infinite of causation, or an eternal "supreme" entity that created everything. Either way, one of them has to be the answer if we suppose every statement is correct.

What is the justification for asserting that the cause need be an "entity"? Couldn't an unconscious cause work just as well within the framework you've suggested?

I call it an entity as an existence, i could as well call it a thing. The "thing" is, this "thing" either is continuously transcending infinite, or it has a supreme. Your choice. xD

Exactly because "nothing" is defined as non-existence, and obviously couldn't exist. Something always was there, somehow. And the moment you define something can't come from "nothing" you simply can't accept there isn't something as eternity, in fact in terms of physics we know such thing as infinite time distortion is possible.
If you don't agree with this, i'd like to see you arguing how can something come from nothing.

Our own "time" was created in the big bang, but nothing contradicts that time exists outside the universe, and the fact that we know both space and time can infinitely distort, and they behave like something we call "branes"/dimensions, and also according to string theory, these dimensions and more exist outside the universe, and created our universe the same way as it "probably" created infinitelly more. We're just on our own spacetime distortion "bubble".

And again, no evidence= I don't know, regardless of the speculation.

No evidence for what? That some kind of arrow of time must preceed the Big Bang? This is the obvious conclusion, like Tobie said, if the universe shifted from 2 different states, something must have allowed that shift, which is an analogy to time must have passed somehow.

Welcome!

- The universe requires a cause.
...
- Whatever primary cause the universe has, it must be eternal.
...
- The primary cause, created everything.

As soon as you decide that you're okay believing in things that are eternal or "outside of time", I have to ask you: how do you know the universe isn't eternal? I certainly have no proof that it is, but we have no proof of any gods, either. You have to assume them in your premise to reach them as a conclusion with the cosmological argument.

We know there is a universe. We don't know there are any gods. Why add extra assumptions to the equation?

Well, according to all recent theorys/facts, the universe we live in is finite and was created. So it's obvious that "this" precise universe is not eternal per se. So if this universe isn't eternal, something beyond it must be.
And i'm not certainly arguing for the existence of gods as there's no definition of a god, i'm arguing for the existence of something "supreme" to the universe, that is eternal, creating and the primary cause of everything else, which can be a posteriori called as God.
If we assume the existence of an eternal supreme being to the universe can be true, then God could be possible, not the other way around.

- Intelligence/Determination
...
There's just one way i would adjectivate the complex organization of our universe: brilliantly suspiciously organized.

Yes, the universe has a lot of amazing, predictable qualities which can be described using systems. Note: we are intelligent and we can create predictable systems. That does not necessarily mean that any predictable system must have been created by some intelligent thought.

Framing it that way is easy and comfortable from our point of view, but that's not a valid logical conclusion to make.

But that's exactly my point, isn't it incredibly weird that a "randomly" generated universe would have this scale of predictability and precision, to the point that the universe itself functions with strict casual laws and effects, and these same laws organize themselves into all the different dependencies of the universe and on life forms?
Isn't it weird that we have a well defined causual system and timearrow, when presumably our universe could and should be way more chaotic?