"The First Cause Argument

The first cause argument is very popular among theists. It is based on the assumption that everything has a cause, and from this assumption it is argued that the universe must have had a cause, and that this cause is a god.

However, if everything has a cause, then the god must also have a cause, and that cause must have a cause and so on infinitely. This is a conclusion that I think isn't palatable for any theist. If the theists, to counter this, claims that his god is uncaused, then he has contradicted the assumption on which the argument is based and has therefore invalidated it.

Furthermore even if the argument were correct, all it would tell us would be that there is a first cause. Calling this first cause "God", doesn't give it any of the properties, which are normally ascribed to gods, it could be some perfectly natural occurrence. I might as well say "I call the chair, I'm sitting on, 'God', therefore God exists"

Why Morton Monrad Pedersen I am filled with sorrow! Why you may ask? I am filled with sorrow because either the Creationists you have talked too have not explained the argument to you in full or you have just simply chosen to ignore the most important part. It is true this is one of our (theists) favorite arguments and it might be between this, intelligent design (which I saw you seek to debunk as well) & the one of my fav's the morality argument (which I have yet to get a good answer too). Since this is indeed one that I am sure you have heard over and over again I will not repeat the whole of the argument simply I will add what you or the persons you have heard this from forgot. The argument is that their at some point had to be an eternal thing (that is something that never needed to be created). This eternal thing from the theists point of view/argument is God. We draw this conclusion from other things but in this argument the conclusion is drawn from whence the argument starts, the cause and effect of which we view all around us. The universe in which we live in is dominated by this rule. For every effect there is and must be a cause. Since we view this everywhere we look the theist asks the question: if this is true and testable in the universe in which I live now perhaps there is a reason for this? But, what oh what could it be? We then go through several other steps and as those steps are put side by side with this we get to a conclusion that there must be a cause for the universe in which we live, and that cause must be eternal.
Let me address the Atheists argument to this (as far as it has been relayed to me through the mouths of Atheists). You say, yes there must be an eternal thing. But you say that eternal thing was matter. it always existed and one day decided to blow up. This however, does not answer another argument, that oder has never been observed to come from disorder. meaning if you look at a watch you say what an awesome watch maker! not I wonder how many millions of years that took to evolve.

The long and short of it Mr. Pederson is that I hope that in the future you would make sure to include the whole argument or at least check on the reliability of what you have heard.