Reply #128: Barker conflates

[parkening]

the First Cause and God arbitrarily as I've pointed out already. This is where he loses his way on #1. The attributes of the First Cause are what cause us to call it God.

In #2 I think Dan means "temporal antecedents to the real world". And I think the answer is "no". And BW's expanding/contracting universe could be one other option, only not extending infinitely into the past. Eventually you come to the point where there is only nontemporal antecedents to the worlds.

From Barker: "* If no, then why doesn't the impossibility of an actual infinity disprove the existence of an actually infinite God?" Hey, BurtWorm, Dan Barker says, "the dog never gets your doughnut!"

I've addressed #3 with my "transcendant attributes".