That's an assertion based on presupposition. How do you establish a first cause beyond asserting it? Even if you are granted a first cause premise there's no justification presented for it being a supernatural cause. — CeleRate
It's based on the same assumption that Plato and Aristotle made. In my thesis, I refer to the necessity of a First Cause as an Axiom (self-evidently true). Look it up. The "supernatural" aspect is merely logical inference. That's what philosophers do; this is a philosophical forum. You should know better than to ask for scientific evidence & arguments for something that is not available for empirical measurements. Supernatural causes are excluded from modern Science on the basis of Methodological Naturalism. Look it up. But as a non-scientist, I am not bound by that arbitrary (but useful) limitation. Philosophers can go where Scientists fear to tread : Metaphysics.
Meta-Physics : "Physics refers to the things we perceive with the eye of the body. Meta-physics refers to the things we conceive with the eye of the mind."
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page14.html
Plato/Aristotle First Cause : The Cosmological Argument
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument
If it was a supernatural agent, then what caused the supernatural agent? — CeleRate
You missed the stipulation in the earlier posts : both G*D and Multiverse are necessarily eternal and self-caused. No need for any other cause.
I asked for the reason that it was limited to two. It's not my job to support your claim. — CeleRate
I gave you my reasons via links in previous posts. It's not my job to read them for you.