There is a God.

Since my opponent has not yet directly rebutted my arguments, I will use this round to rebut his. I would like to start with my opponents atheistic reasoning for the universe coming into being. My opponent states:"Simultaneous causation is the idea that "the causal order must not be the temporal order because of the possibility of cause and effect being contemporaneous. '[1] X and Y have such a relationship if X, the cause, and Y, the effect, happen at the same instantaneous moment. The possibility of simultaneous causation demonstrates how the universe could have came into being. " Here are some of my arguments against simultaneous causation: Given the known laws of physics, any kind of transfer of energy, say, a football player hitting another football player has to take non-zero amount of time. There is a necessary lag time between the cause and effect of the player hitting the other player, so any simultaneous causation is not possible. We can put this argument into simple context like so: Every kind of physical cause involves a transfer of energy Transfers of energy always take a non-zero amount of time Therefore, every physical cause always takes a non-zero amount of time Henceforth, simultaneous causation is not possible The only exception to this argument would be that this is not an ordinary physical cause/effect scenario, but outside the laws of physics, we can only find a higher power. Here is another reason simultaneous causation is invalid, If simultaneous causation is allowed, then the thing does not need to exist before it exists, only simultaneous with its own existence, which everything does by definition anyway. So, it would seem that if there was simultaneous causation, then things around us should beable to cause themselves. However, we do not see this sort of causation happening around us. Simplified, this looks like this: If causation can be simultaneous, then a thing can cause itself to exist simply by co-existing with itself. Everything co-exists with itself. Therefore, everything can be the cause of its own existence. But, since we cannot see that everything is the cause of itself, simultaneous causation likewise does not exist. Were we to look at simultaneous cause in physics, we would find this: Casual influences cannot propagate faster than the speed of light, according to the theory of relativity. Therefore, there cannot be simultaneous causation between bewteen events that are separated between space and time. Even with simultaneous causation refuted, I, as pro, still have the burden of proving the existence of a God. All I have done here is shown why his/her atheistic reasoning cannot replace the theory of an existence of a God. My opponent does refute the idea that the universe is the result of a necessary being: "Pro's argument is meant to establish a necessary being which caused the universe to come into being. However, the idea of a necessary being is not even coherent. " I am quite sure my opponent knows of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Everything in existence that has a beginning of its existence must have a cause of its existence. The universe does, have a beginning of its existence. (See the Second law of Thermodynamics) Therefore the universe has a cause of its existence. . .. and since the universe cannot cause itself, it must have a cause that is beyond known Space and Time. Therefore, the cause of the universe must be spaceless and timeless, a description fitting God. . http://www.youtube.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org...