The Kalam Cosmological Argument is a sound argument for God's existence

Thank you, again, Dakota for your thought-provoking response to the argument.Premise 1 -- Everything that begins to exist has a cause.I must have seen different debates than Dakota, because whenever I'd see someone debate this they would always concentrate on attacking the second premise. It wasn't until I started debating on DDO that I saw folks attack the first premise. At any rate, what I meant by uncontroversial is that there is a principle that every effect has a cause. A car is not a car until it is constructed. A hunk of metal is not a car, and won't become a car until someone sets out to construct it. A human is not a human until the process of fertilization has begun by the man's spermatozoan coming into contact with a woman's ovum. Everything that begins to exist has a cause of its existence, a cause that is outside itself. This still seems pretty uncontroversial to me.So I believe our intuitions in this case are justified. After all, if humans don't begin to exist without a cause, and cars don't begin to exist without a cause, why can universes begin to exist without a cause?I see no problem with saying something comes into being ex nihilo, which can't happen without outside intervention. It can only happen by a powerful Being who has the ability to create from nothing. It is equivocation to state that something can come into being from pre-existing materials, but not from nothing. Coming into existence is coming into existence. We have already seen that the universe is not eternal. If non-being cannot produce being, then a Being must have produced it. Otherwise there would be nothing in existence at all.A) I have not seen anything come into being ex nihilo. I have also never seen atoms but I know they exist. We do not have to see something in order to logically infer that they happen. Scientists have never seen humans evolve from lower forms of life, but they still believe that it happened.B) We are not talking about different things. Nothing means "non-existence." The only thing that existed before the universe came into existence was God. There wasn't "nothing" before the universe. There was God. But God created a universe out of nothing, where there wasn't one before. For example, I exist (thank you, Descartes). If an apple just popped into existence on the table in front of me, that apple would have come into existence from nothing. Even though I exist and this table exists, the apple came from nothing.Premise 2 -- The universe began to exist.As Dakota has let this slide, there is no need to defend this premise.Conclusion -- Therefore, the universe had a cause.The conclusion is still rendered valid and sound, considering that it naturally follows from the premises. Unless Dakota can show why people and small objects can't come from nothing but universes can.God as cause of the universe.I could concede that the God who created the universe was "dumb, but lucky." That would not disprove the existence of God, just that God is a different God than I believe in. For the purpose of this debate, that is irrelevant. I do believe God to be an intelligent Creator because I hold faith in the Bible, but that's really not absolutely essential for this argument. I believe other arguments, such as the Teleological Argument, show that God is an intelligent creator.I will elucidate on what I mean by infinite. There are two definitions of infinite which are relevant to my argument. [1] One is an unlimited amount of objects; an infinite amount. This is why I say we can show through philosophy that the universe had a beginning. It would be impossible to traverse an infinite amount of time.The second definition of unlimited. We are finite beings in that we are limited. We don't have the ability to create from absolutely nothing, or to work outside the laws of nature. However, God is infinite; He is unlimited in His power which is why we even exist today. I hope that clears things up.I thank Dakota for taking the time to debate this topic with me. Over to you, and I look forward to reading your next rebuttal.[1] http://dictionary.reference.com...;