What would you call my new beliefs?

[Nonpareil]

Inductively, to escape the logical absurdity that physical matter always existed, what we are left with as an explanation is a non-physical, timeless, un-caused, force that was powerful enough to bring matter into existence out of nothing.

No.

Matter always existed within space-time, as matter cannot be created or destroyed within space-time. In the same way, the necessity of causality can only be demonstrated to hold within space-time - in point of fact, the idea of causality holding outside of time is nonsensical, since there is no time in which a cause could possibly precede an effect.

This is the failing of the various formulations of the cosmological argument. They all fail to establish that the idea of the universe having a cause is even coherent, let alone possible or necessary. They attempt to hide this by sleight of hand, trying to substitute the necessity of causality within the universe for evidence of its necessity outside - but this does not work, as the two are not equivalent.

a. God is the best explanation why anything at all exists.
b. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe.

See above.

c. God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.

The universe is not fine-tuned for intelligent life.

d. God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.

Incoherent. The argument is not sufficiently defined.

e. God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties.

Objective moral values and duties do not exist.