Dr. Craig is a liar.

[wiploc]

1) Define cause and effect.
2) Demonstrate simultaneous cause and effect is plausible under your definition.
3) Even if we grant whatever you mean by simultaneous cause and effect, you still can't get around the fact that, God could not exist timelessly and changelessly without the universe prior to causing time to exist within the universe. This is a non sequitur.

Review the first video in my "Timelessness" thread here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-42797.html
Time becomes an emergent property of causality. Or, put in terms of the video, "Causality is responsible for Time."

Third time trying to post this...

Pisser.  You have my sympathy.  

First, we must distinquish between a material cause and an efficient cause (there are more types of causes, but I don't think they are germane to the discussion). A material cause always precedes its effect. It is not so clear that an efficient cause does.

For example, take a train locomotive and a freight car connected by a coupling with 0% flex. When the locomotive starts moving (the efficient cause), the freight care moves as well (the effect). Simultaneous. 

You are denying relativity.  Yours is a pre-Einsteinian argument.  If there were such a thing as zero flex, then we would live in a Newtonian universe.  But we don't.  

Science is against you on this point.  And we're not talking about a mere consensus of quantum physicists; you're just indisputably wrong.  

[/quote]