What would you call my new beliefs?

[SteveII]

Fine. You have 2 problems that I can see:

1. You are incapable of having a discussion. 
2. Your grasp on reality is about an inch deep.

Not precisely. I am unwilling to engage in more than is necessary with something like this. When someone outright rejects the existence of spacetime, despite their own sources contradicting them and the idea of existence without dimensions being utterly nonsensical, there really isn't anywhere else to go, and certainly not much inclination on my part to do much beyond pointing out that, yes, you are quite totally wrong. [1]

Space exists. This is demonstrable; it is the thing that separates two objects. [2]

Time exists. This is demonstrable; it is the thing that lets one event happen after another. [3]

Space and time are dimensions. This is a matter of definition; they are continuums in which two points can be separated from one another.

Causality requires time. This is also a matter of definition; a cause must precede its effect, or it is, by definition, not a cause. [4]

Causality does not create time any more than motion creates space. The idea is utterly nonsensical.

These are all brute facts. You cannot get around them. All you can do is stick your fingers in your ears and say that the people refusing to let you get away with complete nonsense are big meanie-heads who can't hold a conversation because they won't let you play silly buggers. [5]

1. LOL. You don't even understand your own position. Let's pull apart the word 'dimension' that you are so fond of:

In physics and mathematics, the dimension of a mathematical space (or object) is informally defined as the minimum number of coordinates needed to specify any point within it.[1][2] Thus a line has a dimension of one because only one coordinate is needed to specify a point on it – for example, the point at 5 on a number line. A surface such as a plane or the surface of a cylinder or sphere has a dimension of two because two coordinates are needed to specify a point on it – for example, both a latitude and longitude are required to locate a point on the surface of a sphere. The inside of a cube, a cylinder or a sphere is three-dimensional because three coordinates are needed to locate a point within these spaces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension

Classical physics theories describe three physical dimensions: from a particular point in space, the basic directions in which we can move are up/down, left/right, and forward/backward. Movement in any other direction can be expressed in terms of just these three. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension#...dimensions

A temporal dimension is a dimension of time. Time is often referred to as the "fourth dimension" for this reason, but that is not to imply that it is a spatial dimension. A temporal dimension is one way to measure physical change. It is perceived differently from the three spatial dimensions in that there is only one of it, and that we cannot move freely in time but subjectively move in one direction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimension#Time

Time is the indefinite continued progress of existence and events that occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.[1][2][3] Time is a component quantity of various measurements used to sequence events, to compare the duration of events or the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change of quantities in material reality or in the conscious experience. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time

Underline added for emphasis

To sum it up, a dimension is a mathematical expression of relationship. It is a description of spacial or temporal location, not an object. It does not exist separately from the things you are describing. 

2.  "it is the thing that separates two object". Do you mind defining 'thing'? What properties does the space thing have? 'Space' only describes relative position of things. It is a mathematical description of spacial relationship. If you only had one object in the universe, there would be no space.

3. "it is a thing that lets one event happen after another". Another 'thing'. What properties does time have that it 'lets' anything happen? Again, time is a mathematical structure in which we catalog events and their relationship to each other. Cause and effect are 'things' (events) that happen to other real 'things' (objects). Time is not a real 'thing'.

4. You have your work cut out for you if you think you can defend "causality requires time". Since time is a measurement of change, you are really saying, "causality requires a measurement of change". However, that does not make any sense. Wouldn't it be the case of the reverse: "A measurement of change requires causality?" Or, as I stated in my first response to you, Time requires causality. 

5. You have not shown anything resembling an argument other than to assert your position over and over and over. Your move to 'brute fact' does not do anything for your argument because there have been thousands of books written on the philosophy of time and space where people actually produce reasons/evidence/arguments for various positions. My opinion is that you got in over your head when you posted and then persisted in your one-note 'dimension' tune.

---

I do not believe that time, space or space-time exists. 

The Kalam Cosmological Argument presumes that time and space exist in order to be valid. The analysis used takes space and time into account to deduce the existence of God. So, the more accurate claim is that time and space began to exist with the first event and space-time is dependent upon the occurrence of events, and God logically exists independent from the occurrence of events (space-time). Otherwise, you are at least looking at God in a completely different way than contemporary monotheist theology.

First, welcome to the forum. You posts so far seem thoughtful and polite--both welcomed attributes.

You picked one sentence out of a rather detailed paragraph. I think time, space or space-time are mathematical constructs and not real things themselves. I have explained my position in detail above. But, I don't see a problem in regards to the KCA or the existence of God in general. Creation was the first event in the timeline in which all the matter and energy of our universe began to exist and therefore all things in our universe have a mathematically-described relationship to each other and to us (space and time).