What I find quite surprising with what WLC says in this debate is that his conception of God doesn't entail that God is changeless. In other words, he throws Gods Immutability out the window. It seems he is committed to the view that change occurs independent of temporal reality, that time is really a product of material events, not point D transitioning to Point F.
Craig (@ 58:42): Since something cannot come out of nothing, there must therefore be a transcendent cause of the universe...
This is why the KCA doesn't demonstrate God's existence, it assumes a specific relationship between non-existence and causality that has the medium being a personal omnipotent being.
A previously did not exist. A now exists. B caused non-existence to become existence. B is omnipotent, which means there is a contradiction between B willing A to exist and A doesn't come into existence.
But wait! How do you know that an omnipotent being even exists? They just assume it does from the KCA's first premise (whatever begins to exist has a cause). How do you know that whatever begins to exist has a cause? "It just makes sense, from nothing nothing comes." How do you know anything could emerge existence from nonexistence? They don't, they just assume an immaterial causer is required.
Craig (@ 58:42): Since something cannot come out of nothing, there must therefore be a transcendent cause of the universe...
This is why the KCA doesn't demonstrate God's existence, it assumes a specific relationship between non-existence and causality that has the medium being a personal omnipotent being.
A previously did not exist. A now exists. B caused non-existence to become existence. B is omnipotent, which means there is a contradiction between B willing A to exist and A doesn't come into existence.
But wait! How do you know that an omnipotent being even exists? They just assume it does from the KCA's first premise (whatever begins to exist has a cause). How do you know that whatever begins to exist has a cause? "It just makes sense, from nothing nothing comes." How do you know anything could emerge existence from nonexistence? They don't, they just assume an immaterial causer is required.
Hail Satan! 
