Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[Mister Agenda]

1. If God exists, he is immaterial (be definition)
2. The universe is material (by definition)
3. If God exists, then God is the best explanation of the universe (from Occam's razor, PSR)
4. If God exists, an immaterial God created a material universe (from 1-3)
5. Creation is causation (be definition)
6. Therefore, if God exists, the immaterial has causation over the material. (from 4-5)

1. That's one way to define God, certainly not the only way.
2. Yep.
3. If the Creator of the Universe exists, the Creator of the universe is the most likely explanation for the universe. No need to invoke Occam, it's a tautology.
4. If 1. correctly defines God and 3. is true, that does follow.
5. Yep.
6. Uh huh.

That was sort of interesting. Let's try this:

1. If God doesn't exist or is in some sense material.
2. The universe is material and not entirely illusory or made of spirit thoughts or some such.
3. If God doesn't exist or is in some sense material, the universe had a material cause.
4. If God doesn't exist or is in some sense material, you don't even need a 4.
5. Creation is causation.
6. Therefore, if God doesn't exist or is material, no reason to suppose the immaterial has any affect at all on the material

Basically, your argument is just asserting that God is immaterial and created the universe, broken into pieces. I'm pretty sure 'show your work' was meant to evoke an attempt to explain how an immaterial God would affect a material universe. We all already know that you think God does that, your argument was completely lacking in new information.