The idea of God always existing

[Ryft]

Saying that God being metaphysical makes him immune to needing a cause is also mental masturbation.

His being metaphysical, whatever that means, is not what makes him immune to needing a cause (notwithstanding your odd focus on masturbation). His being actus purus, eternal necessary being, is what makes him immune—and quite by definition, given the very meaning of these terms. You can summarily deny these attributes, if you like; however, that would simply indicate a preference for talking about any deity other than the God of biblical Christianity. I am somewhat confident that Christians don't mind their God going unrefuted.

"Metaphysics," you said, "simply means the study of that which is beyond the physical." No, that is not what it means. Metaphysics is the study of reality, of being, of what is—which sort of includes the physical or natural world. But it is not necessarily restricted to nature. It is a far bigger tent than that. Whereas science is the study of nature, metaphysics is the study of reality. Granted, there are those who claim that nature is all that reality consists of; but that is a metaphysical prejudice, not a scientific conclusion. Such a claim is outside the purview of science, a discipline which presupposes and concerns itself only with the natural world.

Just saying God does not have a cause does not prove that he didn't.

True. But then who ever thought otherwise? (Forgive me but I could not bring myself to read the entire thread.)

What if God did exist but had a cause?

Then you are no longer speaking about the God of biblical Christianity, thus leaving Christians with nothing to respond to. But again, I'm sure Christians do not mind their God going unrefuted.

You cannot prove a metaphysical being exists without any proof.

You cannot prove without proof. Man, yeah, that was deep.

The ontological, telelogical, cosmological, moral, faith, experience, and belief in inspiration of scripture arguments do not establish anything for certain.

Sure, if granting your presuppositions and worldview criteria. But they are not granted, nor are they even relevant. Or maybe you're content to simply beg the question. But then why waste time with thoughtful responses? Just presuppose the truth of your view while rejecting all others that conflict with it and call it a day. Far less effort. No need to waste time with logical validity, rational consistency, skepticism, critical self-analysis, intellectual maturity and growth and all that crap. What a bunch of masturbation.