Brief Answer:
God had no beginning, and therefore does not logically require a cause.
Detailed Answer:
When Richard Dawkins could not escape the evidence pointing to intelligent agency involved in the creation of the Universe, he responded by questioning the conclusion by asking, “Who made God?” The audience erupted in applause. Dawkins’ smug response and the audience’s applause highlighted themselves as not approaching the question of God logically in this instance, as they committed two errors in thinking in attempting to avoid the conclusion the evidence necessitates.
Logic errors in this question
The first is the assumption you must be able to fully explain the explanation. Using abductive reasoning, you take all the evidence in and infer the best explanation of the evidence. The explanation you arrive at does not itself require a full understanding or explanation for it to be the best explanation of the evidence – it just has to best explain the evidence.
The second logical fallacy involved is a category error. Asking who made or caused the cause of the Universe is a fair question to ask every belief system not founded on the Bible, including atheism and agnosticism, all of which claimed the cause of the Universe was part of, or within, the natural Universe. However, when applied to the biblical God, it becomes a category error—a mistake in thinking.
Why? Because God is not in the same category as the natural Universe. Everything in the Universe, including matter, energy, space, and time, had a beginning, and thus requires a cause. But God, according to the Bible, exists outside of the Universe and outside of time itself, uncaused and eternal.
A second category error is thinking the cause of the Universe is comparable to the things in the Universe.
If the universe had a beginning, then it, and everything in it, is a contingent entity, dependent on something else for its existence. But God, as described in the Bible, is in a different category—uncaused and not dependent on anything else – a non-contingent entity.
It is fair to ask an atheist what they believe caused the Universe and what, in turn, caused that initial cause. Further, it would be a fair question to ask all the other belief systems, which have a God or creator that was created, or is part of the Universe. In contrast, the Bible stands apart from other belief systems by proclaiming the entire Universe was created, but God is independent from the Universe, beyond all of nature and time, existing uncaused.
The Cosmological Argument is a logical argument that the Universe requires a cause, and is based on the Kalam Cosmological Argument:
Premise 1: Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
This is supported by the law of causation. Cause and effect is the foundation of science and rational thought.
Premise 2: The Universe began to exist.
All evidence points to this conclusion, with no contrary evidence. When all of the evidence is on one-side of the argument, and no evidence supports the other side, the answer should be obvious.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Universe has a cause.
Since the Universe, and all of nature that is a part of it, began to exist, it requires a cause. The biblical cause of the Universe, on the other hand, posits the cause exists beyond space, time, and nature itself, and is therefore not subject to the need for a beginning. This aligns with the concept of an uncaused first cause, which philosophers and scientists have long acknowledged to avoid the impossibility of infinite regress (it is impossible to go infinitely backwards with every cause needing a cause). Originally, they believed the Universe itself was this uncaused cause, but we now know the Universe had a beginning—pointing to a necessary cause beyond it. The properties of the necessary ultimate cause fits the biblical description of God precisely.
