Who created God?

This from Christianitydisproved.com:


It is now up to the Christian to answer the question: Who created God? "Surely, nothing as complex and intricate as a supernatural intelligence can be the result of mere “chance.” Therefore, there must be a super-designer who designed God. But a super-designer [God 1] would require a super-super designer [God 2], and so on ad infinitum … If an orderly universe requires an explanation, the positing of a god does not provide it." (Smith 1989, p.150)
"The reply that God is self-caused (somehow) ... raises the rebuttal: If something can be self-caused, why can't the universe as a whole be the thing that is self-caused?" (Dennett 2006, p.242)

While there is no knockdown argument for or against the existence of God, this particular argument is from all sides, idiotic.  The universe consistently shows us that everything has a cause and effect.  At first glance this would lead to the conclusion/rebuttal above.  Whether or not god exists, both sides of the argument have to agree on at least one particular, namely that god is not part of the natural world the same way a tree is (or a star, or background radiation).  God is by definition supernatural.  This does not mean merely that god is natural plus, but that god does not exist in, nor is god defined by the universe which god created.  The assumption is poorly made here that however god's existence is defined, that existence somehow operates under the same "rules" as the natural universe.
Whether or  not god exists, the understanding of god is that god exists apart from the natural universe and exists outside of time in a way that we are unable to understand.  Words such as "forever" and "eternity" and "pre-existing" are used not because they are good definitions of the supernatural but because they are the closest we can come to understanding what being outside time means.  Most theists would agree that god exists before time.  But this is in itself a metaphor because the word "before" is temporal.  Again, this is the best way of understanding and communicating something that we only understand for fleeting moments.
The point is that whether you say, "If God is self-caused, then the universe could be as well," or, "The universe had to be created, therefore God had to be as well," you have merely committed a non sequitur.
This is of course no argument for the existence of God (though from nothing, nothing comes still is).  But many people are taken in by such foolish arguments.  What must be understood here is that if you make or believe this argument, you are in no way talking about God.  Anselm's definition of God is helpful here: God is "that than which nothing greater cane be conceived."
One more point to be made here:  99% of the time, atheism argues against bad theology, which is good in many respects, since curing bad theology would do the world good regardless.  But the statement, "God is self-caused" is misleading in a weak theology sort of way.  To say God is self-caused is to imply, however subtly, that God was not, then was.  This makes the same mistake mentioned before in that it encapsulates God within time.  It is acceptable to say such things only if we truly understanding that it is merely a simile in that it is like God is self-caused.  This is not remotely the worst theology against which atheism argues, but it is important here.