i found this argument for god's existence

here is the argument:

"1. Every dependent physical thing requires a cause.

2. Following this chain of causation: eventually, this leads back to a foundational source of physical existence that is not itself dependent on physical things to have been caused. (I am not arguing time here. I am simply arguing what is prior.)

3. That foundational source cannot have a physical cause (e.g. particles or what not) as nothing physical existed before it.

4. That leaves us with non-physical explanations.

5. Non-physical, non-conscious things are, at best, concepts (e.g. thoughts) that lack causal power.

6. This leaves us with only a non-physical, conscious thing.

7. Since this is the only possible cause left, denying this denies the universe a causal explanation.

8. If the universe had no cause, it shouldn’t exist. The universe is a physical thing, and all physical things require causes.

9. Therefore, a non-physical, conscious thing caused the universe. This is believed by many to be a god."

im kind of curious and conflicted on this. does this make sense? would like to see people's thoughts on this