What you define as "transcendent of natural laws" might simply be some other natural law which is yet to be discovered. 300 years ago, the existence of complicated life forms might have been used as proof of the necessity of God, until we discovered evolution. Today the temporal condition of the universe is used for the same purpose, but in 300 years' time we might have the answer to that too.
This is the advantage of having a god which only exists inside a rhetorical vacuum: it will always exists just outside the edge of knowledge. Even if we discover that X caused the universe and that Y caused X, Mike's god will be the perpetual Z.