“Atheists give me a logical answer?
Now, the common atheist fallacy is that God, the Creator, needs a creator.”
No, that’s a logical reply to the Thumper claim that the universe is so complex that IT demands a creator. Based on the observation that everything complex needs a creator. So, logically, a perfect, all-powerful, omniscient being would demand a creator.
You can’t evaluate the atheist statement out of context.
“1. The universe could never have not existed and come about on its own. That would require energy, which, mind you, can neither be created nor destroyed by a finite human.”
Do the laws of thermodynamics, developed inside a universe, also apply to the creation of a universe?
“2. The universe could never have always existed, because all matter needs to be created.”
You’re just restating the ‘needs a creator’ argument which will arbitrarily excuse God from the logic.
“3. We must exist. "Cogito ergo sum." "I think therefore I am." So therefore, even if the rest of the world is a lie, SOMETHING MUST EXIST. That something (you, me, desks, bathtubs) MUST BE CREATED.”
There’s a hole in the logic chain right there. You’ve yet to actually prove that everything that exists must be created.
“4. This is not the watchmaker analysis for evolution. This is the watchmaker analysis for the very creation of matter.”
The watchmaker argument sucks no matter what you’re using it for.
“. This all leads to one thing: There must have been an original Something, by definition uncreated, and by definition able to transcend the laws of physics and humanity.”
Okay. Now, why can’t the universe fill that definition?
“6. Thus, we arrive at the concept of a God.”
Cute. You actually just backfilled your conclusion as your premise.