The Intelligent Atheist is not an Atheist

For many years I have appealed to the logic of everything material necessitating a Creator. When I have done this, I have noticed that atheists run to a predictable refuge. See if you can see how they deal with it:

"If some sort of evidence turned up that a conscious entity was behind the creation of the universe itself . . . then it would simply open up this HUGE question of what this entity is and where it came from."

"So Ray, what is the explanation of where God came from?"

"If everything needs a maker, who made the maker?"

"Alright, I'll bite. Okay, a creator created the Universe. Where did this creator come from?"

It is scientifically impossible for nothing to create everything. If nothing created everything, then the "nothing" isn’t nothing. It is something, because it had the amazing ability to create everything. Only an unscientific ignoramus would hold to the thought that nothing created everything. We have the dilemma of having everything, so we therefore have to come to the conclusion that something made it. Whatever it was, it had to be non-material (unseen), eternal (without beginning or end), and it had to be omnipotent (have the amazing ability to create everything from nothing). If the professing atheist concedes to such basic logic (which he must or he reveals that he is unscientific and unintelligent), then he’s not an atheist. He is in truth an agnostic ("One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism."). He is someone who believes that there was a creative force that brought everything into existence, but for some reason he denies that it was God.