Interesting take. Not quite what I've heard before. Bridges the divide between the religious fanatics and the science "rationalist" fanatics.

"God" - use of the word "God" to me has always been loosely applied, and we all know there have been hundreds if not thousands of different spiritual traditions and religions throughout human history. Heck, Buddhism itself (a religion) doesn't even believe in a "God". Whose definition of "God" are you speaking about when you say "God"? Whose religion? What spiritual definition?

In Science we have the reductive materialists who now demand obeisance, much like the old church zealots of the Spanish Inquisition. If you don't bow down to them, you will be banished from Academia, attacked online for your refusal to obey Materialist doctrine. And yet, in science itself, we now know there are such things in Nature as non-local phenomena, a possibility of more than one Universe (Everett's Probable worlds) - we have an explanation of a Big Bang, but no explanation of how everything came from nothing. Science too has almost as many rational holes in it than all the definitions of "God" one can discover in ancient theological texts.

Weirdly, you and I still go about our individual lives. Not really knowing how we even came into existence, why there is any kind of existence, and not really living for very long - soon perhaps to be put away forever, not ever even knowing why we even existed in the first place. Well, at least this is often the "ego" portion of consciousness that experiences this - Carl Jung would argue the unconscious does know where it is going. The damndest thing about the unconscious, is it is unconscious. The ego is rarely fully aware of what is happening in the unconscious.