Why Does Atheism Have to be False?

The reason why I am a theist is based on the evidence that I don't know how to overturn.

The evidence to me is we observe trillions of cause and effects in the time and space of nature, and no hard evidence of something from nothing, so to me this is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. It would be like expecting to win the lottery if you are still holding out for some naturalistic explanation. The odds are stacked against you. If you keep holding out for some naturalistic explanation to the point where you have to know all things, that is a loser's proposition because you are claiming you have to be God "all knowing" to know if God exists, but obviously, you are not the uncreated Creator and never will be. The beliefs of atheists become unfalsifiable. That which is unfalsifiable is itself false.

Since that which does not exist can't cause anything because it doesn't exist then nature which is something can't come from nothing. That which does not exist will never be able to cause something. That's why you never see a billion pound gorilla stomping NYC because it doesn't exist.

And infinite regress of cause and effects is impossible, because by that definition you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. And you should never have existed, because if a past eternity of cause and effects were true, then by that definition a past eternity goes on for eternity, thus never reaching this point. Infinite regress is false on these individual points, and it is self-contradictory on these points as well. Therefore, nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is whom we call God. His foremost quality is that He is uncreated. This is another way of saying, there are no gods before God, beside God or after God. He alone is from everlasting before time and space.

So the foundation of all truth begins with accepting the uncreated Creator. Before venturing out into finding where He reveals Himself, or not, and determining His nature, qualities and what He demands of us, or not, I would back up first, and acknowledge first the existence of the uncreated Creator. It would wrong to start from a false premise.

Even a person on some remote island who lived thousands of years ago could make this same observation, therefore, he would be without excuse.