Common sense tells me that something can't create itself. It would have to exist before it could create, so self-creation is self-refuting. It is an absurd idea. So, if something started to exist my common sense tells me there must be a cause or agency for it.
If the universe had a beginning then it is logical to assume it had a cause because the alternative is self-creation.
GREAT! Now we're almost to where you seem to want to engage the topic. All of the above is for the most part granted by the OP, 19 pages ago. In fact, the experiment doesn't even rely on logic, it simply says "this is what happened for sure, a thinking agent created the universe." Sadly, then you start to wobble again. and try to go through what you think I believe happened instead. That is, once again, immaterial. The question isn't what do I think happened to the universe, at all. Here it is again, from me, to you, page 18:
HIS QUESTION IS FRAMED THROUGH THE LENS OF A CREATOR. The only feature we can KNOW it has is the ability to create a universe, because a universe is here. Please pay attention, because here is the question: Can you support with evidence that the god you so happen to worship IS THAT CREATOR?
There is not even an attempt to answer this. Nor is there an attempt to refute the pantheon being real, but maybe someday. You simply complain that you're not allowed to use your claim as evidence. You hold up the book, say "The stuff in here is true!" and your answer to the sensible 'how do you know?' question is "THE BOOK SAYS THAT IT ITSELF IS TRUE." That's restating your claim. Not supporting with argumentation.
I'm starting with the presupposition that the roman pantheon is real. I know it's real, because it comports with reality, and if I start with the knowledge that Zeus and his cohorts are behind all of the stuff I see, how would I follow that? Hmm. Well, wars exist and are objectively terrible for everyone involved...but why would Mars care about people dying? So long as there's war, he's doing his job. Would an ominbenevolent god allow for this atrocitiy? Maybe, but why? Hmmm. A tidal wave wiped out 250,000 people in Sri Lanka that one time, and I know Neptune, god of the sea, causes those, and also doesn't really care about what happens to the people on land, they're not his problem. That makes sense if I start with the presupposition that Neptune's there. What's that? Someone's telling me it's not Mars or Zeus or Neptune? It's instead some single god from a far less advanced culture?
WHY WOULD I BELIEVE THAT.
This is the question, dude. If you want to ask me anything, feel free to start a topic.