I only have what you tell me to go on. Your own words implied that you thought it was lifeless (compared to how I see it)
What was your statement about assumption above…? If the universe caused itself, then it is what we call God. This does not eliminate the possibility of sentience. I bet I look like a universe to a virus (not saying we are a flu God has, it's just and example).
Actually, God only has non-falsifiable properties when science is applied, not philosophy. To say that in the 13th century people had little understanding of the universe is to show your own lack of knowledge. We know less now than we did then. Yes, yes, science has taken a lot of new turns and new advances, ect… but almost none of them have been factually proven. It's just a compilation of ideas based on other ideas, based on other ideas, which still cannot be definitively proven. When one of those is disproven, all the 'science' stacked upon it will come crashing down and send us back to the so-called 'dark ages'. But I digress. This is a philosophical debate, not a scientific one.
Actually there is a logical basis for my belief. I never said that my religion was based solely on faith. Did you forget once again what you said about assumption above? I am not wrong on the basis of logic. That is flawed thinking. You see, just because you think I am wrong doesn't mean I am. You are saying I am wrong because it is your opinion that I am, not because it is factual.