Is pantheism a reasonable belief

My apologies for my forfeiture.. I truly did not know which direction to take this but I will give it a shot... O.K. Here goes... I want to focus on two ideas 1. "god is everything": I want to state that AS FACT! Now my reasoning comes from the desire humans have to "understand" the world they are in. We have always created a God out of this desire. These are called "God of the gap" where anytime you don't know an answer you just use the word God to put that baby to bed! My theory is that whatever God exists today is the "Final God of the gap" the only gap not answered (beginning and end) Which is why Alpha and Omega illustrates the nature of this God! So out of necessity we imagine that only "God" could exist before our natural existence was "created"... When you believe that God "willed" existence to be.. it still does not answer the question of where existence and matter came from unless you say "it came from God".. Meaning everything in existence is made "from God" not just "by God"! That is hardly an atheistic view and the "confusion" with pantheism comes from ignorance.. not from the concept of pantheism itself! In fact you could share a pantheistic view while being theist/deist.. or atheist. It makes so much sense that everyone can identify with it and it does not have nearly as many holes as what you would find in scripture! I would even go as far as to say it is the only concept of God that actually holds water! Every other God is a personal preference. A God you wish exists. I like when theists say "I KNOW God exists".. the word they are looking for is HOPE.. "I HOPE MY God exists! Where in my belief.. God just is.. no debate necessary! 2.Deism/ theism/ atheism= conjecture: I find myself entertaining the notion of just about anything. With the same circular reasoning I have come to the conclusion that I know nothing! Anything could be real (fairies, ghosts, aliens, Zeus, Vishnu, Vampires, Demons, Angels, Allah, Hercules, Jesus, telepathy, time travel, storks deliver babies, Elvis is alive, pot of gold at end of rainbow...) With the same logic the "Earth is flat" and when it rains, "God is crying for leukemia babies". Unfortunately for Deists/theists or even atheists.. You just don't know. You can only hope or imagine. Your evidence for God will some how also be evidence for the universe existing in a marble inside "Gods pocket".. could be true but.... a lot of people see something completely different. It seems as though we are looking in the same direction just with a completely different preference for what we want to see. That will explain what God is to me... this vague ambiguous empty shadow of the mind that could just be "me" or God experiencing itself subjectively.. who knows.. that is why pantheism seems convoluted and "easily manipulated" where just recently I noticed; it is what everyone else believes. They believe "God is everything" while contradicting themselves by separating God from existence. It is a duality.. a conflict.. I think pantheism is actually the stronger force of logic and reasoning.. where deism/theism is "falling in line" with societies demands instead of looking at what's right in front of them. I trust you don't believe in the "loving father" who commits mass filicide while torturing his children for eternity! So tell me about your God and why you came to that conclusion. How is Deism "reasonable"? I know I keep flip flopping with my "stance". I have been ambiguous from the beginning. You claim I am atheist.. but I think that may be a cop out because I believe in pseudo atheism (not believing in a specific God). Where I do not believe in absolute atheism. Typically, If someone is atheist, it is a reaction to a theist. So when the question of God comes up they react with atheism.. however if the idea of God in any form is not presented then God does not exist to them literally! What I'm trying to say is that atheism hinges on the idea of God being brought up in either a conflict with another or perhaps a conflict within there mind. When they are simply going about their day without the thought of God in their minds the are not "being atheist".. holy crap do you get what I'm trying to say? lol To get back on why I would not be considered atheist. If I were to call myself pantheist.. it would be within in the context that I have no debate on whether or not God exists.. in fact I consider it arbitrary to anyone's existence to even make such a claim. I am only stating that I can see the pattern of humans inventing Gods and trying to sell it to me.. From my experience with Christians and Muslims.. the God they are selling is what I have been known to call "a turd sandwich labeled delicious"! That is why you need to explain why deism is a reasonable conclusion. Like I said before pantheism is only unreasonable if seen through the same perspective that makes theism/deism unreasonable! I guess I would be considered atheist in the concept of picking a football team. If you asked me to choose right now.. I would tell you "I don't watch football" I think all of the teams are wrong.. i guess in that metaphor I am atheist. But I would still "believe in football".. man that metaphor was fun to play with! The bottom line.. to me it is just conforming and apparently I do not conform well! I think we may need to dive into Agnosticism, thanks to Wikipedia Agnosticism is the belief that the truth values of certain claims"especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, as well as other religious and metaphysical claims, are unknown or unknowable. Agnosticism sometimes indicates doubt or a skeptical approach to questions. An agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas a theist and an atheist believe and disbelieve, respectively. Yeah I don't see a problem with Agnostics. In fact I think it is just an honest approach to theism. Whereas claiming the existence of a God is.. well.. not honest. Every God I have been presented with has come from self inflation and pride.. not to say I am without! "We are created in God's image"? Really? or "We created God in our image" seems to fit better in the acknowledgement of our own observable history! I gave it my all here. I still feel as though I had to stick to my guns.. but it is in the spirit of debate.. plus I did not want to forfeit .. take it from here and we will see where it goes i guess!