example: the being 'linda' created all the particles that formed the earth, but who created linda? the being 'bill' created linda, but who created bill? etc. the argument goes on forever until there is a beginning, which was initially required according to the cosmological argument.
The cosmological argument assumes that there was a beginning, but it can again be contradicted simply by pointing out that the the matter which composes my body is eternal, never going to be created nor to be destroyed.
If we can`t prove that the universe was created, then we don`t need to think that actually a creator exists.
Second; the definition of God implies a being that is sentient. An eternal universe is absolutely not equal to a God because it lacks the capability of thinking.
Aristotele for example, believed that both God and Matter always existed, but yet he considered them to separate beings.
So I don`t really think that I'm calling the same thing under different names...
And I'll also ignore that puerile comment..
oh. and if the universe simply existed, the universe would be god. you're just calling it a different name. read a book, kid.