It doesn’t really matter what Dawkins thinks, or almost all atheists for that matter.
Furthermore, I see no logical reason to assume that what is in the Bible is correct and can serve as the foundation of a logical argument.
This leaves us with
Right away, you’re saying that some things can exist eternally. Yet the question “where did this all come from” suggests that the things we do see around us can’t exist eternally for some unexplained reason. This is a logical contradiction which you have done nothing to get us out of.
to do so is actually a mistake of logic - requiring an explanation for an explanation
I don’t understand at all.
So to most people, the choice to explain a universe that we know had a beginning, which produces conscious, intelligent life, beauty, complexity, love, worship and sacrifice, either comes from God or a cosmic accident.
That’s a false dichotomy, particularly in the light of the capital G in God suggesting the God of the Bible. How could you possibly know that those are the only two possibilities? Furthermore, in the case of God, why wouldn’t his incredibly fortunate eternal existence be deemed a “cosmic accident”?
The logical answer for the vast majority of people is God, based on the evidence.
I don’t see how you can reach that logical conclusion. You may have other reasons for believing in God, but this logical argument is not valid.
This God is understood to be eternally existing.
There’s no logical reason to assume this that I can see. I may as well just say our physical reality is understood to be eternally existing.