Which is kind of my point. Even just the word “is” is quite a large assumption that is easy to overlook. I think it’s an outgrowth of saying some thing created existence rather than saying some event created existence.
Edit: Even thinking in terms of assumptions it’s hard to list them all. We think of time as a linear progression which naturally suggests a first action. But set that aside and really strange possibilities show up. What if the universe was created at the end by something that’s yet to exist and time flowed backwards from that event? Now it’s last action that created existence. Or even in the middle with a positive time universe moving forward and a negative time universe moving backwards. Or…
Energy can not be created out of nothing so something had to exist before "existence". My assumption is that every universe collapses and then new universe emerges through something like Big Bang.
Having convinced yourself of all of these things it then feels natural to think of that first mover as somehow complex for creating the universe rather than some infinitesimal speck that started a cascade. To then think in terms of mystical power rather than say energy. It doesn’t feel like you’re less likely to be correct with every assumption which is kind of silly in one way but also seductive.