You have nowhere established the "facts" of the finiteness of time or the universe. Even granting those as premises you have not established that finitude necessitates a creator, the impossibility of a first cause, or even the necessity of a first cause if it is assumed that time is finite. And, you certainly haven't established that the bag of contradictions (that there is something that both exists and does not exist) associated with your belief is somehow more valid than any other bag of contradictions.
And it is a little pathetic being accused of accepting logical impossibilities from somehow who confesses that his whole view of truth and existence is founded firmly upon a logical impossibility.
If you are so willing to break the bonds of reason and logic, why make it so hard on yourself? With such a detachment you have opened up an infinite world of possibilities for belief. Why not just find some religious document and believe it literally? Wouldn't that make life easier for you? Not so much hard thinking involved.
It is a kick, I must say, watching such logically crippled individuals think they can reason their way to the secrets of the universe. Kind of like joining the major leagues before you know how to spell "baseball".
I'm going back to the minor leagues to put together some arguments for the finiteness of time, necessity of a first cause, etc.
May I ask you a few questions?
You say you're not an atheist, and you're certainly not a deist, so I assume you're an agnostic. If so, how did you come to be an agnostic and how long have you been one? Also, which philosophers do you like?