I am a philosophical theist endorsing a version of classical theism that is based on Neoplatonist objective idealism, with the world being based on thoughts in the mind of God. Thus, I am an immaterialist and supernaturalist.
I therefore concur with many of the views of the following thinkers, mostly subjective and objective idealist and/or platonist philosophers, or physicists supporting an idealist interpretation of quantum mechanics or the simulation hypothesis: Augustine, George Berkeley, Brand Blanshard, Jacob Böhme, Bernard Bosanquet, Nick Bostrom, F.H. Bradley, Giordano Bruno, Fritjof Capra, David Chalmers, Deepak Chopra, Arthur Collier, Nicholas of Cusa, Meister Eckhardt, Jonathan Edwards, Ralph Waldo Emerson, A.C. Ewing, Edward Feser, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Peter Forrest, S. James Gates Jr., Kurt Gödel, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Philip Goff, Bruce Gordon, Amit Goswami, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Vittorio Hösle, Donald D. Hoffman, Daniel Hutto, Ludwig Jaskolla, Bernardo Kastrup, Ernst Mach, Perry Marshall, Robert Lanza, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, John A. Leslie, Peter B. Lloyd, Nicolas Malebranche, Freya Mathews, John M. Ellis McTaggart, Nagarjuna, Thomas Nagel, Gregory Palamas, Parmenides, Karl Pearson, Charles Sanders Peirce, Roger Penrose, Plato, Plotinus, Proclus, Johanan Raatz, Ramanuja, Nicholas Rescher, Hugh Rice, Josiah Royce, Rudy Rucker, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, Erwin Schrödinger, Itay Shani, Shankara, Mark F. Sharlow, Rupert Sheldrake, Baruch de Spinoza, Timothy Sprigge, Eric Steinhart, Eleonore Stump, A.E. Taylor, Max Tegmark, Holm Tetens, Frank Tipler, Giulio Tononi, Keith Ward, John Watson, Ken Wilber, Brian Whitworth, Anton Zeilinger, Christian Idealism and Apologetics and Inspiring Philosophy.
This worldview implies that I endorse the following philosophical notions that mostly would have to be denied by a consistent materialism and naturalism:
As a committed theist I reject the incoherent world view of naturalism, which necessarily implies atheistic materialism and scientism, and thus automatically leads to total nihilism (compare Alexander Rosenberg's book "An Atheist's Guide to Reality").
I subscribe to the idealistic (universal mind causes collapse) interpretation of quantum mechanics, and agree with many modern physicists that spacetime and matter/energy are not fundamental but emerge from timeless quantum information. The hypothesis that the world is a kind of mental "computer simulation", is supported by many arguments from physics. It differs from Bostrom's "simulation hypothesis" or The Matrix in the fact that there is no underlying level of physical reality at all. It differs from some other types of monistic objective idealism in the affirmation that created finite minds are distinct from God's mind (weak panentheism) based on the palamite divine essence vs energies distinction and the distinction of thoughts and thinker.
During my nearly 15 years of intensive studies of metaphysics and philosophy, I thoroughly evaluated very different alternative world views like atheistic materialism (naturalism), Eastern non-dualism, Integral Thought, quantum mysticism, process philosophy, objective idealism, neoplatonism, mathematical monism, and deism. I studied most of the pro and con arguments, and ultimately came to the conclusion that there are only three serious and potentially viable alternatives to a theistic world view:
However, all three alternatives ultimately involve much more severe problems, absurdities, and incoherences than the theistic world view proposed above, even though it incorporates some elements of these:
No world view apart from theism can really account for an enduring and unified self. Thus, if you do believe that YOU exist, than you must accept theism! There is an easy test if you do believe that you exist as an enduring and unified self:
If you answered any of these questions with yes, than you are highly irrational if you still embrace atheism and materialism, because these world views are totally incompatible with the fundamental beliefs you just confirmed.
To sum up: There are no reasonable alternatives to theism, and therefore as rational human one should believe in God.