Why does anything exist?

[HoreTore]

Why does anything exist?

Because it does.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Why does anything exist?

Because it does.

You just blew my mind.

[KukriKhan]

Why does anything exist?

The whole universe consists of a cosmic self playing hide-and-seek, hiding from itself by becoming all the living and non-living things in the universe, forgetting what it really is; the result being that we are all IT (the cosmic self) in disguise.

I therefore assert that our concept of ourself as an "ego in a bag of skin" is a myth; the entities we call the separate "things" are merely processes of the whole.

So: why? To keep ourself(s) amused. And to thus better understand our 'bigger', cosmic self by means of understanding our parts, individually.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I used to ask these questions, then I got an all-consuming job and had barely any time to do anything, so I ditched them.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I used to ask these questions, then I got an all-consuming job and had barely any time to do anything, so I ditched them.

This is what I must do.

[KukriKhan]

I used to ask these questions, then I got an all-consuming job and had barely any time to do anything, so I ditched them.

Which, ironically, is just as valid a method of reporting to/informing the Cosmic Self about who he/she/it is, by experiencing (and remembering) who you are.

[The Celtic Viking]

The whole argument fails because "all material must have been created" is just an empty assertion. Until you can actually provide evidence for that, we have no reason to accept that it has indeed been created, removing all supposed need for an "immaterial creator", whatever that means.

By the way, you left out a premise in point 4 and 5. In logic, all conclusions must have at least two premises that it draws from. The only conclusion we can draw from "material objects exist" is that "material objects exist". As I see it from your other points, it should rather be something like this (correct me if I've misunderstood you):

P1: Material things exist
P2: All material things must have been created by an immaterial creator
C: Therefore, an immaterial creator must exist

However, as I said, P2 is invalid, which invalidates the conclusion. One could also ask: what created the immaterial creator? If you can say that "the immaterial creator" didn't need to created, then we can just say that material things didn't need to be created instead, thanks to Occam's razor.

2. All of the material things in existence can trace their creation to a single point in time, the Big Bang (or is that correct, any scientists?)

Well, I'm not a scientist, but I do know enough to say that the Big Bang wasn't a creation event, but rather a transition from one state to another. We really don't know the origins of the universe, and AFAIK the furthest we could ever postulate back is 1 planck unit of time (5 x 10^-44 s) after the initial event. We don't and might never know anything beyond that point.

[Husar]

In logic

Logic is a lie.