[QUOTE=Waxing_Gibbous;501439]I see no problem with a creator that sort of sets the rules and gets the ball rolling (makes as much sense as a "Quantum Fluctuation") and just gives it a nudge here and there. But ultimately we'll never know until its over.
Sounds easy doesn't it? The problem with a God that just "sets the rules and gets the ball rolling" is that such a God has to be unbelieveably complex in the first place to be capable of being able to do such a thing and religion, whether organised or not, is incapable of answering the question of where did this God come from? To use a God as a creator simply puts off the questions of how or by whom was God created and so answers nothing.
Personally I prefer people who believe in the full on God rather than this rather wimpy version, if you are going to believe in fairy stories, at least believe in interesting ones!
Lastly, "hyper-rationality" is an interesting term. Rationality is attempting to understand events based on evidence, and refusing to invoke "unknowables" based on simple faith to explain away difficulties. As such you cannot be hyper rational, you are either rational or you are not. I cannot accept science can explain 99.9% of the universe and reserve the rest to God and still call myself a rationalist. Remembering of course that a rationalist should never say that science explains everything, only that everything is open to scientific rational enquiry. There may be some things that we cannot hope to explain, it doesn't mean we shouldn't try or worse, simply invoke "faith" and a God to avoid the question.
My 2 cents worth!