I think this is the best way I can qualify my thoughts.
The way I see it, there are one or two options, depending on how you want to look at it. I think the question everything leads to makes it a challenge to definitively give a 100% certain answer because it really depends if you accept the existence of the second possibility, which also seems to be a logical possibility. There are no more than two options and no less than one, though.
Ask yourself these questions:
1. What created the universe?
2. What created the thing that created the universe?
3. What created the thing that created the thing that created the universe?
4. etc...
Logic dictates there is a "God" (or "Gods") because there will never be an answer to how the first thing was created. No matter how many levels of explanations you go through, there is not going to be an answer to the next level, or the level after when you find the answer to the previous level, etc. However, logic also dictates that this means there can't be a "God." "God" must be the first thing created, but since there is nothing that could create "God," then "God" couldn't exist.
I think the only true solution to this problem is accept that "God" simply came about, so to speak, and have no option other than to accept this because it is the only option.
Simply put, you have to accept the impossible at some point because logic dictates that the impossible is the only way it even is possible.
Additionally, if we were living in a simulation the same is true; what created the things that created the simulation, etc. This impossible logic holds true in all instances: something came from nothing somewhere, and that something would have to be "God."
Now, here is where I think shit gets deep:
The only alternative, I believe, would be to accept that we are literally nothing. Nothing can exist, therefore we must be nothing.
You can stop there, or go on at this point based on what you are willing to accept. I think if we go on, we can introduce one more question that sort of highlights where you can take your stance on the matter when using only logic: how does nothing exist (or, not exist, rather)? One could now argue that "God" must exist because it is impossible for nothing to not exist (or, exist, rather?), and since "God" is the impossibly existent creator, "God" must be the thing that made it possible for nothing to not exist.
So, basically, you are logically forced to accept that you are literally nothing, or you can choose that nothing has to exist (again, or not exist), and the only way for this to be possible is if something created nothing, ergo "God." Or, if you dismiss the possibility that you are literally nothing, as nothing can't simply be nothing because it is impossible for nothing to not exist (or exist), then the only conclusion remaining is that there is a "God" which either created something, created nothing then created something, created the nothing that we are since nothing must exist but cannot create something, or didn't create nothing, but made it possible for nothing to not exist (...), in which case we would still be nothing since something cannot come from nothing (except in the instance of the "God," of course).