I see it as a simplification, personally. God is a critically important concept for humanity; less than 7% of the global population are atheists and less than 5% of the US population are atheists (look it up, I’m not kidding). Regardless of the merits or shortcomings of doing so, refusing to recognize the inherent impulse to theism in human beings requires a great deal of mental gymnastics.
The question, for most people, becomes one of assigning internal or external agency to this spiritual impulse that the vast majority of humans share. Many atheists believe that the desire to know God comes from inside individual human minds; that it is a product of internal fears, childhood conditioning or simple ignorance. Religions that posit a God or gods outside the human mind usually assign the source of religious belief to that outside agency.
For pantheists that sort of question is meaningless sophistry, since there is only one source, and every questioner is a participant in divinity, not a supplicant outside of it. In my opinion (both as a scientist and as an ordained minister) this way of understanding God and humanity is fundamentally simpler and fits the observable data better than any of the others I have studied.
Of course you are! This is a cause for joy and celebration and prezzies on your birthday.
The name that you call an actuality doesn’t make it less or more, except in your own mind. The assignment of meaning or meaninglessness is also up to you; choose the mental state that makes you optimally happy and good.
