I have often noted the way in my own case I have cycled back and forth between atheism, theism many times. One can rediscover the relevance of the ‘god’ idea in so many ways that any hope thought (which is itself ridden with such ‘dualities’) will settle on one alternative seems unrealistic. For good Kantian reasons.
One easy way to get from atheism back to, well, theism of a sort, is through contemplating (the atheist?) Schopenhauer’s thesis of the ‘Will’: and this echoes an unknown ancient version of theology. We can banish ‘god’ from the realm of the ‘phenomenon’ or ‘representation’, but we can also consider that the constant reckoning with the issue of the ‘existence’ of god has confused us. God’s existence, if we allowed such a loaded phrase to stand, would only stand as representation to the ‘thing in itself’ ( I prefer the term ‘noumenal’ which Schopenhauer disliked) beyond ‘existence’ in physical space, perhaps (I am not sure how this works in transcendental idealism where ‘space’ figmentizes as ???). This then is, what? In Kant the noumenal is unknowable. But in Schopenhauer, there appears to be some way of considering the ‘thing in itself’ in the category of ‘WILL’.
Well there you have it: the two poles of thought pervading monotheistic theology: the ‘existing god’ and the mystery beyond representation (of the idol ‘god’) of the unknown, the ‘will of god’, as a pointing to of an unknown noumenal/thing in itself….You might have noticed this is the way that centuries of men have taken the question in variants more or less like the above.
This summarizes neatly millennia of thinking on the issue of ‘god’.