I suppose that one could say from an a priori point no given statement is more logical than another.

It seems rational to inform our logic through experience. There is no experience for the existence of a God. We must choose between some arbitrary world whose rules we do not full understand and some arbitrary world whoose rules we do not fully understand which contains a God (an object that can behave contrary to all of the accumulated evidence that we have about how things can behave), furthermore a God that has, as yet, no observational effects.

Seeking the lest ad hoc explanation indicates that we should choose the Godless world. This seems logical to me.

Why would one search for a deity through logic when logic has been constructed to help us think clearly about human propositions?

Meaning is what you make of it.