Baraka_Guru

I fail to see how I focused on semantics at the cost of implications. I will attempt to clarify.

It all comes down to probability: If our world as we know it could possibly exist as it is without a God, then it should follow that there is no God because God is ideally all-knowing and all-being.

God cannot be all-being if it is possible to have being in his absence.

If we can have being without an all-being god, then it is impossible for such a god to exist.

But, if there exists such a god (implying that there must be an all-being god) and nothing differs, then so be it.

We cannot have both as two possibilities; there is either an all-being god or there is not. But if both happen to be possibilities, then there can be no God. (i.e. Being can exist with or without an all-being god, but an all-being god cannot exist if being can exist on its own.)

Yes, this is a difficult concept. But I gave it a try.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot