The purpose of my study in this field is not to insult or infuriate anybody but to discover truth and explain it as best I can. As I am just one person I welcome others to contact me so that I can publish a more informed view.


I have published my First Principles on this website so I shall not repeat why I have chosen them. Instead, here is how I would apply them to the question of any type of creator-god entity:

  1. The universe contains absolutely everything.
  2. A creator-god created the universe.
  3. In order to create the universe, a creator-god must have existed outside of it.
  4. The universe contains absolutely everything and so nothing can exist outside of it.
  5. A creator-god cannot exist.

The basic gist is that an entity (even a god) could not create everything since it would need to create itself, which is impossible. This is known as the Origins Paradox since an entity would need to already exist in order to bring about its own existence. If one suggests that self-creation is possible, or that an entity may exist without a creative event, the existence of the universe needs neither a creative event nor a creative entity.

The renders the notion of a creator-god either impossible or unnecessary.

Deeper Definitions

Rather than thinking about the universe in terms of what you see in Star Trek or a Hollywood movie, I am using it as the philosophical concept of all that exists. It is an all-encompassing idea of everything, in which even things we do not know about are included and which is therefore the most empirical and complete definition possible.

A creator-god must be included within this definition if it exists. A creator-god would be defined as an entity which has brought about the existence of everything, else it cannot be viewed as a being of godlike creativity.

Why Can Gods Not Exist Outside?

If gods were given any sort of vehicle outside of the universe in which to exist, it would not prevent them from existing. This vehicle would still be part of all that exists, as would the gods. They would be unable to escape from this definition of the universe and yet retain their existence. If they do not exist within "all that exists" then they cannot claim the property of existence.

But I Thought Gods Could Not Be Proven Or Disproven?

Any proposition of any sort must be subjected to the rigours of reason else all semblence of sense in our lives is lost. Without systematically analysing ideas one would end up believing the absurd, such as the 1969 moon landing by the USA being a fake or that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was part of an intricate government conspiracy.

One must apply logic and reason to every idea in order to establish whether or not they are sufficiently truthful to be accepted. This approach must include any argument for any type of god and indeed any arguement against any type of god.

As the proposition for most gods is a hypothesis which can neither be tested directly by humans nor by machines, one can only analyse the given definition to prove or disprove it. I find that the specific definition of any god as having been the ultimate creative force of all things is fatally flawed.


Thomas Hobbes created a similar argument to show that creator-gods could not exist. He came up with it over a century before me, so I am a little concerned that people still believe in gods when this idea appears to be a strong proof of their impossibility. I can only assume that this argument is somehow flawed and wholeheartedly welcome anyone to explain how so.