Ok, let’s do this the easy way:

G(od)

[First thing first- G is not Contingent if and only if G is necessary or impossible. As G implies the Necessary Existence for all else in existence (therefore cannot be contingent on any other existent thing) G is only Necessary or Impossible.]

Necessarily, It is possible G exists if and only if it is not necessary G does not Exist.
It is necessary G exists if and only if it is not possible G does not exist. In other words, It is necessary G exists if and only if it is not impossible that G exists and it is impossible G exists if and only if it is not necessary G exists.

Are we logically consistent in defining that God must be necessarily necessary or else God is impossible? If so, moving on.

Impossible is most accurately defined as 0 probability or 0 chance. Thus, Impossible defined as 0 probability or 0 chance is materially equivalent to 0 probability or 0 chance equal to impossibility. However, 0 probability or 0 chance does not entail impossible, therefore 0 probability or 0 chance does not accurately define Impossible, logically implicating Impossible is impossible. Impossible being logically Impossible, G necessarily exists. (Please be sure to understand the nature of ‘impossible’).

Next: “Statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low, *but not truly impossible* as impossible outcomes have a probability of zero, while zero probability outcomes are necessarily not impossible.” A zero probability outcome is expressed as a denominator that approaches a constant before infinity and the entire expression approaches to a constant before absolute zero.

In relation to G, An impossible outcome is only an infinite approach to certainly impossible and never achieves 0 outcome or actual impossibility. The denominator of impossible outcome is most precisely defined as a constant infinity, where Infinite Impossible outcomes is infinitely accurate as necessarily impossible if and only if infinity is not infinity in the sense if infinity achieves infinity, thereby completing itself, it is inconsistent to infinity (now being finite), meaning the infinity of impossible outcomes will be inconsistent necessitating an outcome of possibility, and since G is not a contingent possibility, the outcome is necessary. Therefore G necessarily exists. (Please confirm these statements with statistical impossibility).

You probably have some questions about this right now, So I’ll explain:

This event occurs because Impossible is an effect rather than a cause, essentially conveying impossible is impossible (on the grounds of possibilities and probabilities), but what makes something actually impossible is if it lacks sufficient reason to exist at all, and conversely, what allows something to exist is if it has a sufficient (causal) reason to exist.

So we must understand the principle of sufficient reason and how it pertains to our existence:

The principle of sufficient reason states there is a sufficient (causal) reason for all that exists, introducing causality: the *connection* between cause and effect, where the cause is responsible for the effect, and the effect is dependent on the cause, with all existing states of events or objects determined by prior states of previously existing causes (causal determinism). In other words, everything that exists, is caused or sufficiently reasoned to exist by other sufficiently reasoned prior causes. God entails the first cause; the cause of all causes or reason of all reasons.

Existence is sufficiently reasoned to exist, like all other things that exist. If existence is not sufficiently reasoned to exist, then existence would not exist. The predicament arises in how existence is sufficiently reasoned to exist. There’s ultimately either the first Cause (God), supernatural magic (heuristic interpretation of God), infinite regress of causes (infinite contingency), or interdependent-teleological causation (which ultimately brings us right back to God). Only one of these explanations attempts to defy God—infinite regress of causes.

If existence is contingent on an infinite regress of causes, then 1) all labeled causes can be equally labeled as effects, rather than causes, insofar infinite regress of effects remain without cause, or 2) all that exists (and all causes) are ultimately contingent, and existence (with all causation) depends on causes outside of existence. Causes outside of existence are nonexistent causes. Causes that are nonexistent, don’t exist, since they exist outside of existence. Therefore, existence cannot be dependent on nonexistent causes, concluding existence is not dependent on infinite regress of causes. Existence only ‘regresses’ to the first cause of all existence, the first cause et al a.k.a God.

At this point in time, I’ll allow you time to consider and respond as you will. We will get to scientific evidence and data and proof once we get on the same page. I hope to hear from you soon.

God only necessarily exists if it exists. I doubt that it can be proved that there was a first cause.