Hell and God cant Co-exist.

[Esquilax]

The problem is the conclusion. You've given absolutely no justification for why that is the conclusion you draw from the observations you list.

That justification is actually hugely important. It's literally the difference between an actual argument and a baseless assertion.

Then why is that when presented with the actual demonstrations in Question 2 of the Summa Theologica, you don't challenge the logic; but rather, the observations about reality on which those demonstrations are based.

... Because logical arguments can be totally valid within their own structure, while still not aligning with reality?

What does this have to do with your utter failure to connect your conclusion to your observations, by the way? Someone's playing dodgeball.