Is there objective Truth?

[Neo-Scholastic]

If you want to question why existence is existent you need to realize that makes as little logical sense as asking why atheism is atheistic why colors are colorful why A=A... it's nonsense…Existence is not a property…Asking why something is existent makes sense when asked about anything except existence itself. Asking why existence itself is existent makes no sense at all.

You seem to be saying that existence and essences must be alienable to be distinct, but that is not necessarily true. For all particulars both their existence and essences must be present together or not at all. Everything that exists has properties and everything that has properties exists. Anything that has no properties doesn’t exist. Anything that doesn’t exist has no properties.

At least one ontological argument (the 3rd Way of Aquinas) is based on the two very basic observations: 1) some things that could potentially exist don’t and 2) some things that actual do exist could cease to exist. It seems to me that denying that existence is a property is just a self-defeating way to avoid dealing with the theistic implications of it. Self-defeating because if existence isn’t a property then nothing could exist, could it?

No I already dealt with that in my post. Either the universe is the totality of all things and existence itself or the universe came about through the totality of all things and existence itself.

Right! That is true. Either the physical universe is part of a larger reality or it is the sum total of all reality. I think that atheists and theists both agree that the reason there is something rather than nothing is because some thing or things must exist of necessity. So the next question is this: what is the nature of something(s) that it (they) must exist by necessity? For that the physical universe simply doesn’t qualify because it goes from prior states of potential to subsequent states of actuality (as per the 1st Way of Aquinas).