What do you think of this argument for God?

[masterofpuppets]

To put a -1 * -1 = 1 make look like cheating but if you understand it, you know why it is true.

The same is true of this argument. It may look like cheating but in fact, it's because we deal with negative, we assume God is a possible being, but when you combine that with the definition he is the necessary being, then you know it doesn't matter where you start the assumption...you can start with assumption that non-existence brought existence to existence, and you would prove that wrong, and come to notion that existence is necessary and one and absolute.

All things pertain to existence and necessity with whatever assumption you start, you will get to God.

That is because God is the truth by which all truth is derived from, he is the foundation of reason, life, existence, morals, and insight, love, humor, tears, etc... The concept of possibility itself proves necessity.

You have merely presupposed God as the foundation for all truth, and then claim that because truth exists, God exists. However, we don't need a foundation for truth. Truth is that which corresponds to reality, nothing more, nothing less, no God needed. I am also curious as to why you claim that we should assume God is not only possible but also necessary. This is flawed because you have yet to demonstrate the veracity of all these claims, and hence they hold as much water as a spaghetti strainer.