On the subject of Hell and Salvation

[The Grand Nudger]

Which natural laws make existence impossible?  What is the purpose of equivocating between the supernatural and god?

It isn't so much that there are laws that make existence possible, but that there are laws which preclude the possibility of existence, particularly in the case of the Big Bang. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed (1st law of thermodynamics), therefore existence is impossible, unless you  want to argue that the universe isn't a closed system, which the folks on your side would take issue with.

 
This explanation is factually incorrect, doesn't follow, and is inconsistent with the position that you espouse.  Since we're on the subject of impossibility, it's impossible for an assertion to be more wrong than that.

To violate the first law of thermodynamics bb cosmology would have to make claims that it doesn't make.  It would still be the case that we exist, and thus, that existence is possible by definition, and if something about the first law of thermodynamics -did- make existence impossible, then it would be equally impossible for a god to have created the universe.  

Then the 2nd law of thermodynamics completely nullifies the possibility of the Big Bang.

Can you explain why you think so?  

Of course, I have no doubt in my mind that these arguments aren't new here. I made them myself some time ago.

OFC they aren't..these arguments aren't new anywhere.  Neither are the reasons that they are malformed.  

And I don't really see that I'm equivocating between the supernatural and God. You can call Him what you like; the bottom line is that existence can't be explained by anything other than a supernatural source. There is simply no way, and any attempt to argue the point is an effort in absolute futility.

You actually wrote "supernatural" and then directly behind in parenthesis "god".  You've done it again here. A "supernatural source" is not equivalent to "a god". That's equivocation.   In any case, this assertion is an argument from ignorance.  You can't explain it, but you can't explain it by reference to the supernatural or god, either, if you hold to these misconceptions.  Broadly, if you're going to assert (rightly or wrongly) that some x makes y impossible, the use case for this assertion cannot be it's immediate contradiction by the invocation of some z. If z can do it, then y isn't impossible nor does x make it so.

Meanwhile, others can and have explained the thing you think is impossible to explain. I think that you have a huge problem with the concept of impossibility. By all means, believe in a tinkergod if that's what floats your fancy, but understand that the constraints you place on the universe will influence this tinkers creative efficacy regardless of whether or not it impacts it's creative capacity. If it's impossible for y in this universe, then a god couldn't do y in this universe. Maybe in some other universe it could..because this is not gods personal limitation, but in this universe that path is blocked. As a thoroughly mundane example...I'm perfectly capable of typing this response to you, but this potential is moot if I'm in a room with no computers.

In sum, you've accidentally closed the door on your god in a failed attempt to discredit natural explanations.

*TLDR version: don't you think someone might have noticed if your assertions regarding the laws of thermodynamics and bb cosmology were true, and made both their careers and a credible run at a nobel? Do you appreciate the unavoidable implications of your position wholly apart from any consideration of gods?