I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Purple Rabbit]

In short, your answer is that you define your god as not contingent upon anything else because you see that defining him otherwise leads to logical contradiction. However eloquent it is a thoroughly unsatisfying answer because it does not adress the question HOW you KNOW this fact. You seem to conceive your own facts. This will not do as an argument because it is circular reasoning.

When you say "the vacuum cleaner in my house", it would lead to a self-contradiction of the very definiton of what that vacuum cleaner is to say it was in reality, a moon of Jupiter. That in no way proves that your vacuum cleaner exists, or that the moon of Jupiter does. That's not the issue at hand.

Like it would be a contradiction with the very definition of God to say that he is contingent upon something else. That in no way proves my concept of God to be true, and if you are now asking that question again as to what the evidence is for the truth of my conception of God, you are asking a question wholly irrelevant to that particular fact.

Although the vacuum cleaner argument is LEDO's and although it is paramount in debate to address the right argument at the right opponent, I will reply your answer. In short your answer on my question ("How do you know that your god with his specific RC-characteristics that indicate choice of specifics identifies with the non-contingent absolute?") is that my question is irrelevant to "that particular fact" (assuming you are referring to the alleged 'fact' that "it would be a contradiction with the very definition of God to say that he is contingent upon something else").

But my question IS relevant to your assertion because of the fact that you contended that only Gods noncontingent actuality can embody absolute morality. You write god with capital 'G', known to be the name of the christian god. For this you give no reason. Why cannot Hindu be the noncontingent actuality that embodies absolute morality? If you do not show that your RC-god can only embody this, your statement that only Gods noncontingent actuality can embody absolute morality becomes meaningless, for no specific god-conception is needed. The Absolute itself (all that exists) would fit in that placeholder and there would be no reason to justify that your god chooses some moral statements over others.