God's God

[median]

I said if you can make up shit about some non-demonstrable deity (giving whatever secondary characteristics you want) then so can I about whatever I want. That gets us nowhere there smart guy.

I can not find any counter-argument in your response. Probably because there isn't one.

Great! Then you agree that simply making shit up about an alleged deity (or assuming secondary characteristics) isn't a sound option, right?

---

As far as I'm concerned Mystic Knight and I have presented a clear and reasonable basis for believing in a Supreme Being, regardless of the name applied to that being. And no serious counter-argument has been made.

The Argument from Ignorance/Incredulity fallacy is supposed to be "reasonable"?? LOL. Actually, counter arguments have been made. Can you read? If you didn't see any then you haven't been paying attention. Merely claiming "God [the supernatural self propelling causer of the universe] is necessary" isn't an argument. It's an unsupported claim, which anyone can do. The truly honest answer, the one that credulous types like you are unwilling to accept b/c of some emotional need you have, is to admit that you simply don't know - and to withhold judgment. But that's just out of the question for you, due to your assumptions, isn't it?

there's no reason to assume that cause is supernatural; it could just be a feature of the universe our technology can't detect yet.

That still falls within the definition of supernatural, since it falls outside of what we currently consider natural.

Ah, so anything you don't personally understand, you put the label "supernatural" on? WOW. There's the inherent problem with faith for ya! Just keep believing credulously even when there isn't sufficient/extraordinary evidence to support an extraordinary claim (all so you can keep feeling comfortable in your holy book assumption).