Square-circles Vs. God

[The Reality Salesman01]

But now they have to admit the metaphysical necessities, the most fundamental basics of reality are outside and beyond God. Naturalism is proven logically.

This fundamental naturalism is necessary in the technical sense. But God in this regard is dispensable if the theists can't demonstrate a God that fits into this scenario actually exists and can be squared with their favorite revealed theology. The burden of proof most certainly shifts to the theist here.

Agreed. The conclusion from this line of reasoning is that if there is a God, there can be no coherent version of God that is compatible with the natural laws (logic included). While we can speculate about the possibility of this "God", any attempt to define it's properties can be readily dispensed as illogical. All we could say is that "There may be something, and you can call it God, or whatever you want". But you can't really stake claim to anything else beyond that because, as Rob pointed out, there isn't anybody here that is privy to anything that everyone else is not, no extra sense that we don't all share. If it were possible for some to know things about such an entity, it would be possible for everyone, and any such entity that can understood by logic would be bound by it, and would be ultimately unqualified to be "superomnipotent" as Apo put it.