My stance is simple: I do not [u]believe[/u] God exists. Whether He actually exists is beyond my (or anyone's) knowledge so I won't claim to definitively know either way, however that doesn't mean I won't engage in an argument about it. Excuse my language if it seems obstructive at all. Monotheism is based around the ideas that one being brought everything else into existence, and that this being is the most powerful, most perfect, most [insert descriptive term here] thing in existence. My opinion is that, whilst what monotheism describes could exist, that thing wouldn't actually be God. You know what's more powerful than one human? Ten humans. You know what's smarter than ten humans? A hundred humans. You know what's smarter and more powerful than a hundred humans? All humans together. So, from this we can gather the rule that the collection of a bunch of things together is 'better' in every way than one of the things individually. If we have all of them together we include all the traits that an individual of the collection has, plus everything else. If we have one being (the Christian God for example) as the best thing in the universe, that implies that nothing could ever be better than it in any way possible. But because this thing is one being in particular, it necessarily can't be anything else (the Christian God can't be a human and a planet and a star and an atom because it is specifically something separate from those things; it created those things so it can't simultaneously be those things). As we've found out though, a collection of things is better than any one of those things individually, so there CAN be something better than the Christian God and that is the Christian God and everything He created, together in one collection. In other words, the only thing that can be truly given the title of 'the most x in the universe' is the universe itself, as only the collection of everything can have no amount of anything excluded.