You don't see a distinction, because you don't want to see a distinction. It's very simple, not only does asking "what came before god, or what created him", br

You don't see a distinction, because you don't want to see a distinction. It's very simple, not only does asking "what came before god, or what created him", bring you to where we started - the impossibility of infinite regress, thus nothing existing - but also the fallacious nature of your question implying that God is a created being, which is false, created Gods are idols. As explained above: "that's like looking at the painting of Mona Lisa and asking "but who painted Leonardo Davinci?", while Davinci is the painter, he is a human, not a painting, creator and created don't have to be of the same nature." It's one thing to deepen the discussion by contributing new ideas and a whole other thing to just stubbornly insist on making fallacious arguments and repeat them like you did. So unless you prove this time that you're not deaf to the arguments being made, I won't even bother next time...