Look at how your statement about not knowing what it means to conform to equality proves true:<quoted text>
No, you only have the existence of power, not the existence of a common source for all power.
Even if all power has a source, you are making the illogical leap from the statement
'For each power, there is a source of that power'
to the statement
'there is a common source for all powers'
THAT is the logical leap that you have not established.
If all power has one source, then it is naturally the source of EACH ONE of those powers which it (the source) has created.
Therefore the remark:
"Even if all power has a source, you are making the illogical leap from the statement...";
Should never even have entered your mind as a reasonable individual ("reasonable" by any definition).
The assumption that there is a source of all powers MUST immediately, directly, naturally and every -ally-ly implies that:'For each power, there is a source of that power'.
If that conclusion was based on your sentiments above; it is meaningless (both the conclusion and the sentiment).So you have not proven that there is a God, even by your definition, and even granting that the term 'power' is sufficiently defined to lend itself to this argument (which I also deny).
But logic demands that there be, and there must naturally be.The logical flaw is pointed out above. You assume a common source for all types of power. That has not been demonstrated and, in fact, is incredibly unlikely.
That which is powerful by any definition of power, must possess one unique attribute (or set of attributes) which allows it to be identified as being powerful or having potential. And it is this attribute/s which is causes or generates the power by itself or from itself.