# There is no God.



## Pan-Eslavo Brasil

_Salvete, amici! Ut valetis hodie?_  Is it possible to say "*Nulla Dei*" (genitive) meaning "*There is no god*" instead of "*Nulla Deus*" (nominative)?_Gratias vobis ago _in advance!!!


----------



## Starless74

Salve,
_Deus_ is masculine, so the literal translation of «there is no god» is: _Nullus deus est._
I really don't think genitive can convey the same sense in any way, wait for more answers about that.


----------



## radagasty

Pan-Eslavo Brasil said:


> Is it possible to say "*Nulla Dei*" (genitive) meaning "*There is no god*" instead of "*Nulla Deus*" (nominative)?



Neither of these are grammatically acceptable, as Starless74 points out. In particular, _nulla_ is either feminine singular or neuter plural, and _nulla Dei_ would mean something like ‘no things of God’.



Starless74 said:


> _Deus_ is masculine, so the literal translation of «there is no god» is: _Nullus deus est._



In the absence of any context, I would read this as ‘nobody is (a) god’, although this would more customarily be expressed as _nemo est Deus_. Why not avoid _nullus_ altogether and simply say: « Non est Deus »?


----------



## Pan-Eslavo Brasil

Thank you very much! This new construction is far better, hahaha!


----------



## bearded

radagasty said:


> Non est Deus


Perhaps also _Deus non extat_.


----------



## Sobakus

_*nūllus est deus*_ - with this word order - seems perfectly clear and idiomatic and finds a parallel in this nice little epigram by Martial. I don't think *nōn est* is normally used to deny existence, but as a copula - "he/she/it is not a god". *extāre* is about coming out into view, being found, bordering on *appārēre*.


----------

