I’m not sure to whom this is directed since you did not indicate such. However, I’ll respond.
As an atheist I have exactly zero god(s). Only those with god(s) are the ones able to provide definition. Based on the definition provided, I can then accept or reject the proposition that it exists.
@CyberLN Yes, I was responding to you. I apologize. I’m not great with the mechanics of the site.
Ok, fun.
But when you say zero “gods “ what do you mean by “gods”? You must mean something. Otherwise atheism might as well be disbelief in the existence of X, where X can literally be anything!
Because you are a moderator right? An attempt to kindly signal that you are way off track.
I have none of the gods anyone I’m aware of has thus far presented. I have made up no supernatural being of my own. I worship nothing.
2 Likes
-
Which of the ones you’ve been presented with stands out as the most “typical.”
-
What do you mean by ‘supernatural’ ?
Nope. You said something. I responded to it. That is not off track. It is precisely on track. If you do not want what you write to be addressed, I’d suggest you refrain from writing it. In this forum, what you say is up for challenge, just as you’ve been challenging what I’ve been writing.
It’s not the challenge but the lack of relevance that was my concern. But I welcome further explanation if you genuinely think it’s relevant.
None seems typical. Each seems to be specific to the individual.
Not part of what is currently known / understood as being natural.
From my perspective god is a made up figment of peoples imaginations. He/She doesn’t exist except in peoples minds. They were dreamt up as a way to explain everything that wasn’t known and therefore mysterious. As science advances more things that were unknown become known and gods become less relevant.
1 Like
How do you recognize X, as claimed to be a god? It is the supernatural character?
Well here is an example of God as understood as something dramatically complex!!
I do not recognize it as such. The claimant does. I have listened to the details offered about the claims and reject them.
I’m intrigued that you tie supernatural to our knowledge.
So thunder was perhaps at a time thought to be supernatural in its cause (maybe — depends on what we mean exactly) because it was not accounted for by causes we could really come to know. But this can’t be what we mean by ‘supernatural’ in the case of god. Or perhaps, is that what you mean?
But that is my question. How do you recognize that the believer or claimant is saying X is God?
What? I recognize the claimant is claiming x is god because they are saying (writing) words.
Yes of course they are using words 
But would you be unable to recognize what they are talking about if they didn’t use those three letters “god” ?
Well, that depends on the person’s ability to use words that adequately communicate their thoughts / beliefs / ideas.
Try it! Describe your god without using the word god.
I claim that there exists
A first cause of all being.