There is a lot of confusion regarding the definition of god. And it's this confusion that makes atheists think they can righteously say to theists (defined in the most broad sense of the word here) that god doesn't exist. But actually, god does exist if you're assuming causality*. What most theists are wrong about though, is their claim that they have the knowledge to interpret this defined notion of god, that they can give meaning to it. Which is by definition impossible.
If we're willing to analyze what people understand by the concept of god, there can only be one core definition. All people who believe in god and have given it some thought must have this one true definition in common. What different believers don't have in common regarding god, isn't part of that definition anymore. It's merely an interpretation of that definition, usually added by religion.
So what is this universal definition of god?
When we look around we see a lot of things. Man has a fundamental drive that makes him want to understand the things he sees. But, in order for us to understand something, we must describe it. A description is only satisfying if we can describe something in terms of causality. A rock, for instance, is a bunch of atoms that were glued together by physical interaction between those atoms. To most, this description will be more than satisfying enough. But not for all unfortunately. A more complete description should also describe what these atoms are, and then what these sub-atomic particles are etc. until we reach the tiniest particle of the universe (this elementary particle does exist). And even then some hardcore researchers wil stilll not be satisfied and ask: "So how did these elementary particles came into existence?". Our drive to explain things in terms of causality will never be fully satisfied. How do I know that? Well, because everything in our universe, and the universe itself, started to exist at some point. There are plenty of articles explaining why this is a fact, so I'm not going into detail on that. The point is, there must be some mechanism that caused the existence of our universe, because everything that starts to exist must have a cause. The problem is, we can never understand this fundamental mechanism, because it is by definition acausal, and we can only describe and therefore understand something in terms of causality. And it is this fundamental acausal mechanism that is our core notion of god. We cannot understand this mechanism because we cannot describe it, but still throughout history man has tried (in vain) to make it more understandable, by giving personal interpretations ("god does this and that because he wants this and that"). Some people shared the same interpretations, and that's how religion came into existence, joining people and sometimes forcing people to have the same interpretations. When I'm calling some atheists close minded, I do that because they seem to refuse to think about the notion of god outside the frame of religion. They refuse to see this core definition of god and therefore reject all notions of god, because they realize interpreting it is impossible.
*causality that doesn't require time
If we're willing to analyze what people understand by the concept of god, there can only be one core definition. All people who believe in god and have given it some thought must have this one true definition in common. What different believers don't have in common regarding god, isn't part of that definition anymore. It's merely an interpretation of that definition, usually added by religion.
So what is this universal definition of god?
When we look around we see a lot of things. Man has a fundamental drive that makes him want to understand the things he sees. But, in order for us to understand something, we must describe it. A description is only satisfying if we can describe something in terms of causality. A rock, for instance, is a bunch of atoms that were glued together by physical interaction between those atoms. To most, this description will be more than satisfying enough. But not for all unfortunately. A more complete description should also describe what these atoms are, and then what these sub-atomic particles are etc. until we reach the tiniest particle of the universe (this elementary particle does exist). And even then some hardcore researchers wil stilll not be satisfied and ask: "So how did these elementary particles came into existence?". Our drive to explain things in terms of causality will never be fully satisfied. How do I know that? Well, because everything in our universe, and the universe itself, started to exist at some point. There are plenty of articles explaining why this is a fact, so I'm not going into detail on that. The point is, there must be some mechanism that caused the existence of our universe, because everything that starts to exist must have a cause. The problem is, we can never understand this fundamental mechanism, because it is by definition acausal, and we can only describe and therefore understand something in terms of causality. And it is this fundamental acausal mechanism that is our core notion of god. We cannot understand this mechanism because we cannot describe it, but still throughout history man has tried (in vain) to make it more understandable, by giving personal interpretations ("god does this and that because he wants this and that"). Some people shared the same interpretations, and that's how religion came into existence, joining people and sometimes forcing people to have the same interpretations. When I'm calling some atheists close minded, I do that because they seem to refuse to think about the notion of god outside the frame of religion. They refuse to see this core definition of god and therefore reject all notions of god, because they realize interpreting it is impossible.
*causality that doesn't require time
Buy on AliExpress.com
