"Do you believe in God?" What do you accept and reject as
   definition of God? What requirements are there for belief to
   exist? The question "Do you believe in God?" contains a lot of
   subquestions, which is why I am asking. It is ambiguous as a
   question as it stands. == Ok. Supernatural. Another issue.
   Driving line between physics and metaphysics. What is natural?
   What is not natural? == I have to unpack your compressed
   assumptions to be certain I'm understanding your questioning
   properly in order to answer it properly. == I am agnostic about
   most things. My default position on most things is: "I don't
   know". Knowledge I gain is tentative at best. An analogy would
   be: certainty for me is "more solid sand" than uncertainty,
   which shifts and can't be walked on. I test. I probe. I ask
   questions. I consider. If I am going to cross a rope bridge, I
   do so with great care. Sometimes I do not cross the bridge at
   all and instead find other ways of traveling across. When I see
   a 0.0001% I am careful to decide whether or not it is necessary
   to round to a 0 because that 0.0001% may be more significant
   than it at first appears. So, that gives you a 'gist' of my
   approach. I am agnostic towards most things. ==
   Deities-as-written are stories constructed to give explanatory
   power to various systems. As they stand, I have not found a
   written deity whose constructed story matches what I would
   consider entirely accurate. However, this does not preclude the
   possibility of something in the [SET OF DEITY] yet unknown or
   unscribed not existing. It's an area of ongoing investigation
   from time to time. The case remains open. I act as-if the
   possibility exists. == A full comprehension of God from the
   judeo-christian traditions is dependent upon a number of
   factors. The sola scriptura is not enough but is it possible
   within a fuller tradition within which the scripture is a
   part-of? Yes. I investigated this possibility in my mid 20s for
   5 years. I converted to Eastern Orthodox and spent a little time
   in a monastery, learning their practices. I cannot say what I
   learned/experienced is God or not God. I don't know. == I'll
   give an example: Sometimes I don't know if I'm doing the right
   thing. I make decisions. I know the cognitive processes that
   take place. I also know there are systems in play in the world
   that are not in my control. There is also the future: Am I
   making the decisions that will lead to optimum results, not just
   for myself but for whatever direction these larger systems go
   into. So, if I say, "Does the future approve of my decision?" Am
   I not saying, "Does God approve of my decision?" Is not one
   substituting for the other? If I say, "It is random and out of
   my control" is that not the same as saying, "It is God and out
   of my control", replacing "random" for "God" in the realm of
   "choice"? Is Randomness supernatural? Are unknown systems that
   function whether we know of them or not, supernatural? If we say
   "The laws of physics dictate", could that not be simply a
   description of God for a modern era? Do we know if there were a
   God that God would be a conscious agent or an agent with a
   personality that can't be circumscribed? In a pantheist
   worldview, even if we were describe the deepest inner workings
   of matter, even if we were to describe the effect of every
   cause, they might consider that all we have done is described
   the processes of the gods animating things. A realm where there
   is no distinction between natural and supernatural - just a
   state where, "this is how things are". So, I believe in systems
   and processes. Dictionaries are useful but limited. Synonyms are
   far more flexible. == By analogy, the dictionary would be your
   bible. It defines you. My bible? I'm writing it as I go along.
   == The definition of atheist is not one that can apply to me,
   for God which is a part of that definition is not adequately
   defined for me, rendering the question nonsense. Let's go back
   to the beginning of my questions back to you: "What do you
   accept and reject as definition of God?" == Could you, for
   example, accept a natural God? I'm not saying I'm advocating for
   it - I'm just trying to discern what you can accept and what you
   reject. == Why not? Look at the Gaia concept for an analogy.
   That is a goddess concept and it's not unreasonable to consider
   those working for the planet are engaging in worship of the
   natural world and its systems and processes. == Or another
   consideration: Logic. I come across this a lot in Philosophy
   forums. There are those who hold Logic to the level of deity.
   For them, the Universe is built upon Logic and all things lead
   to Logic and come through Logic, ignoring the fact that Logic is
   a human constructed system that happens to work very well (it's
   pragmatic) for problem solving, for internal consistency, for
   building machines and such. == I know. It's just too pat and dry
   for me and contains too many assumptions and unknowns, most
   particularly, the "self aware substructures". Is it possible?
   Sure. But for me, the jury is out on it. I still maintain that
   math, like words, does a great job of describing the Universe in
   a story form, but it's still not the Universe itself. ==