Either you can't read or won't read, Viviane. Go back and read that it wasn't me that was asking for a definition of "god".
I never said it was. Have you tried actual reading?
That is the sort of thing that should be asked to a theist. It's nonsensical to be insistingly asking to a non-theist like me to define a god. It's stupid and obtuse. For the empth time, I don't know.
Exactly. That's my point. You can't possibly assert anything about evidence or knowledge regarding a thing you can't define.
Why are you still going round in this circle?
You need a definition given by a theist so you can then debunk it.
I see you've started pretending to know what other people think again, despite you saying you wouldn't.
But when a non-theist asks you to logically explain how come your so-called absence of belief in deities that stems from lack of evidence for their existence is in itself different than a belief proper, what I observe is some sort of broken record, headless chicken attitude.
Because you can't define "not having money" as "having money". You're attempting to say "!A = A".
And by the way, that's a GREAT use of weasel words, "so-called". It's used by the WT quite often when they are also about to say something utterly absurd.