There is a slight possibility of one of my JW relatives coming to have a read of this forum, which has made me really excited and endlessly hopeful, but also worried that they might read some of my angry comments from back in the day and throw their hands up in horror. I've also been thinking about the book by Christopher Hitchens "God is not Great" recently and I think there are similar defences to be made for both.
There is a topic that I started called Jehovah God is not Real and there are also comments that I have made where I have said that Jehovah God is cruel, stupid or even evil. I appreciate that this sounds like a personal attack on God, just as Hitchens' book "God is not Great", sounds like an attack on God, but the truth is that they're not.
The title of Hitchen's book: "God is not Great" is (deliberately) a negation of the Islamic phrase Allahu Akbar "God is Greatest" and my topic on this forum called "Jehovah God is not Real", was in direct response to another poster's topic "Jehovah God is Real". In both cases it is not the God which is being attacked, but the claim about God.
Likewise, when I say something like "Jehovah God is stupid", I am not actually saying anything about God. After all, as an atheist, it would be weird for me to attribute any quality to a deity. What I am saying is that the believer's claim, if true, would mean that the God they are proposing is dumb.
This might sound like hair splitting semantics, but it's an important distinction. All Gods, and all information about their qualities and actions, are claims made by people. There is not one single God, Thor, Vishnu, Jehovah or whomever, for which there is a single piece of evidence which does not come second hand from a human being.
I don't know if God exists, I'd really rather like it if they did and there was some kind of purpose to this whole business, but I do know that every story of a personified deity is disproved either by internal inconsistencies in the claims, a lack of evidence or both.