Which God to rethink?

When we seek an answer for the question "Does God Exist?" , a crucial starting point—that many miss—is the need to define the "God" in question. Are we discussing the God of Abrahamic religions? The God of a certain religion? The creator of the universe? The creator of life?

The word "God" is typically attached to a system of faith or religion. However, most of the scientific and philosophical investigation about that "God" is completely detached from religion. When we are questioning the need for a creator of the universe or life, "God" could be any entity with abilities beyond our comprehension.

 One mistake Neo-atheists and religion enthusiasts fall into so easily is that they question the existence of the God of religion. One would celebrate a scientific mistake in a holy book to prove God doesn't exist. The other would celebrate a statistical impossibility for an event of our existence to occur without a creator as evidence for the need for his religion's God. As common as both examples are in the dominent debates around the God topic, both views are quite ill-founded.


The matter of fact is, a creator is not necessarily what we commercially call God. The “commercial God” has so many roles, aspects, stories attached to him other than creation of the universe. The “creator God” is not one and the same as that one. In the Simulation Hypothesis, the creator could be the programmer who wrote the simulation program we are living in, not the “commercial God” of religion. So the research on the  need for a creator should be completely detached from proving or disproving the God of religion.