I enjoyed this Carl Sagan video on the existence of God (Link below).
Note the use of the capital “G” in God. It makes no sense to discuss small letter g’s.
In the video, an audience member off-camera asks Mr. Sagan if we shouldn’t start giving more credit to the existence of God before we blow ourselves up. Mr. Sagan turns the tables on his questioner by asking a question that leads in the opposite direction. Paraphrased, the question Carl asked was: If we blow ourselves up, does that disprove the existence of God. The questioner had to admit that it did not.
Mr. Sagan then asks his questioner what he means when he invokes God. The questioner had some difficulty formulating an answer, because, of course, God means many things to many people. We can perhaps all agree that God is not an elderly white-man sitting on a golden throne.
Mr. Sagan was much too wise to dismiss the idea of God fatuously by making fun of some of the more ridiculous ways men and women have chosen to portray God, some as a Him and some as a Her.
The questioner then presses Mr. Sagan as to his own, personal conception of God. Mr. Sagan favorably alludes to descriptions of God by Einstein and Spinoza, who portrayed God as the sum total of all Natural Laws in the Universe. We are a long way from there, although we have made a start. Scientists like Kepler in the Enlightenment proved that there is Order in the Universe. Every day we learn more about our Universal Orderliness.
However, until we have full discovered the driving force (or forces) behind our Universal Orderliness, we should leave discussions of God to people who have more time on their hands.
Or we could spend many, many hours trying to pin each other down about what we actually mean when we invoke the word.