I understand it one way. You see, in order to believe in something, or lacking belief in something, you have to define it. If you cannot define the concept, then you cannot interact with that concept. That is your first folly. Your idea of god is that god does not exist, you base this on "proof" which you say doesn't "exist". That begs the question, what proof would satisfy the criteria to be considered definitive? If you knew, then it means you know what kind of proof you're looking for, therefore you have some idea of what god is, because you demand a particular proof, for particular validation of your particular beliefs about God. IE that god does not exist. You think god is some fairy god father, so unless some fairy god father comes from the heavens and says "I'm God", you will remain smug in your belief that there is no god. Do you see what you have done? You have defined god as a fairy godfather. You defined god by the proof you demand that will validate your belief in god. You have a bigger task, is god a fairy god father? Is the divine entity that is responsible for all existence bound to its creation? If it is then how can that concept of yours be god? If by definition god is ultimate reality, the supreme being, how could your limited mind create an accurate conception of such a reality? How can it when your perception is merely a blink in the life of the universe? Are you telling me that your conceptualization of god is so perfect, because you in your limited knowledge, and senses have perfect understanding of reality? Only an atheist could be so arrogant. Remember, your religion is the one that's responsible for satanism, feminism, communism, and the corruption of organized religion, as well as transexualism. If you think your one true faith is productive, so be it, I respect your right to degenerate yourself. I seek a higher path.