We find religious people, in general terms, assert a god by faith and from a gap logic, so from a belief in a book and interpretation, and the idea that a hole found within reality is a god shaped hole, so from the belief they hold and a place to build, they spin a belief that we know that a "god" is one who represents a Biblical God, or Koranic Allah. The idea of a God is already slanted, from the faith position it is a question of confirmation bias, from the god must fit the bill position it's an extension, extended from the belief to include a potential for validity. The result of confirming, for example, a first cause god, a creator, we are told utterly nothing about that creator by having the idea that he/she/it was somehow there, we are told nothing of it's will, desires, laws, orders, hopes, dreams, nor do we have any pointer towards any kind of religion, if any should be valid. We are given, at best a series a mildly poor arguments by the faithful for why their must a be a god, they fail on their reliance on faith or upon selected definitions to assert by use of words a greater cause or force and mind to create the complex universe and all within, and even if this were true then what would it confirm in regards to any sect of Christianity? What we find are assertions upon the foundational bad argument for a creator god, such as how many an apologist may make an unholy leap from infinite to god to the father god or trinity of the bible, the leap frogging between bias terms is a favourite of the faithful, because all they need is a thesaurus to find a series of related terms to take facts back to their version of god.