A simple challenge for atheists

[Esquilax]

I listed only qualities needed to be the first cause and creator of the universe--which is all that the cosmological/ontological/design arguments deal with. You tell me which characteristics are superfluous or which I might need to add.

The actual issue is twofold: my first problem is that you're a christian arguing for the existence of the christian god, and it's more than a little irritating to see you- and you're hardly the first apologist to do this- flip between the god you actually believe in and a vague deistic one whenever it's convenient. I thought I was having a discussion with you, about the things you believe in, not a discussion with you about whatever needs to be on hand for you to win, whether you believe it or not. Perhaps that's just a pet peeve of mine, but it's still there.

The much more relevant issue is that none of the five characteristics that you listed, either taken together or as individual parts, are exclusively characteristics of a god, the god, whatever. I can't tell you how many fictional narratives contain beings of immense power that satisfy all of the criteria you list, but are not god. What you're actually doing here is co-opting whatever we happen to think of, by assertion alone, in order to make it fit with your argument. If you want to say that any being that has the criteria you listed would be so close to your conception of god that you might as well just call it that, then that's fine, but don't forget that in doing so you're winning a word game, and not the actual question under debate here, and also that you're doing so by taking whatever concept is introduced to you and saying "no, that's not X. I'm going to call it god." I can't imagine why you'd find that compelling.

Additionally, we're here discussing your beliefs, and specifically you've said that you'd like to demonstrate that it's rational to hold such beliefs. Given that, you arguing for a concept of god that you don't believe in both does not address the topic of the debate, and also kinda hurts the core of your argument, because you're having to reach for things you don't believe in, rather than defending the things that you do.