A pantheistic argument.

[Edwardo Piet]

We don't have to assume that, they are.

I was just saying that I trust that you are right about that...

So, you don't think that this changes your argument eh? You are a theist if you believe that there is at least one god - regardless of how you describe that god.

If the belief in god is identical to the belief in the universe then the belief in god is identical to an atheist's belief in the universe - and if the belief is identical, the atheism and theism distinction becomes meaningless in that particular case because the very definition of them being opposites is dependent upon the definition of them being differences of belief.

It doesn't actually matter whether the universe is god, or whether or not god exists, only that you believe in at least one god.

It doesn't matter whether god exists, indeed. But it matters whether the universe is god or not because since at least most atheists believe in the universe, if the universe is god, that would make their belief identical to the theistic belief of god being the universe. Because they believe in exactly the same thing: The universe. It is merely the label that is different.

The difference would be the presence of at least one god.

That's not the difference between theism and atheism. That's the difference between the truth or falsehood of theism and atheism. Theism and atheism by themselves are about belief/non-belief, not about whether they are right.

Not what that god is or how you describe it.

Of course it's a matter of what god is. If atheists believe in the universe, and theists believe that god is the universe, then they both believe in the same thing: the universe. By your logic if I believed that the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" meant "apple" and yet the meaning of "pastafarian" was no different to what it normally is I would be more of a pastafarian than non-pastafarians who believed in apples and just as much of a pastafarian as someone who actually believed that there is a Flying Spaghetti Monster, in the sense present in the gospel of the FSM.

That which we call a rose.....again, it doesn't matter how you describe a god, only that you believe that a god exists.

Let me try and make this simpler. I'll start from the basics.

The only difference between atheism and theism is belief/non-belief. Therefore, if there is no difference between the belief/non-belief of theism/atheism, there is no difference between theism and atheism.

So, whether you label the universe as "god" or not, if in both cases the belief is completely the same because you are believing in the universe in exactly the same way and that is all that is meant by "god" the belief is identical and, therefore, for the reasons stated in the above paragraph, the difference between atheism and theism is none and there is a resulting logical contradiction that makes the whole meaning of theism and atheism collapse.

There -is- a difference in the belief. Mainly that one believes in a god and the other does not.

See above. If I merely define god as "the universe", nothing more and nothing less, and then believe in it in what respect do I believe in something different to you at all? I label it as "god", you don't. That is all. The label is different, the belief isn't.

If god means the universe then I also assume that you believe in god, correct?

No, lol. You are free to describe or define the term god however you wish and profess belief in it all day long, I do not believe in god, and I do not call the universe god...so this isn't my problem.

So you are saying that even if god meant "the universe" you still wouldn't believe in god? That would imply that you didn't believe in the universe...

If the very meaning of "god" is "the universe" then if someone asked you "Do you believe in god?" and you replied "No" you would be denying the very existence of the universe.

The definition of the words theist and atheist do not hinge on anything other than belief in a god.

If they hinge upon belief in god, they hinge upon belief. Therefore when a theist defines god as "the universe" and an atheist also believes in "the universe" they are believing in the same thing, just with different labels. The belief is the same. Therefore there is no difference in belief, therefore there is a logical contradiction between theism and atheism because their belief is the same and that cannot be logically possible by definition and so the whole thing collapses completely and becomes meaningless.

because the fundamental difference in the definitions have been removed

You could only do this by removing "god"...which you have not done.

I only need to demonstrate that the same particular definition of "god" being addressed is being believed in in both cases. If "god" is defined as "the universe" for example, then that means atheists don't believe in the universe. But since that isn't true because atheists do believe in the universe we then have a logical contradiction and the whole thing collapses.

Which there is, you believe in at l;east one god, I do not.

If I am defining "god" as the universe and you don't believe in that definition of "god" that I'm using - the universe - then you don't believe in the universe.

What? If someone believes in the same thing as theists they aren't theists? News to me.

No, I was demonstrating that if god is defined as something and atheists believe in that something then there is a logical contradiction, so: If atheists believe in the universe, and god is the universe, either atheists don't believe in the universe or the theism and atheism dichotomy logically collapses.