A pantheistic argument.

[Edwardo Piet]

I still don't believe the universe is god (or that god is the universe) - Even if you do...and I'd call that a difference, wouldn't you? Perhaps even the difference between pantheism and atheism.

You're not addressing my argument. You're just saying "I still don't believe".

If god is the universe and you believe in the universe then you believe in god. That is undeniably tautologically valid logical reasoning. If X is Y and you believe in Y then you believe in X.

There is more, and the more is the god bit. A label does not change belief, but a label does change the description of that belief if the label is a disqualifier.

If the belief is the same then the label is describing the same thing. If I believe in the universe and label it "god" I am merely describing "god" as the universe. What we believe in is the same, and the description is the same, merely the name is different.

There are no gods in atheism Doubt....by definition.

Which is why if atheists believe in the universe and if god is the universe then there is a logical contradiction.

(all this shit about labels..lol, show me a word I couldn't call -just a label-....?)

All I'm saying is that the meaning of believing in something is different to the meaning of labelling it as something. So if I label the universe as "god" then that doesn't mean that I believe in god. If I merely define god as the universe, then what I actually believe in is the universe, just like you, the belief is the same - merely the label is different.