GUEST, Raunch said, in part:

Why would science have a problem with that, when they do not have a problem with miles or kilometers or lines of longitude or a thousand other totally non-physical things that have been conceived of by people and found to be useful?

This depends upon a fundamental confusion between the idea, the description and the referrent.

The land--the rocks, the hills, the trees,the ocean--are there. No getting around it. The miles, the national borders, the lines of latitude, are merely conventional ideas, intellectual tools to deal with the reality.

Miles and kilometers are merely variant conveniences. No-one asserts that they have independent reality beyond the agreement of the users.

One could posit that the idea of God--or "a god"--is merely such an intellectual tool to aid in dealing with reality. But when proponents assert that one of those tools (one of those "gods") is real, independently existing and controlling even with relation to those who maintain or believe in some other god, or an absence of gods, it's an entirely different matter.

Dave Oesterreich