No Two People Have Ever Even Mentioned The Exact Same "God".

Picture, first, a universe where there are no "gods" (whatever the that may mean, to whoever is employing the term).

In regards to this hypothetical universe,
I suspect most people would agree:
 the title statement holds. 
---
Moving forward.

Next, ..

Picture a universe where there are some god(s);

- by any definition, these points all still hold.
However,
I primarily mean:
perceived or hypothesized Super-"entity/ies". 
---

In this other hypothetical universe, ...

They are hidden from sight.

So then, either:
a.) no one in this universe can know anything about them;
- exactly the same as a universe where there are no gods.
or
b.) some few people make:
 some sort of
objectively true cognitive-contact
with those entity(ies).

However, inevitably,
their human minds still "fill in the blanks" of their blind-spots;

- with filler their "mind's eye" automatically provides.

Thus, they still can't fully tell where the externally-supplied data ends
vs
where their mind's gap-filler begins.

And since those people don't all have identical minds, ... they still end up with a different figure (literally) "in mind" whenever they mention "Him" (or "Them").
--

In this universe, where such Super-Entity(ies) exist 
(same as the universe where they do not exist):

Everyone has:
a.)
their own conceptualization,
and
b.) their own "personal relationship" with their own conceptualization.

As such, even if any random person(s) get any details about the god(s) correct, ...

1. They would have no way to objectively verify any details which define their "God";
-even if they "believe" that they have experientially or logically verified some of the details.

  In this world, where religion thrives, 
God-perceivers would sect-off endlessly,
 That's because of how sure all "believers" would be ... that their subjective experiences, intuition, guesses, and "logical deductions" about their "God" count as objective "proof" for any of it. 

2. Even if some cross-section of a religious demographic are getting some of it right, ...

They're still not getting everything right. 

There are simply too many things to guess, or intuit, or "deduce".

Statistically speaking (and proven by what we can observe in our world), believers are not going to reach consensus on even a single, meaningful, character-defining detail; let alone all such things.
 
Even if they say something in unison, like "our God is love", ... or "our God is just", ...they're going to have a range of ideas for what things like "love" and "justice" mean to them.

So they're still not really reaching a true consensus on any facet.
And the larger whole of it
is still not possible for even just two people to reach true-and-total ubiquity about. 

They're still each going to have their own personally unique conceptualization of "God". 

Even while an external source-entity exists (in this hypothetical universe), ...

"God", as the figure whom has "life" within their mind,
...
certainly is composed from elements of their own psyche;

- per a myriad of personal variables;

ie.
life experience,
IQ,
emotional palette,
unique relationship with language,
unique relationship they have with their own self,
etc..

Thus, for each whom professes a "God"
and even for each who only mentions gods they don't personally believe in, ...

"He" (or "They")
is/are
absolutely unique to each person.

For each person,
the god(s) envisioned
(aka "the Entity they have "in mind")
are defined per details;
spoken and unspoken bits,
simple, complex, and nuanced bits, 
mentally clarified bits,
and even the foggy bits.
 
Further,
there are so MANY bits
that no one could be reasonably expected to sit down and list + clarify them all.
- Nor could anyone else be expected to perfectly understand the speaker.
 I can assure you,
they don't. 

Inevitably,
each person's idea of "God" is:
defined,
envisioned,
and/or experientially "known" to them,
unlike anyone else's idea of "God". 

This remains true, even if there ~absolutely is~
an objectively, literally existing Super-Being
which self-identifies as a "God" .

Even if some people have actually had:
 direct personal interactions with the 1-or-more literal, external Super-entities.

Even if those Super-entities self-identify as "God"(s).

Even if they welcome (or, insist upon) such 'reverent regard' as to be granted such a title.

Even if the special/lucky/whatever people with perceived "God"-encounters
are CORRECT that they really did have such an encounter.

Even if they end up with an identical overlap (some facets of the Super-Being(s) which they share an identical perception of (not that I think this is possible; because human psychology would certainly meld those facets with elements from their own psychology; to form the larger whole of their individual perception. But I'll grant it anyways. Let's just say there is an identical overlap shared among all true "experiencers"), ...

3. They're still not unanimously agreeing on every detail which defines the figure.

This is a fact which all-by-itself means they aren't really referring to the same exact ~figure~ or "character" as anyone else who mentions the "God" that they are a "witness" of.

There are a few more related points about this I could make. But I want to draw this post to a close soon. So I'll end with this:

Just as
"No Two People
Have Ever Read The Same Book", ...

"No Two People
Have Ever Read The Same Person".

And 
"No Two People 
Have Ever Heard About The Same Person".
--

In the same sense that I exist,
you exist.
I grant this, freely.

With this in mind, ...
If a Super-Being exists in the same way
(or. that + more), ...
they'd run into the same problem you and I have, with being "known" by others.

Out of all the people you know,
not a single person out there
"knows YOU" to be (or "as") the same exact person that anyone else knows you as.
---

Our senses deliver data in the form of electrical impulses.

Those impulses are translated by our brains into various forms and flavors of sentience. 

Our respective brains generate a mental hologram
which approximates the external beings we encounter.

Who each person IS to you
will not be identical to WHO they are to anyone else.

Who you are to yourself
will not be identical to the person anyone else's brain generates.

So know one will ever know the same "you"
that you know as you.

Each person has a relationship with the unique holograms their brain generates.

That hologram is always a mesh of:
internally and subjectively interpreted data that combines:
a.) data which originated from external sources
and
b.) automatically internally-provided filler-data; which is largely indistinguishable from externally-sourced data.

The end result is something like this
(no matter if there is a real "God" or a real "Super-Jesus (etc) or not):

A Personal Relationship with Jesus (by NonStampCollector)

and this

The Real God: An Epiphany (by DarkMatter2525)

Both of these videos hold true 
~even if~ there are some external, literal, self-aware (or anthropomorphized) super-entities ~out there~ somewhere. And even if we want to call those "g/God(s)". 

The primary and truest "relationships" we have 
(each "person" we "know")
are the mental holograms
which approximate the perceived external entities.

 In any case where our mind has correctly identified ~the existence of~ an external entity, ...
those are the less-true and secondary "relationship" we have; because:

 The source isn't the same as:
the entity we are perceiving. 

The projected person;
the "reflection";
the "manifestation";
the "message";
the "promise";
the "logos";
the "incarnation" born into our mental manger. 


These are:
~our interpretations of~ the radiated light and heat of the source.   

The two entities (the internal; which certainly exists, and is unique to each person. 
vs
the external; which is less-often objectively real)

are never same entity. 
    Our limits prevent it.