I think there are usually some cross-cultural similarities as well as differences in god-concepts.
Of more interest to me are the god-concepts of mystics. That is, people who claim to have had a certain kind of mystical experience that most of them -- but not all of them -- describe as an experience of god. They tend to show sometimes remarkable similarities across cultures, times, and places.
For instance, there seems to be near universal agreement among mystics -- even the relatively few mystics who do not describe their experiences as experiences of god -- that they experienced a sense of oneness or of all things being one.
Another very common claim of such mystics is that their experience felt overwhelmingly "real" in much the same sense as we have a feeling or a sense that the tree in our yard is real -- but a "thousand times" greater than that. "More real than real", I've sometimes heard.
There is nearly as much agreement among mystics about having a sense they were dealing with something infinite.
There is a bit less agreement that what was experienced was sentient. Some -- the mystics who claim to have experienced deity -- tend to say it was, but some -- those who either are not certain or who do not think it was actual deity -- tend to say it was not sentient.
Somewhat less often, that the deity was loving or identical with love, that they experienced unsurpassed beauty and/or bliss, and so forth.
It goes on and on.
Contrary to some early scholars on the subject, mystical accounts of an experience of oneness or of all things being One are sometimes, but seldom enough, "pure" -- That is, devoid of any specific cultural influences or interpretations. But why precisely that is so is still open to reasonable debate.
