Here is where you're whole argument falls apart.<quoted text> The problem is this nougat , we named many things god thinking it was something that it is not.
You just conceded that we've "named many things god".
Boom. Game over. You lose.
That's the ENTIRE discussion right there.
My argument is ENTIRELY: People name things gods, therefore gods are those things named by people to be gods.
That's it. There's not some additional special qualification. If people have named this a god, then it's a god. What does that mean? It means that people named it a god. It carries ZERO additional meaning.
It's a LABEL.
Skippy is claiming that NOTHING with that label has ever really existed.
I am pointing out that, while MANY of the 150,000+ things labelled as gods do not actually physically exist, there have been several which were ACTUALLY real things.
Those include various volcanoes, a couple trees, and a bunch of different individuals - in particular the Pharaohs.
That's it. That's the WHOLE debate.