You need to be more careful with your spelling.<quoted text> Yes Nuggin your argument is exactly the circular argument the cristards use .
You are in fact saying god exists because the dictionary said so.
As opposed to god exists because the bible says so.
I am not saying that "God" exists.
I'm saying that "gods" exist in the same way that any other title or rank exists.
Do "presidents" exist? Do "priests" exist? Do "umpires" exist?
These are titles which ONLY exist within cultural context. You can not present me a "biological umpire". An umpire exists because a set of characteristics has been ascribed to that title and an individual fits that set of characteristics.
That's HOW WORDS WORK.
Would you deny that someone is an umpire because you personally don't believe that they have the ability to call someone "out"?
It doesn't matter if the person is a good ump or a bad ump or a failed ump. If they fit the criteria, then the label applies.
In this case, the criteria is for the label "god".
Some examples are: Thor, Loki, Vishnu, Ramses, etc.
In ALL these examples, the same criteria are present:
- People BELIEVE that they have supernatural powers.
- People BELIEVE that they require worship.
It doesn't matter that Thor is not a physically real entity.
It doesn't matter that Ramses does not ACTUALLY have magical powers.
It ONLY matters that the two criteria are met.
And the KEY WORD in both criteria is "BELIEVE".
So long as people BELIEVE it, then there is a religion around this central figure and this figure can be labeled "god".
It doesn't matter that YOU are not a member of that religion. I am not a member of the Norse religion, however I can evaluate it as an educated outsider and determine that Thor is one of the gods of the Norse Pantheon.
Why is it that you, an allegedly educated person, are INCAPABLE of making that assessment?