Actually, that's a pretty good answer.In modern times, baldness has become fashionable, whereas it wasn't fashionable in the 60's &. 70's.
Actually, that's a pretty good answer.In modern times, baldness has become fashionable, whereas it wasn't fashionable in the 60's &. 70's.
///But all supernatural entities have the potential to be gods in a given context.
If a supernatural sock qualifies as a god of socks, then shouldn’t another supernatural sock of equal capacity also be worthy of that same title? Or any other supernatural entity of like capacity? The common thread when it comes to these deities is that they are expected to supernaturally facilitate various functions and be revered for their perceived actions. So in essence theism is a reverence for the perceived actions of supernatural facilitators, regardless of their form or grandeur.
///There's a difference between hair and without hair.
In modern times, baldness has become fashionable, whereas it wasn't fashionable in the 60's &. 70's.
Jan.
And by definition everything can be a god. Therefore theism can be defined as a reverence for the perceived supernatural aspects and behavior of anything.///
Theism by definition involves a god or gods, not lucky socks or rabbit feet or potential gods.
<>
///And by definition everything can be a god. Therefore theism can be defined as a reverence for the perceived supernatural aspects and behavior of anything.
So you can have theism without a deity? Ok.Therefore theism can be defined as a reverence for the perceived supernatural aspects and behavior of anything.
Sorry, but you’re not the arbiter that decides what can be imagined to be divine, sacred and revered. If someone proposes that every element of the universe is one god among many in that universe, then by virtue of the subjectivity inherent in the definition of the term god, everything has the potential to be a god.No. It is not.
When anything can potentially be a deity, worship of that perceived supernatural anything can become theism.So you can have theism without a deity? Ok.
///Sorry, but you’re not the arbiter that decides what can be imagined to be divine, sacred and revered. If someone proposes that every element of the universe is one god among many in that universe, then by virtue of the subjectivity inherent in the definition of the term god, everything has the potential to be a god.
I didn't make up the rules as to what the products of imagination are allowed to devise in terms of constructing gods. As to the silliness quotient regarding one god or the next, a proclaimed miracle performed by my big toe is as valid as one performed by Jesus or any other imagined deity.Neither are you. Your supposed definitions are much too vague & broad.
1 problem we have in discussions with theists is some want to call anything or everything a god which is just silly. The universe is not a god & neither is your big toe.
That is one of enumerable definitions of a god, but no more valid than my supernatural big toe.A god is a living conscious entity with superhuman power who has some effect on humans.
///I didn't make up the rules as to what the products of imagination are allowed to devise in terms of constructing gods. As to the silliness quotient regarding one god or the next, a proclaimed miracle performed by my big toe is as valid as one performed by Jesus or any other imagined deity.
Which is the whole basis of defining a god, it's all about make believe.You are making things up.
<>
///That is one of enumerable definitions of a god, but no more valid than my supernatural big toe.
///Which is the whole basis of defining a god, it's all about make believe.
There is a definition of a man, but that didn't stop Christians from making one into a god. On the scale of potential gods, calling a man a god would be akin to calling a virus a man.There is a definition for unicorn & it is not the universe & it is not a rock or a cat. Calling a cat a unicorn does not make it a unicorn & some idiot referring to the universe as god does not make the universe a god.
Give those entities a perceived supernatural persona and they acquire the potential for god status.I am reminded of another theist idiocy : Your god is money & your god is sex & you are your god which is utterly frigging stupid.
///There is a definition of a man, but that didn't stop Christians from making one into a god. On the scale of potential gods, calling a man a god would be akin to calling a virus a man.
///Give those entities a perceived supernatural persona and they acquire the potential for god status.
So the story goes. Substitute "man" with virus and you now have a god in the form of a virus. Substitute virus with neutrino and you now have god taking the form of subatomic particle. Will you now assert that a god cannot assume any form it wishes?The "man" was a living conscious being who they claimed had superhuman power. He was referred to as a man because he was in a human form. He was a god who took human form.
Lets first establish this God exists before you give it power to do this or that... so square one ...show there is anything more than delussion supporting any God story.Will you now assert that a god cannot assume any form it wishes?
///That's not how religions materialize. The fantasy evolves regardless of any kind of rational substantiation. When established religious beliefs already propose that everything is god, I don’t get to take credit for conjuring up these examples of gods.