Yes, me too.
To be fair, here I am, wondering and not searching. But, sometimes, simply wondering is a joy, even sometimes a privilege.
Yes, words are used for different things. But they have original meanings, and those meanings are the reasons they are used for those different things. It is not arbitrary. And people simply using them differently, does not change their actual meaning. Certainly, there is a history to how a word is even formulated and attached to its meaning, but once it is coherently and consistently formed and used, it exists. It is how we preserve meaning. Zeus means something, terribly specific. So does gravity in special relativity. Incidentally, it does in special relativity because it already did outside of it.
About the public schooling, I did mention that earlier. What I see today is a lot of people going to a lot of schools and learning nothing, knowing nothing. Whereas, in the past, religious tradition brought deep knowledge and understanding about many things that today aren’t even suspected by most to even the remotest of peasantry.
You are a lot more confident than I am about the exactness of those things. 
Logic I trust.
What people say - very much less.
Logic is a word, and everything you are saying about it is also with words.
Seen from that angle, perhaps I am far more skeptical than you, wanting to know the provenance of the words that concern me.
If you think that what you just said is at all relevant - obviously logic is not your thing.
It’s ok mate. Everyone has to believe in something.
You keep saying that. Perhaps you are trying to justify your own beliefs?
Do you disagree? When I say “everyone” I mean everyone (research the word to find out what it means to me - don’t take my word for it. ).
Apparently you want official documentation to reveal what you are looking for. I don’t have a problem with that. I like having official documentation too - I watch way too much politics interfering with everything - so I certainly want to see what was the official record. I just personally believe in going deeper to see what must be necessarily true - it often isn’t the official story. I don’t expect everyone to do that any more than expecting everyone to be a computer geek.
I really don’t have a problem with people doing their own thing and believing what makes them feel confident and comfortable - the world needs a whole lot more of that - I am very much anti-authoritarian.
I think the motto -
[list]Nullius in Verbe[/list:u]
comes into play - If I can’t reason it out - it isn’t science (known fact).
It’s a shame that you do not follow this dictum.
It is a contradiction of your post above “Everyone has to believe in something”. Since belief is trusting without knowing.
That is the excuse of a lazy man, hoping to justify the stupid ideas he clings to.
NOLUNT CREDERE
SAPERE AUDE.
You’re in no position to be calling anyone lazy - as you attempt to cling to your own imagined credibility.
People who live in Rome can worship whomever or whatever they like, or, of course, nothing at all. Apart from them there are no longer any Romans per se.
If you say so.
I must have misunderstood your earlier objection.
You must have. I made no objection.
This consitutes an objection. For some reason that I don’t entirely gather, you desire that not to be apparent. But I must have misunderstood the nature of the objection itself.
This, of course, is also an objection.
You are not only lazy but willfully stupid and dull.
This is not a valid distinction.
Romans were Helenophiles and knew well that Jupiter was the same thing as Zeus.
Its a bit like saying Christians and Moslims do not worship Jahovah.
You can even find the word Zeus used instead of Jupiter in Roman writing.
The Greek and Roman pantheons had several direct correlations.
Juno-Hera
Minerva-Athena
Neptune-Poseidon
Ares-Mars
Vulcan-Hephaestus
Venus-Aphrodite
Artemis-Diana
When Virgil penned The Aeneid, concerning the Trojan war, the same events form Homer, simply used replaced words directly. Such that instead of Poseidon was have Neptune; Odysseus becomes Ulysses etc.
They had basicall the same religions, just with different names.
Note to Vittorio. This is, of course a thousand+ years before the Goths.
Correct, so the word “God” was never used. And it is not before the Goths, it is before Goths came under Roman rule.
No, both are not held to be the same. Iovi is not the same as Deus. Jupiter is Jupiter.
Regarding the Aenid, sometimes different divinities are used for the original ones, the closest one that can be found, to transmit the story in native terms. So, for example, the word “God” is used to stand in for Zeus in Gothic renderings of Roman rites, but God is not Zeus. When the word God was used at first, Goths were not even aware of the existence of Zeus, and, one believes, they are still not.
You do bring up an interesting point, which is that early Roman aristocrats on the whole spoke Greek as their first language, much like Russian aristocrats spoke French, and that is likely how worship of Zeus became popularized in Rome.
Perhaps even possibly, considering Zeus must have been worshiped more among the aristocracy than the common people, there may have been an element of the aristocracy claiming dominance over and imposing their deity on what some of them may have considered the rabble when the Christian agenda started to be implemented. The aristocracy bringing the rest of the Romans to heel. Such as today, for example, they use a Christian-like ideology to impose the same dominance on the people, with things like socialism and climate change and whatnot, which in previous decades where the sole concern of the well-to-do. Hard to tell. If so, those fanatic aristocrats, dishonest enough to smuggle their god through this whole religious project, would have been traitors to their ilk, possibly the weaker ones (thus the need to establish dominance) that cared little for, say, Aphrodite or Hermes or any of the others.
It is very simple. Speak the word “Zeus” to any Roman in their local dialect and see the reaction it causes. It is visceral, as knowledge of the Gods is, as religion is.
God evokes a similar visceral reaction, but not the same one Zeus does. The feelings it elicits are not the same.
The same can be said for Jupiter uttered to a Roman. Or even, at this point, a Goth, since, thanks to astrology, the word entire has been imported, the God entire acknowledged. But the strength will not be the same, the tradition that is inherited via a language being absent and so also the complete context.