(Some) Polytheists are Atheists

[AquinasD]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

So it is the general opinion of others on the board that the existence of powerful but limited beings is relevant to the question of an infinite being's existence?

What is the principle of relevance, save that the same words happened to be applied to these different things? Or is it to be stipulated that there is no essential difference between belief in a powerful but finite being as opposed to belief in an infinite being?

What's the difference? Did the question of Yahweh's existence change when people decided to start imagining him as infinite? Surely you don't think the only similarity between Yahweh and other gods is that the same word has been coincidentally applied to them.

[100%atheist]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

Theist means person who believes in God. Atheist means person that don’t believe God/gods is/are. If one believes in at least one God he can’t be atheist, if those definitions are true.

Wow! It is really nice to see something with what I can completely agree to come from a theist on this forum.

[Autodidact]

So it is the general opinion of others on the board that the existence of powerful but limited beings is relevant to the question of an infinite being's existence?

What is the principle of relevance, save that the same words happened to be applied to these different things? Or is it to be stipulated that there is no essential difference between belief in a powerful but finite being as opposed to belief in an infinite being?

Right, there is no essential difference. They both involve belief without evidence; the only difference is the nature of the object of the belief.

[Chase200mph]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

Answer: LOL! No and NO…..Atheist ‘do not believe in god, one god or many gods is irrelevant they don’t believe. Secondly Hel (<pun intended) no! You question is completely backwards….why do Christians redefine gods like Ra and Zeus in creating their god since those gods were here LONG before….1000s of years before. Why is it important…..because all the stories of the bible are similar to exact copies and are predated by other cultures…all of them.

[AquinasD]

What's the difference?

Well, most people conceive that if you prove x doesn't exist, you haven't proven y doesn't exist (unless of course they happen to stand in such a relation to each, but then gods and God don't).

The gods of polytheism are finite, diverse, varied, proliferate, ethically troubled, capricious, whimsical, and so on.

The God of monotheism is infinite, singular, absolute, indivisible, ethically foundational, absolute, pure, and so on.

Are you really going to tell me "Oh well there's no real difference, since neither exists..?" Here is the logical form which seems to foment under such premises;

1) God and gods are relevantly similar
2) gods have no evidence of existence
3) Therefore, God can have no evidence of existence

It seems inherently question begging. If the atheist is really so confident that God and gods don't exist, what do they lose to grant that, conceptually, God and gods are distinct kinds of beings? Are they so insecure in their atheism that they can only maintain it by impugning monotheistic belief as something it isn't?

I know there must be at least one atheist who can recognize that they can logically maintain their position to grant that there is an essential difference between the beings polytheism accepts and the being monotheism accepts. But why is this position among atheists so popular?

[AquinasD]

Right, there is no essential difference. They both involve belief without evidence; the only difference is the nature of the object of the belief.

So you don't think that the difference in the nature of the object maintained is relevant to our understanding of what constitutes evidence? And that all theists, whether monotheist or polytheist, believe they believe something not proportioned to the evidence?

[Goat]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

Answer: LOL! No and NO…..Atheist ‘do not believe in god, one god or many gods is irrelevant they don’t believe. Secondly Hel (<pun intended) no! You question is completely backwards….why do Christians redefine gods like Ra and Zeus in creating their god since those gods were here LONG before….1000s of years before. Why is it important…..because all the stories of the bible are similar to exact copies and are predated by other cultures…all of them.

I disagree. they are not exact copies. However, there are archetype themes that reoccur in different religions, even those that do not interact... these archetypes deal with birth,death and the changing of the seasons, and many other concerns that affect human life so much.

[Chase200mph]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

Answer: LOL! No and NO…..Atheist ‘do not believe in god, one god or many gods is irrelevant they don’t believe. Secondly Hel (<pun intended) no! You question is completely backwards….why do Christians redefine gods like Ra and Zeus in creating their god since those gods were here LONG before….1000s of years before. Why is it important…..because all the stories of the bible are similar to exact copies and are predated by other cultures…all of them.

I disagree. they are not exact copies. However, there are archetype themes that reoccur in different religions, even those that do not interact... these archetypes deal with birth,death and the changing of the seasons, and many other concerns that affect human life so much.

Answer: Sorry, I hate using the phone app…not just because it is so slow, but because my eyes and the screen don’t always get along. My OP should say “similar too *or* exact copies�
The Christian bible mocks the Jewish bible, Jesus and Joseph for example. Be that it may, the bible is not a direct plagiarism, rather a collation of the same theme that been played over and over throughout most religions of that region….I would say it was at the last of the list, but that isn’t entirely true either since there are 38000 Christian denominations all reinterpreting and rewriting the bible to fit their own faiths. If memory serves there are 16 religions with crucifixions, at least three with virgin births, and I cannot recall how many with a deity going down to earth. Of the 38 scrolls, only 3 did not claim the life of Jesus happened in a serial plain of existence…guess which ones got used in the Christian bible. Paul being the exception to being edited out completely….and yes, Paul never claims Jesus and his life ever happened here on earth.

[Fuzzy Dunlop]

The gods of polytheism are finite, diverse, varied, proliferate, ethically troubled, capricious, whimsical, and so on.

The God of monotheism is infinite, singular, absolute, indivisible, ethically foundational, absolute, pure, and so on.

Are you really going to tell me "Oh well there's no real difference, since neither exists..?" Here is the logical form which seems to foment under such premises;

1) God and gods are relevantly similar
2) gods have no evidence of existence
3) Therefore, God can have no evidence of existence

It seems inherently question begging. If the atheist is really so confident that God and gods don't exist, what do they lose to grant that, conceptually, God and gods are distinct kinds of beings? Are they so insecure in their atheism that they can only maintain it by impugning monotheistic belief as something it isn't?

I know there must be at least one atheist who can recognize that they can logically maintain their position to grant that there is an essential difference between the beings polytheism accepts and the being monotheism accepts. But why is this position among atheists so popular?

It's popular with me, at least, because I'm not seeing the essential difference you see. I agree that gods are a diverse bunch with different qualities being attributed to different ones. Why are the particular features of your particular god so special that we must redefine "god"?

[Chase200mph]

Before I give my demonstration, I would like to explain how I distinguish between polytheists and monotheists.

Polytheists believe in the existence of powerful, but limited, beings. Some contend that these beings have had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that a troupe of these kinds of beings had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites polytheists is their belief in the literal existence of superhumanly powerful beings.

Monotheists believe in the existence of an infinite and indivisible being. Some contend that this being has had a direct part in recent human history, some only posit that this solitary being had a hand in the creation of the universe. But what unites monotheists is their belief in the literal existence of a foundationally necessary being.

An atheist is one who disputes the existence of this infinite and indivisible being.

Do all polytheists believe in the existence of this infinite being? No.

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

Question: What is the relevance of the existence of beings like Ra or Zeus in discussing the existence of God?

Therefore, some polytheists are atheists.

LOL!!!! Therefor those that believe in many gods don’t believe in any of them….now if we were to take this seriously, monotheists don’t believe in all of the gods so some theist are atheists. Doesn’t the affirmation of the consequent work both ways? LOL!!!!!