Here on this site, one often hears from non-believers statements and questions doubting the existence of "gods", plural. Not sure why that is. Why not just question God, singular? In Western culture, that would be a more relevant question.
Hardy anyone believes in "gods" anymore. Hindus and Pagans maybe. But most folks here in in the West are either Jewish, Christian of Muslim. Monotheism is predominant.
(Whether or not Trinitarians are actual Monotheists is another debate).
But this leads to an important question. Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural?
What IS the case for Monotheism, as opposed to Polytheism?
(please, this is not intended to become a "prove God or gods exists", thread)
God vs gods
Moderator: Moderators
-
Elijah John
- Savant
- Posts: 12236
- Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
- Location: New England
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
God vs gods
Post #1 My theological positions:
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.
I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.
-
DanieltheDragon
- Savant
- Posts: 6224
- Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
- Location: Charlotte
- Been thanked: 1 time
Post #131
[Replying to post 129 by bishblaize]
The problem though is that if you can't agree that a chair exists what can you debate. Hence why it has no value. When one is debating there are assumptions that are made that you might not even agree with, so as to prevent talking past each other.
There is a difference between relinquishing the idea of self within the confines of Buddhism and the assumptions made within debate.
Like I said one does not have to agree with the assumptions they are simply made so as the dialogue of debate can progress. Its not that you can't debate these things, the question I always ask though is how does this contribute to the debate at hand?
Does this idea from Buddhism contribute to this debate and if so how?
Yes you are right things from a certain perspective about concepts however does a curled up hand not exist? Does coffee beans crushed up with water when mixed together not make an Americano? The use of these concepts is to simplify speech using widely accepted terms. Does engaging in the frivolous nature of the value of these concepts contribute to the nature of whether monotheism has more or less merit than polytheism?
The debate you want seems more to me about philosophy than whether or not there is a case for a god or gods.
The problem though is that if you can't agree that a chair exists what can you debate. Hence why it has no value. When one is debating there are assumptions that are made that you might not even agree with, so as to prevent talking past each other.
There is a difference between relinquishing the idea of self within the confines of Buddhism and the assumptions made within debate.
Like I said one does not have to agree with the assumptions they are simply made so as the dialogue of debate can progress. Its not that you can't debate these things, the question I always ask though is how does this contribute to the debate at hand?
Does this idea from Buddhism contribute to this debate and if so how?
Yes you are right things from a certain perspective about concepts however does a curled up hand not exist? Does coffee beans crushed up with water when mixed together not make an Americano? The use of these concepts is to simplify speech using widely accepted terms. Does engaging in the frivolous nature of the value of these concepts contribute to the nature of whether monotheism has more or less merit than polytheism?
The debate you want seems more to me about philosophy than whether or not there is a case for a god or gods.
