God and gods

[historia]

I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

Questions for debate: Is this quote accurate? Is the difference between the concept of God and the concept of gods simply a difference in number (one vs. many)? When atheists and skeptics combine the two into the short-hand "God(s)," are they making a category error?

[William]

[Replying to post 40 by dio9]

Yes my image of God is a man and a woman together, like Adam and Eve.

I have wondered now and again what images of GOD a species who does not require male/female to procreate, or requires more that 2 others to procreate, would be.

[marco]

Had Yahweh remained merely a tribal deity of the ancient Hebrews, I could certainly see your point. But later Jewish and Christian theology came to associate Yahweh with the supreme, transcendent God.
An uncreated, eternal Supreme Being that is the ground for all existence is ontologically very different from the gods of polytheistic religions. The latter are, as you noted here, more like angels. And, as such, are ontologically much closer to humans than they are to God.

I feel we are discussing angels on pinheads here. Of course there are philosophical differences; and once we move into ontological arguments we establish what we seek to establish, that God is not primus inter pares but supreme. This is declaration rather than difference. Yahweh is a god who has been raised to uniqueness and alone exists of himself. We can paint him green, but a god he remains. We have no power to alter that.

In this particular case, the word is capitalized precisely for the purpose of signaling that there is a difference. In other languages, like Greek and Arabic, the definite article is used to signal we are talking about the God, and not merely gods.

Allah, from the humble Arabic word elah, performs the same service, aggrandising the holder to a special throne. The existence of three entities, all claiming Godhead, should give us pause, perhaps to consider a similarity to Cerberus with three heads. Just because people like Aquinas possessed the erudition and ingenuity to endow a deity with singular qualities does not mean we have moved from god to something else. Zeus and Yahweh are gods; Yahweh has had more work done on him.

[marco]

[Replying to William]

Yes my image of God is a man and a woman together, like Adam and Eve.

I wonder in what way the great world of divinities is better appreciated by a person's imaginative picture of what is there. The scenes we have in big movies, such as Jason and the Argonauts, are somebody else's picture, and really interesting. Perhaps, coincidentally, they bear some semblance to truth.

[marco]

[Replying to post 40 by dio9]

Yes my image of God is a man and a woman together, like Adam and Eve.

I have wondered now and again what images of GOD a species who does not require male/female to procreate, or requires more that 2 others to procreate, would be.

In general it is nice to wonder what pictures other creatures have of the God that made them. Did he tell whales size matters? Did he tell tigers that teeth are the way, the truth and the life? And man that he matters?

I believe that the birds who wait patiently each morning for my manna to be scattered on the lawn see me as having the hands of God, and maybe I do, in some poetic way. I am trying to encourage the crows, in particular, to caw in Gregorian chant. Perhaps Marco is just a minor god, a temporary finger of the Real One.

[dio9]

[Replying to William]

wonder no more. there are no species which exist without male /female procreation.

[dio9]

[Replying to post 53 by marco]

perhaps but I am referring to the Genesis creation story. It seems most reasonable and even implies a moral imperative.

[marco]

[Replying to post 53 by marco]

perhaps but I am referring to the Genesis creation story. It seems most reasonable and even implies a moral imperative.

It is a tale fashioned by an ancient human puzzling over rainbows and roses and wondering at the rolling constellations. In the beginning there was one man made from mud and he was disobedient to the Master Builder, ergo snakes and mosquitoes.

Yes, it is most reasonable.

[Filthy Tugboat]

[Replying to William]

wonder no more. there are no species which exist without male /female procreation.

This is actually incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_r ... al_species

[dio9]

[Replying to marco]

I think you underestimate the intelligence of humans who were just like us.

[dio9]

[Replying to post 58 by Filthy Tugboat]

OK give me an example of one species of creatures that aren't made up of yang and yin members.