How Many One Gods can there be?

[McCulloch]

In another thread

Ok. If someone believes in a Creator God, then they are in accordance with every (real) religion.

Not really. How many gods are there ? Are the gods all-powerful ? Do they thirst for the blood of unbelievers ? What do the gods command us to do ? All of the major religions that we have today (yes, including Christianity, Judaism and Islam) disagree on these important points, and on many others as well.

This raises a question that, I think deserves its own discussion.

Do the major monotheist religions believe different things about the same god or do they believe in different gods?

For the moment let's discuss Judaism, Islam and the many flavours of Christianity and, if you will, Christian inspired religions. Let's ignore the claim made by some that trinitarian Christians are not monotheists, since they by their own peculiar twist of logic claim that they are monotheists.

On the one hand, every monotheist religion, by definition, makes the claim that there is only one god. Therefore, if someone not of that religion, makes reference to god, claiming as well, that there is one god, then it seems reasonable that they must be talking about the same god. Also, historically, the Christians claim that their god is identical to the god of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and David. Islam claims that their Allah is the same god as the Christian's.

On the other hand, YHWH, the Christian's Triune god and Allah, bear very little resemblance to each other.

[Dilettante]

Those are good points McCulloch. If by "do they believe in the same god" you mean "are their respective ideas of god identical", then the answer is probably no. YHWH seems to play favorites (the chosen people), while the other two present a more universalist deity. In the Christian version, God has a son, an idea which is utterly unacceptable to the other two religions.
But what if some or all their ideas of god are mistaken? Can you believe in God and yet be wrong about his attributes? At first sight this seems possible if God exists of course. But the fact that all three religions claim to believe in the same god is not enough to conclude that it is true. A Christian would say that Islam is a heresy, and that it paints a false picture of God. A Jew could say the same about Christianity. That makes me think they only believe in the same God when they say certain things about him (He is the Creator, etc) but not when they say others (He sent his son Jesus to Earth, etc).

[ST88]

But what if some or all their ideas of god are mistaken? Can you believe in God and yet be wrong about his attributes? At first sight this seems possible if God exists of course. But the fact that all three religions claim to believe in the same god is not enough to conclude that it is true.

Consider the difference between the competing claims on the nature of God of the Abrahamic religions, and the claim of Hinduism that the creator god Vishnu appears differently to all religions around the world -- thousands of images. In the case of the Abrahamic God, the essential nature of these beings are similar. And the ancestral claims of each religion make their referent the same. I.e., the God that we all refer to is the same God, but has a set of aspects of either A, B, or C. Or D. It would appear that they all look at the same image through different windows.

Assuming that all three religions really do reference the same cultural deity, it would not be possible to distinguish between them on their own terms, as Dilettante says. It's a logic problem. A says B and C are wrong. B says A and C are wrong. C says A and B are wrong. But all three also say that not only are the other two wrong, every other possible version of this deity is also wrong.

On the other hand, Vishnu says that A, B, and C are all correct (theoretically), appearing to different peoples around the world in forms and personalities as he sees fit (D through Zz are also correct). The distinction here is that, in this light, these are actually three separate avatars of the same being -- effectively three different entities -- shown differently to different peoples and times throughout history for inscrutable purposes.

[Dilettante]

This question also involves the differences between sciences (science should be thought of as a plurality) and religions. It is a characteristic of the sciences that one can arrive at the same theorem through very different procedures. There are, so to speak, independent ways to arrive at the same destination. You can study trigonometry geometrically or mathematically. You can solve the same problem in different ways. That's what makes it scientific. If I have understood him correctly, this is what the Spanish philosopher G. Bueno calls "synthetic identities" of science.

Is this also a characteristic of religions? No. To begin with, the three Abrahamic religions did not develop independently. In addition, their respective theologies are not compatible. Finally, I think it was Leibniz who said that identical things must have identical properties. In that case, according to these religions, the God they worship is not the same because the property of "having a son (Jesus)" is exclusive of the Christian God.

Another characteristic of the sciences is that their theorems, laws and principles can be separated from the scientists which originated them and from their hopes, intentions, aspirations, plans, fears, interests (this is what Spanish philosopher Gustavo Bueno calls "cancellation of operations"). This does not mean that "science is neutral", only that scientific truths are independent from the people who discovered them. Again I have to ask, is this also characteristic of religions? I don't think so.

Now, I know of no mathematician who would accuse geometry (the mother of the sciences) of being a heresy. When the mathematician and the geometrist arrive at the same circle or at the same theorem they can prove it. Can the religionists do the same?

[Bro Dave]

Do the major monotheist religions believe different things about the same god or do they believe in different gods?

For the moment let's discuss Judaism, Islam and the many flavours of Christianity and, if you will, Christian inspired religions. Let's ignore the claim made by some that trinitarian Christians are not monotheists, since they by their own peculiar twist of logic claim that they are monotheists.

On the one hand, every monotheist religion, by definition, makes the claim that there is only one god. Therefore, if someone not of that religion, makes reference to god, claiming as well, that there is one god, then it seems reasonable that they must be talking about the same god. Also, historically, the Christians claim that their god is identical to the god of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and David. Islam claims that their Allah is the same god as the Christian's.

On the other hand, YHWH, the Christian's Triune god and Allah, bear very little resemblance to each other.

The real confusion here comes from our limited abilities to define INFINITE Diety. Clearly this has to be (infinitely) beyond anyone’s ability. So we are left each to construct a model as close as our understanding will allow. This is where Atheists and Agnostic emerge. The models of God man creates are, in a word, flawed. And so, easy to dismiss or ridicule.

Culture also plays its part, and so the seeming disparity of attributes of The Creator. Man’s ideas about God have evolved over time, as has his religions. Failing to grasp God as an Absolute, mankind has designated various levels of Universe administration as God(s). This is realitively true. To us they are indeed Gods, when judged by their capabilities and authority. But not would presume themselves to declair to be God as First Source and Center, Absolute Creator, existing outside of His Time/Space creations.

Today, the number of people who are literate changes our approach to finding religious answers. We no longer are is such isolation about the various religions and their cultural and historic roots.

However, religions do, (or should) share a common goal; Bringing man closer to God. This however, diminishes the power of the churches, and is therefore seldom the focus of religions. Still, virtually every religion contains enough to stimulate the search for God, who lives within each of us. And so, the question of which religion is “correct” is moot. None is, because the relation with God is individual, and personal. So, the Churches simply do not have the information or tools necessary to offer direct assistance. On the other hand, nearly all religions focus towards the super-material, and so turn people towards spirituality. But the rest remains in the hands of each worshiper.

Bro Dave

[Bugmaster]

The models of God man creates are, in a word, flawed. And so, easy to dismiss or ridicule... However, religions do, (or should) share a common goal; Bringing man closer to God.

Wait a minute. If our models of God are so flawed, then isn't the goal of bringing people closer to God unachievable, by definition ? How can we get closer to something that we know virtually nothing about ? If we can't define with some reasonable degree of certainty what "God" is, then the statement "we must bring people closer to God" makes as much sense as "we must bring people closer to Xkzqiueuoire".

[Dilettante]

I think Bugmaster is right. Let's not forget that our idea of a perfect, infinite, absolute god comes from Aristotle. And Aristotle specifically said (in his "Metaphysics") that this god does not know the world. So such a god makes religion an impossibility.
Even theology ends up being religion's worst enemy. When an early Christian bishop was told that God did not have a beard (because he did not have a face, obviously) he replied. "Who can I pray to then?".
When God leaves Mount Sinai and takes up residence outside spacetime, any hopes for a relationship between God and humans, and therefore, for religion, are lost. The more I think about it, it seems to me that if you theologize long enough, you'll end up at the doors of atheism.

[Bro Dave]

The models of God man creates are, in a word, flawed. And so, easy to dismiss or ridicule... However, religions do, (or should) share a common goal; Bringing man closer to God.

Wait a minute. If our models of God are so flawed, then isn't the goal of bringing people closer to God unachievable, by definition ? How can we get closer to something that we know virtually nothing about ? If we can't define with some reasonable degree of certainty what "God" is, then the statement "we must bring people closer to God" makes as much sense as "we must bring people closer to Xkzqiueuoire".

God virtually lives within you, so that's a pretty good first step. Its a little like a baby/parent relationship. Does the baby understand its parents? No, yet the relationship is very deep and intense. The same it our relationship with God. He is there in an absolute support role, loving us unconditionally. The only difference in our relationship with God, is that it is voluntary on our side. If you choose to have no personal relationship, you may do so. Your call.

Bro Dave

[Bro Dave]

I think Bugmaster is right. Let's not forget that our idea of a perfect, infinite, absolute god comes from Aristotle. And Aristotle specifically said (in his "Metaphysics") that this god does not know the world. So such a god makes religion an impossibility.

This quote may be referring to God, being infinite and perfect, not being able to experience growth. This is why He partners with us, and shares in every experience as we experience it. The inference that God does not have a clue about our world is just silly!

Even theology ends up being religion's worst enemy. When an early Christian bishop was told that God did not have a beard (because he did not have a face, obviously) he replied. "Who can I pray to then?".
When God leaves Mount Sinai and takes up residence outside spacetime, any hopes for a relationship between God and humans, and therefore, for religion, are lost. The more I think about it, it seems to me that if you theologize long enough, you'll end up at the doors of atheism.

Just because you have talked yourself into that conclusion hardly means it is the only one. When you go looking for a reason not to believe in God, you will find as many as you need. The moment you honestly seek his presents, he is there.

Bro Dave

[Arthra]

I believe the monotheistic religions have always meant One God by definition... If you study how the revelations of God come about from Zoroastrianism to the Baha'i Faith as recorded they are really very similar. The revelations of God occur through the Prophets and Messengers of God are the means by which general humanity receives the Message appropriate for the time.

In time the original revelation though can be weighted down by rituals and conventions...encrusted dogma or regulation, thus the necessity for a new revelation more relevant to the age.

"The fundamental principle enunciated by Bahá'u'lláh ... is that religious truth is not absolute but relative, that Divine Revelation is a continuous and progressive process, that all the great religions of the world are divine in origin, that their basic principles are in complete harmony, that their aims and purposes are one and the same, that their teachings are but facets of one truth, that their functions are complementary, that they differ only in the nonessential aspects of their doctrines, and that their missions represent successive stages in the spiritual evolution of human society.... "

- Shoghi Effendi