Aren’t we all really worshipping the same God?

[1213]

The continents are floating on magma. Have moved, will keep on moving. The signs of that are on other planets too.

And what is the reason for you to believe any of that?

I can believe that nowadays they are slightly moving on magma. Can be possible after the flood.

Yeah, half the world's Jews are in Israel now. In what way that benefited the Jews, a nation which is perpetually at war!

I think it benefits them in that they have greater chance to be defended. If they would remain in other countries that are increasingly antiJew, their situation would be worse.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Sorry, no. That makes no sense.

For example .. God, Jehovah, Allah (Arabic), Yahweh (Hebrew), Brahman (Hindu), Uyyaṉ (Tamil),
Ik Onkar (Sikh), Ahura Mazda (Zoroastrian), Gitche Manitou (Native American) ...

Makes sense to me.

 

[F1fan]

Experts can be wrong and often have been wrong.

Which is why errors get corrected. Science gets more accurate over time. It isn't dogma that is defended by true believers like we see creationists do. The literalist interpretation of the Bible is completely wrong, yet certain types of Christians still claim it is valid.

I don't care if a person is called an expert, if he can't back up his claims with logic and reason.

But they do. The scientific method is a logical process. Following facts and data is what experts do. Literalist Bible believers do not follow facts, nor use reason. Notice you make a general dismissal of expertise and science, but offer no actual examples. You have none, so we throw out your claim.

 

[F1fan]

And what is the reason for you to believe any of that?

We know the continents drifted a certain way because where continents used to be connected there is a lineage of the same type of fossils up to the point where they separated. The east coast of South America and the west coast of Africa has this observed set of facts. They used to be connected.

I can believe that nowadays they are slightly moving on magma. Can be possible after the flood.

There was no global flood. Experts in geology know what flood evidence looks like. Bible literalists do not. The educated defer to experts. not Bible literalists.

I think it benefits them in that they have greater chance to be defended. If they would remain in other countries that are increasingly antiJew, their situation would be worse.

That is questionable. Jews are protected by secular laws in most nations where they live. Jews in the USA and Europe don't suffer missle attacks or kidnapping and murder. A concentration of a population is an easier target as we saw with the many attacks on Israel over the decades.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Sorry, no. That makes no sense.

I have to agree with Muhammed on this one. If multiple religions that have different languages are all referring to a monotheistic God, the Creator, they will undoubtedly use different names to label this same God, whether it is the tetragrammaton, or Allah, or the Great Spirit.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

For example .. God, Jehovah, Allah (Arabic), Yahweh (Hebrew), Brahman (Hindu), Uyyaṉ (Tamil),
Ik Onkar (Sikh), Ahura Mazda (Zoroastrian), Gitche Manitou (Native American) ...

Makes sense to me.

Yup, I'm sure it does. But I'm assuming...correct me if I'm wrong...that you think one of these is a more accurate way of seeing God than the others, right? Or do you see them all as equally flawed.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I have to agree with Muhammed on this one. If multiple religions that have different languages are all referring to a monotheistic God, the Creator, they will undoubtedly use different names to label this same God, whether it is the tetragrammaton, or Allah, or the Great Spirit.

The name they use for God is one thing...and is entirely a simple label.
But when they discuss the NATURE of God, how God interacts with humanity, whether God created humanity, whether God is a sole Creator or there are multiple creators, etc, etc, etc, ad naseum...well...we're not talking about different languages, are we?
We are talking about fundamentally different ideas of what God is, how we views us, how he interacts with us, whether he is even interested, etc, etc.

Omnibenevolent, omniscient and omnipotent are all English words. But that doesn't mean a belief system which doesn't have a single all-powerful, all-loving Creator is basically the same if not for language differences. It is not.
Whatever the ACTUAL truth of God, we aren't all worshipping the same being.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The name they use for God is one thing...and is entirely a simple label.
But when they discuss the NATURE of God, how God interacts with humanity, whether God created humanity, whether God is a sole Creator or there are multiple creators, etc, etc, etc, ad naseum...well...we're not talking about different languages, are we?
We are talking about fundamentally different ideas of what God is, how we views us, how he interacts with us, whether he is even interested, etc, etc.

Omnibenevolent, omniscient and omnipotent are all English words. But that doesn't mean a belief system which doesn't have a single all-powerful, all-loving Creator is basically the same if not for language differences. It is not.
Whatever the ACTUAL truth of God, we aren't all worshipping the same being.

I guess this is where we draw our respective circles, and they may be different. To me, the only significant point is if they believe in One God who is the creator. Any other differences are rather insignificant to me. I do not think we perceive God very well. I think we are going to make mistakes. It doesn't surprise me at all that there are different nuances in belief. I don't think God cares if we make honest mistakes like that. I think he accepts are love in the intent it is given, regardless of whether we might have a misunderstanding about him.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I guess this is where we draw our respective circles, and they may be different. To me, the only significant point is if they believe in One God who is the creator. Any other differences are rather insignificant to me. I do not think we perceive God very well. I think we are going to make mistakes. It doesn't surprise me at all that there are different nuances in belief. I don't think God cares if we make honest mistakes like that. I think he accepts are love in the intent it is given, regardless of whether we might have a misunderstanding about him.

Well...

The example I used earlier was Lakshmi.
Far be it from me to defend Hinduism, but I don't understand how one can see worship of Lakshmi as being the same as worship of Allah.

And a JW would specifically push back on the idea that worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, whilst a Catholic would not.

It's nice to assume a single God, and different windows to the same divinity. But...in my view...it doesn't hold up to much scrutiny at a more detailed level.

 

[1213]

Which is why errors get corrected. Science gets more accurate over time.

Yes, so why rush to believe it now and not wait the day when it is accurate?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Well...

The example I used earlier was Lakshmi.
Far be it from me to defend Hinduism, but I don't understand how one can see worship of Lakshmi as being the same as worship of Allah.

And a JW would specifically push back on the idea that worshipping Jesus is the same as worshipping God, whilst a Catholic would not.

It's nice to assume a single God, and different windows to the same divinity. But...in my view...it doesn't hold up to much scrutiny at a more detailed level.

Hinduism is a polytheistic religion. None of its gods can be even remotely similar to the monotheistic God, unless you want to make the argument that only Brahman exists, and all the other Gods are simply his masks. Thus, I would agree with you that Lakshmi is not the same god.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes, so why rush to believe it now and not wait the day when it is accurate?

Because of utility.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Yup, I'm sure it does. But I'm assuming...correct me if I'm wrong...that you think one of these is a more accurate way of seeing God than the others, right? Or do you see them all as equally flawed.

What has that got to do with anything?
Right, we all have varying creeds, that originate with different messengers .. some relatively ancient,
and some more recent.

The most recent major revelations are Christianity and Islam .. and there are scores of creeds
amongst them alone.
The core concept is the same .. The One G-d who created the universe and maintains it.

Naturally, from a disbelievers perspective, they are made-up, so you see them as individual made-up gods

..but from a believer's perspective..

 

[lewisnotmiller]

What has that got to do with anything?
Right, we all have varying creeds, that originate with different messengers .. some relatively ancient,
and some more recent.

The most recent major revelations are Christianity and Islam .. and there are scores of creeds
amongst them alone.
The core concept is the same .. The One G-d who created the universe and maintains it.

Except for when it's not. How do you see the Trinity? How do you see animism, or ancestor worship?
What about Hinduism, or paganism, or any other form of polytheism?

I get that you believe there is one God, and as far as this hypothetical discussion goes, I'm happy to accept there is. That does not mean all people worshipping God are actually worshipping the real God. Some are worshipping false idols, or aspects of nature, or lots of other things which are NOT the one true God.

It is for this very reason the Christian books implore believers to not hold any other Gods before Him.
It is for this very reason that arguments between trinitarians and JWs can get heated.
It is for this very reason that Mohammed deal with false idols around Ka'ba.

Naturally, from a disbelievers perspective, they are made-up, so you see them as individual made-up gods

..but from a believer's perspective..

I'm happy to tackle this from a believers perspective. I would say, though, that many believers look at this like 'My God exists, and all these other practices people have are just misguided attempts to worship my God.'

But the one doesn't follow the other. Even if your God exists, it doesn't mean others are worshipping Him.

 

[Rival]

..but from a believer's perspective..

...They're still not the same God.

They have different laws, different aspects, one incarnates as a man and one doesn't....

 

[muhammad_isa]

I get that you believe there is one God, and as far as this hypothetical discussion goes, I'm happy to accept there is. That does not mean all people worshipping God are actually worshipping the real God. Some are worshipping false idols, or aspects of nature, or lots of other things which are NOT the one true God..

Correct .. not ALL are worshipping One God .. the God of Abraham.
..but the majority are.

I'm happy to tackle this from a believers perspective. I would say, though, that many believers look at this like 'My God exists, and all these other practices people have are just misguided attempts to worship my God.'

Well, yes .. ignorance is widespread .. but let's not be part of it, eh?

 

[muhammad_isa]

They have different laws, different aspects, one incarnates as a man and one doesn't....

Mmm .. the devil seeks to divide .. and 'he' is very good at it.

I have seen people that say that Allah is a false god, and God's name is Jehovah.
..but what do they really mean by this?
What they really mean, is that they are either ignorant about Islam, or they dislike it for some reason.

 

[Rival]

Mmm .. the devil seeks to divide .. and 'he' is very good at it.

I have seen people that say that Allah is a false god, and God's name is Jehovah.
..but what do they really mean by this?
What they really mean, is that they are either ignorant about Islam, or they dislike it for some reason.

I don't dislike Islam, but God as depicted in Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i faith are clearly not theologically the same character, as it might be. One has the Torah, one has but replaces it, one has the Quran, none others have except as replaced etc. One God incarnates as a man and is Triune, one rides a chariot; one allows his followers to eat blood and pork etc., the other doesn't but yet for another it depends on the group of people. One allows a man to remarry his previously divorced wife, one doesn't, etc. These are not ethically or theologically the same. If they were people we'd be talking about two completely different beings, which I believe we are.

We cannot get it down to 'we're talking philosophically about the same abstract being', because why then not just be a regular theist, no Bible, no Quran, no myths.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I don't dislike Islam, but God as depicted in Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i faith are clearly not theologically the same character, as it might be. One has the Torah, one has but replaces it, one has the Quran, none others have except as replaced etc. One God incarnates as a man and is Triune, one rides a chariot; one allows his followers to eat blood and pork etc., the other doesn't but yet for another it depends on the group of people. One allows a man to remarry his previously divorced wife, one doesn't, etc. These are not ethically or theologically the same..

Errr, no .. that is incorrect.
What you are describing is the difference in CREEDS, and not the core concept of the belief in
One God .. the Creator and Maintainer of the universe .. the One God of Abraham.

Can all these different creeds be right simultaneously, as regards their details?
Obviously not .. it is logically impossible.
However, the nature of man is tribal .. hence we see religions evolving such as Sikhism from the roots of Hindu/Islam etc.

If they were people we'd be talking about two completely different beings, which I believe we are.

Huh?
I mean, Jesus is Jesus in Christianity AND Islam. Historians believed that he existed.
It is believed that he is/was the Jewish Messiah, born of the virgin Mary etc. etc.

 

[Rival]

Errr, no .. that is incorrect.
What you are describing is the difference in CREEDS, and not the core concept of the belief in
One God .. the Creator and Maintainer of the universe .. the One God of Abraham.

Can all these different creeds be right simultaneously, as regards their details?
Obviously not .. it is logically impossible.
However, the nature of man is tribal .. hence we see religions evolving such as Sikhism from the roots of Hindu/Islam etc.


Huh?
I mean, Jesus is Jesus in Christianity AND Islam. Historians believed that he existed.
It is believed that he is/was the Jewish Messiah, born of the virgin Mary etc. etc.

These are not creeds, these are the laws set down by each of the Gods.

You are a Muslim, will you say that not being allowed to eat carrion is just a creed? Or are you sinning by eating it?

A Christian eats it freely, it is not sin.

These are two different laws from two different lawmakers.