• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Battle of the monotheistic religions

Anti-religion

Why cant god be one and many?

The reasons why God cannot be one and many is because first that is a contradiction. If I said to you that I am one person, yet I am many persons, that would be a contradiction. Am I you? Are you me? No, you are you and I am me. If there were to be “many” gods, then all of those gods would be their OWN person and not many persons. Now the second reason why there cannot be “many” gods is because of the reason I gave already, there cannot be an infinite amount of causes. If polytheism is true, this means there is a god, he gives birth to other gods and those gods give birth to more gods. And it just keeps going like that from eternity past. If that was the case, it would take forever to get to OUR TIME period, since it’s an infinite amount of causes and time. And that is why I say there is only ONE God and not many.

Now what if you say that there is many gods but they did not give birth to the rest of the gods, they were all there at the same time and were the first cause of the universe all together? What would I say to that? The best I can say to this is: it goes against our intuitive side and it goes against things that we know in this physical realm. It also goes against a supreme authority. There cannot be “many” gods or many authorities over us, there has to be a supreme authority. Authorities today are not all equal in power, some have more power than others. Thus this would also be the case intuitively with the “gods”. Thus there would be a God, who is above all the rest, supreme in authority and power. And, not to mention again, there has to be a first cause. This first cause cannot be MANY god’s at the same time with their own person. There has to be a ROOT source, a SEED if yea will, and many gods would imply many seeds or sources. Our intuitive knowledge, and solid knowledge of the world tells us, there is ROOT causes for things. The first cause would have to be a ROOT SOURCE, thus implying ONE God.


MSizer

We don't have to go through the infinite regression thing do we?

The way you said that sounds like you may have gone through debating this issue already? But keep in mind, whom you debate with is also different.


If everthing needs a cause, then there can be no begining, because the first cause needs a cause.

You are right their IF I said “everything needs a cause”. But I did not say “everything”. I said “everything IN THE EVIVERSE has a cause, but there has to be a first cause” and that first cause for the universes spark, is OUTSIDE the universe, and this is – God. So, I did not say everything as in everything, but everything in the universe needs a cause. God is not contained in the universe, he transcends the universe, thus he is the un-caused cause for the universes creation.
 

Metempsychosis

Reincarnation of 'Anti-religion'
that first cause for the universes spark, is OUTSIDE the universe, and this is – God. So, I did not say everything as in everything, but everything in the universe needs a cause. God is not contained in the universe, he transcends the universe, thus he is the un-caused cause for the universes creation. [/FONT][/COLOR]

Isn't God be immanent to the creation?If god is infinite and omnipresent how can there be any thing else other than god?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

haltensie

Member
I was unaware of Bahai until today. I did some research on the religion but I have to say that the religion doesn't sound too convincing. But I suppose that I should do more research before coming to any solid conclusions.

Jollybear - People of all religions, polytheistic or monotheistic, have died for them. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, etc have all died for their religions. So that point doesn't help out too much.

You are right though that God is the uncaused caused. The Avestas make it clear that God is the uncreated creator.
 
Anti-religion

The reasons why God cannot be one and many is because first that is a contradiction. If I said to you that I am one person, yet I am many persons, that would be a contradiction. Am I you? Are you me? No, you are you and I am me.

I see no contradiction in god being many and one at the same time.
Although I have a core "self" I wear many different masks; I am several different people it just depends on who I am interacting with at any given time. I am a father, a husband, a son, and employee to just name a few. Each comes with it's own persona and characteristics.
 

dust1n

Zindīq
I see no contradiction in god being many and one at the same time.
Although I have a core "self" I wear many different masks; I am several different people it just depends on who I am interacting with at any given time. I am a father, a husband, a son, and employee to just name a few. Each comes with it's own persona and characteristics.

Yeah, but you don't have a perfect identity, God supposedly does.
 

Metempsychosis

Reincarnation of 'Anti-religion'
But I suppose that I should do more research before coming to any solid conclusions.

You should more research on all religions including the polytheistic ones (like pagan,wicca,hindu,buddhists) etc.....

BTW...A man who holds the view of the cumulative character of truth never denounces view of other religions.

I see no contradiction in god being many and one at the same time.
Yes ....God is no-contradiction within contradiction.:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anti-religion

Isn't God be immanent to the creation?If god is infinite and omnipresent how can there be any thing else other than god?

Good question: I would say before God created the universe, there was just him being infinitely big or omnipresent. Then God created the universe. The universe is finite, it is not infinitely big. God however created the universe which implies that God transcends the universe. It’s like saying a father or mother gave birth to a son, but the son is NOT the father and mother, but he is made up of the seed and egg of the parents, but he is NOT the parents. God is omnipresent, the universe is not, and God is NOT the universe (what he created or gave birth to sort of speak). God can fill outside the universe and fill the universe at the same time. This does not make God the universe, for he created the universe. The universe had a beginning, God had no beginning, thus he is not the universe. God being everywhere does not mean God being everything. I am near my computer right now, does that make me my computer? Obviously not, I am me and my computer is my computer.

I have a question for you, why do you think that God being everywhere equals him being everything?


Haltensie


Jollybear
- People of all religions, polytheistic or monotheistic, have died for them. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Zoroastrians, Hindus, etc have all died for their religions. So that point doesn't help out too much.


Actually you may have read my words too quick. I had said that many people, that includes Muslims, Jews, polytheists, Christians and many others have died for what they BELIEVED to be the truth. But in the case of many biblical authors, in their case, they did not die for what they believed, but for what they WITNESSED. And there is a BIG difference between dying for what you BELIEVE to be true, and dying for what you KNOW to be true. No one dies for what they KNOW is a lie, for they have nothing to GAIN by doing so.



You are right though that God is the uncaused caused. The Avestas make it clear that God is the uncreated creator.

Yes.

Anti-thesisofreason

I see no contradiction in god being many and one at the same time.
Although I have a core "self" I wear many different masks; I am several different people it just depends on who I am interacting with at any given time. I am a father, a husband, a son, and employee to just name a few. Each comes with it's own persona and characteristics.

I agree with this, but this is not what I was referring to above when I was arguing against the “many” gods concept. The one God can have many different sides to himself, such as the “trinity” within the Christian faith. But he is ONE God, or as you put it a “core self”.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I have a question for you, why do you think that God being everywhere equals him being everything?
If I may... technically, he said God being everywhere equals everything being God. There's a difference. You said essentially the same thing when you said, "God can fill outside the universe and fill the universe at the same time."
 
Anti-thesisofreason

If god is infinate then how did he create the universe and where is the universe in relation to god?

It’s just like parents giving birth to a child. A part of the parents are IN the child and a part of the child are IN the parents. But the child is NOT the parents nor is the parents the child. Likewise God is the parent of the universe. A part of God is IN the universe and a part of the universe is in God. But God is not the universe, nor the universe God. Now UNLIKE the analogy, God is not finite like the parents (parents are contained in space and what not).

Does that answer your question? If not, could you rephrase the question perhaps? Maybe I misunderstand?
 
Willamena

If I may... technically, he said God being everywhere equals everything being God. There's a difference. You said essentially the same thing when you said, "God can fill outside the universe and fill the universe at the same time."

Actually that is a misunderstanding, I am not saying the same thing. A child is a part of there parent and likewise the parent with the child, but they are not the same. They are a part of each other, but not each other. Likewise, God is a part of the universe and the universe a part of him, but he is not the universe, nor the universe him. He is in the universe and outside it, but he is not the universe no more then a part of a parent is inside the child, but the parent is still outside the child.
 
Last edited:

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
Hi, I'm a zoroastrian from England and lately I've been getting curious about the other monotheistic religions i.e. judaism, christianity, islam, and mormonism. The reason I only mention monotheistic religions is because I firmly believe there is only one true God, however I'm not sure which religion is God's religion. I suppose I'm just beginning to have doubts about my own religion and I am now willing to branch out to others. So, all who are adherents of the religions listed above, please do respond. I really want to know what makes you believe your religion is God's religion.

It doesn't really matter. They're all equally correct.
 

Baydwin

Well-Known Member
Hi, I'm a zoroastrian from England and lately I've been getting curious about the other monotheistic religions i.e. judaism, christianity, islam, and mormonism. The reason I only mention monotheistic religions is because I firmly believe there is only one true God, however I'm not sure which religion is God's religion. I suppose I'm just beginning to have doubts about my own religion and I am now willing to branch out to others. So, all who are adherents of the religions listed above, please do respond. I really want to know what makes you believe your religion is God's religion.
I sense that what you're really after is Jews, Christians (Mormons are Christian) and Muslims to reply so that you can preach to them why Zoroastrianism is better.
 
Atotalstranger

It doesn't really matter.

It does matter if one of them are right. For instance if Christianity is right, those who are not Christian, go to hell, if Muslim is right, those not Muslim, go to hell, ect. So, it matters.


They're all equally correct.

I would say they all have some things they say that are the same, in those CASES, they are equally correct. But there are clear cut things that are completely different, in THOSE cases, they cannot be equally correct. For instance, Islam says Jesus did not die on the cross, that he was translated to heaven and did not die. Christianity says he did die on the cross, buried for three days and rose again and then was translated to heaven. ONE OF THEM has to be right and one of them has to be WRONG, or there both wrong, but they cannot both be equally RIGHT at the same time. And the reason being is because they both contradict each other in those case examples.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
I would say they all have some things they say that are the same, in those CASES, they are equally correct. But there are clear cut things that are completely different, in THOSE cases, they cannot be equally correct. For instance, Islam says Jesus did not die on the cross, that he was translated to heaven and did not die. Christianity says he did die on the cross, buried for three days and rose again and then was translated to heaven. ONE OF THEM has to be right and one of them has to be WRONG, or there both wrong, but they cannot both be equally RIGHT at the same time. And the reason being is because they both contradict each other in those case examples.

2+2=5 and 2+2=6 are equally correct.
 
Atotalstranger

2+2=5 and 2+2=6 are equally correct.

No, they are both equally wrong. 2+2=4. The answer is not 5 or 6, it’s 4.

So Muslim and Christianity and Jews and any other religion are not equally correct. On some things they are, and some things there not and on some things they could all be wrong. But on the same issue, two contradictory views cannot both be right.
 
Top