Does *exactly one* god exist?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How many realities are there? Many people hold an image of the world represented by multiple realities, and some by only one. Still, the meaning of "reality" doesn't change, between them.

I'm getting the distinct impression that I'm being toyed with.

If you aren't interested in actually answering the question in the OP, why are you bothering to post in this thread?

 

[Willamena]

why should someone hold a monotheistic image instead of a polytheistic one?

The image is, for each of us, our understanding of (that part of) the world. It is constructed in our own individual vocabularies.

 

[Willamena]

I'm getting the distinct impression that I'm being toyed with.

If you aren't interested in actually answering the question in the OP, why are you bothering to post in this thread?

Because the OP asked me for what I think.

My bad.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The image is, for each of us, our understanding of (that part of) the world. It is constructed in our own individual vocabularies.

So... going back to the OP:

So have at it: if we take as given that god(s) exist, what reason would a person have to believe that only one god exists as opposed to two, three, several, or many?

Your answer is basically "any of these possibilities is equally valid"?

 

[Willamena]

Your answer is basically "any of these possibilities is equally valid"?

Monotheism represents as valid an image of god as polytheism. Yes.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Monotheism represents as valid an image of god as polytheism. Yes.

Still with "an image of god"?

Again: polytheism isn't monotheism. This thread is starting to remind me of the old line about all religions being valid because "everyone sees Jesus in their own way".

 

[Willamena]

Still with "an image of god"?

What is god?

Better yet, what is a thing?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What is god?

Don't you mean "what is a god"?

 

[Willamena]

Don't you mean "what is a god"?

What is a reality?

 

[Storm]

Just got to thinking: we've had a few threads here where people have debated whether or no gods exist and whether god(s) exist in the general sense. However, I can't recall having one where people debate whether monotheism is correct... i.e. whether one, and only one, god exists.

So have at it: if we take as given that god(s) exist, what reason would a person have to believe that only one god exists as opposed to two, three, several, or many?

What do you think? Does anyone have an opinion for? An opinion against?

I find it more likely that there are many. That said, I only concern myself with the one.

 

[Willamena]

Depending on your image of the world --dualistic or monistic --there either is or is no real, valid distinction between an image of a thing (understanding of it) and the thing itself.

In the case of god, there is only the image of god, because it is an image of something (variously described as): "beyond understanding", "beyond the world", "hidden", "mystery", "void", "absent", etc.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What is a reality?

An artificial construct: a concept that we find useful when talking about contrafactual possibilities ("this reality", "some other reality"). Or, a way to refer to our subjective views of objective reality ("your reality", "my reality").

Depending on your image of the world --dualistic or monistic --there either is or is no real, valid distinction between an image of a thing (understanding of it) and the thing itself.

In the case of god, there is only the image of god, because it is an image of something (variously described as): "beyond understanding", "beyond the world", "hidden", "mystery", "void", "absent", etc.

So... you acknolwedge dualism, but you leave no room for it in your definition of the term "god"?

You're engaging in circular reasoning: effectively, you're saying that a monist should be a monist because he's a monist. You've given no real argument at all.

 

[Willamena]

An artificial construct: a concept that we find useful when talking about contrafactual possibilities ("this reality", "some other reality"). Or, a way to refer to our subjective views of objective reality ("your reality", "my reality").

It was a rhetorical question, but thank you.

So... you acknolwedge dualism, but you leave no room for it in your definition of the term "god"?

You're engaging in circular reasoning: effectively, you're saying that a monist should be a monist because he's a monist. You've given no real argument at all.

I'm not sure where you're getting this. Monism and dualism represent perspectives that everyone has, or can have.

I'm good for giving up, if you don't mind.

 

[blackout]

I can conceive of "one", "more than one" and/or none
all at the same time.

(which is what I tried to say a few pages back,
but got no response, so.......)

 

[zenzero]

Friend 9-10ths P,

So far it must be clear that the word *God* does not mean the same for everyone and when there exists a differentiation there where does the ball stop??

It is the MIND itself that perceives that is where the buck points towards that needs to be esquired about.
Only on understanding of the very mind itself can it be determined as to what it perceives , how, why, etc to further understand the rest of your enquiry.

Love & rgds

 

[Katzpur]

Just got to thinking: we've had a few threads here where people have debated whether or no gods exist and whether god(s) exist in the general sense. However, I can't recall having one where people debate whether monotheism is correct... i.e. whether one, and only one, god exists.

So have at it: if we take as given that god(s) exist, what reason would a person have to believe that only one god exists as opposed to two, three, several, or many?

What do you think? Does anyone have an opinion for? An opinion against?

The Bible mentions many gods. It does so many times. It also states that for Christians only one God has any revelance whatsoever.

 

[Muffled]

Clearly, the odds that there is a single supreme being are vanishingly small. Consider the possible cases:
0 gods, 1 god, 2 gods, 3 gods......100 gods.....1,000 gods....let us presume that a gazillion gods is an upper limit.
Invoking the scientific principle of obviousness, these cases are all equally probable, so the case of a single god has one in a gazillion chance of being correct.
Dang! I just realized that my atheism also has only one in a gazillion chance of being right.
Probability shows that there must be a whole herd of supreme beings out there.
(The odds are even more overwhelming if one boosts the upper limit!)
My weltanshauung is now crashing down around me....great....just great....

You are basing this on the assumption that a supreme God would have to exist by random opportunity.

Your atheism would be right if there were any evidence to support it but the null hypothesis always lacks evidence. All you can realistically assert is that you do not believe the evidence of a god.

 

[Revoltingest]

You are basing this on the assumption that a supreme God would have to exist by random opportunity.

Your atheism would be right if there were any evidence to support it but the null hypothesis always lacks evidence. All you can realistically assert is that you do not believe the evidence of a god.

Well....I never said that I'm right. I just speculate about the unknowable.

 

[Muffled]

Just got to thinking: we've had a few threads here where people have debated whether or no gods exist and whether god(s) exist in the general sense. However, I can't recall having one where people debate whether monotheism is correct... i.e. whether one, and only one, god exists.

So have at it: if we take as given that god(s) exist, what reason would a person have to believe that only one god exists as opposed to two, three, several, or many?

What do you think? Does anyone have an opinion for? An opinion against?

I think most systems admit that more than one god existed at one time or other but that all agree that there is only one supreme God ie a god who has power over everything including other gods.

My opinion on this is that a universe with two gods would be in confusion . From the evidence of an orderly universe I deduce that there is one supreme God.

 

[Katzpur]

I think most systems admit that more than one god existed at one time or other but that all agree that there is only one supreme God ie a god who has power over everything including other gods.

My opinion on this is that a universe with two gods would be in confusion . From the evidence of an orderly universe I deduce that there is one supreme God.

But are you okay with one God in three divine persons? What's the difference between three Gods who are one in will, purpose, mind, and heart (and who are therefore not in confusion) and one God in three persons, each of whom is God but who are just one God?