Midnight Pete
Well-Known Member
Yes, but they were all human.
Except for the 144,000 saints mentioned in Revelation and featured in certain works of art, who may not be of any earthly origin.
-
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!
Does *exactly one* god exist?
- Thread starter 9-10ths_Penguin
- Start date
Yes, but they were all human.
Except for the 144,000 saints mentioned in Revelation and featured in certain works of art, who may not be of any earthly origin.
blackout
Violet.
I think the edited version of my post kind of addresses that....
blackout
Violet.
Ok, rereading this, I know I'm going to have to clarify further.
In the same way that some of our modern day movies
are based around a "real" character,
the resulting movie is more of an imagined fiction
than anything else.
As well, Catholics believe that these characters
can help them "from beyond",
in the here and now.
(super(human)powers)
Admittedly by church historians
VERY little at all is known about quite a few saints,
yet there are traditional stories attached to them.
Fictional versions of a person
really DO NOT represent who that person actually was
at all.
Thus the real human serves more as an icon...
for a glorified "Saint"hood...
a form to represent an idea...
a "catholic superhero".
Last edited:
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
I wouldn't think that all cases are equally probable though, there would probably be some weighting function. Perhaps p=1/x where p is the probability of existing and x is the number of gods.
Its also possible gods follow a gaussian distribution. My question is what do you do about a negative number of gods, or a complex number of gods? Perhaps there are 7 - 2i gods. As for the original question, I would say that monotheism is preferable from an Occam's Razor standpoint. If you're going to believe in the existence of deities just for the heck of it, then one is simpler than many and more likely to be true. Many religions have multiple deities as a solution to the problem of evil though. Evil is explained by having gods with opposing goals and objective. Even some classic monotheistic religions resort to lesser divine beings like Satan to help explain the existence of evil.
logician
Well-Known Member
What qualities of incorporeal entities qualify them as "Gods?"
Maybe there are diverse taxa and different religious traditions are occupying themselves with different species at different levels of the celestial food chain, so to speak.
It seems the general "definition" of a god is "anything" you want it to be.
Maybe it's because they are man-made concepts?
Does "human" necessarily imply that a person cannot become a god?
I know of at least one Christian denomination that says it doesn't.
Hellllooooooh! I invoked SPOO (The Scientific Principle Of Obviousness) to prove beyond doubt that all cases are equally probable.I wouldn't think that all cases are equally probable though, there would probably be some weighting function. Perhaps p=1/x where p is the probability of existing and x is the number of gods.
Multiple deities not only makes sense from a probabilistic view, but also from Murphy's Law. If whatever process it was generated one god, then it's possible to generate a second.
blackout
Violet.
I doubt very much that most people
"believe" in the existence of deities just for the heck of it.
As well, many of us ADMITTEDLY construct/choose Pantheons
for the very sake of Self Empowerment.
We interact and Work directly With our "deities".
As well "belief" can quite easily be a total non issue.
(ie.... non relevant... meaningless...)
My inner/subjective deities exist only for me.
They are integral to my own personal "PsycheDrama"/"PsycoDrama".
They help open doors in me.
They most certainly DO exist in me.
They most certainly DO have a positive effect
on me, and on my reality.
As well, I enjoy them.
My Pantheon has nothing at all to do with good or evil,
or even anything moral.
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
If all cases are equiprobable and you allow for a negative number of deities, then zero or a small number of deities starts looking more probable. I owe you six dieties.
I don't think they're all equiprobable though, it may be blasphemous to say but, screw SPOO! One could replace the word dieties with universes in your second paragraph and argue that there must be multiple universes. (that is assuming of course that universes come into existence and aren't eternal) logician mentioned multiple universes too. Personally I have enough trouble trying to understand just the one. Occam's Razor takes presidence in my opinion especially when dealing with unknowns like gods.
I do know a couple of people who believe just for the heck of it, but you're right in saying that there are numerous reasons people believe. Just seems that if you're going to believe then one is simpler than many. As a former monotheist I can attest that its hard enough to wrap your mind around one god and what it demands of you.
blackout
Violet.
It's also simpler to play just one game,
or play (as in be a musician of) just one style of music,
or study only one subject,
because well, there's less stuff to learn,
it takes less time and effort.
The thing is though these things SERVE US.
My 'gods' demand nothing of me.
They bring me places...
They show me... and teach me things.
They grant me deeper access
into my own depths and doorways.
Into the higher and deeper realms of my being.
Last edited:
Midnight Pete
Well-Known Member
Are you referring to Mormonism? Mormonism doesn't have enough in common with mainline Christianity to be considered a denomination. I will neither contest nor confirm Mormon beliefs here.
Now that you did, indeed, say "everything" there can only be one origin.
But if you would've believed that this creator didn't create EVERYTHING, but just the majority of the world, there could be several gods.
Negative number of deities? Now you're just getting silly. Probabilistic theological analysis is a serious field, fella!If all cases are equiprobable and you allow for a negative number of deities, then zero or a small number of deities starts looking more probable. I owe you six dieties.
The fate of humanity is at stake, so give it the respect it deserves.....or even more than that.
Well of course, there are multiple universes. You do pick up theory quickly. I respect that.
Clearly, you've solved partial (& even complete) differential equations before. I'll bet you can even divide by zero without bursting into flames!
I view simplicity not as something few in number, but rather a model which is simple to describe & comprehensive in application.
By analogy, a bicycle chain has many parts, but is simple & elegant.
Last edited:
That depends on how much tinkering with logic and math you allow. Something finite can never accelerate into infinity, it can only approach infinity (wich is a hefty feat too, I might add).
But if God doesn't have powers that are infinite, I see no problem (other than the fact that it's pereeeeetty hard).
Okay... so you don't think Mormons are Christians. Regardless, a sizeable number of people do believe that human beings can become gods.
You said that the lower gods of other religions could be considered parallel to angels in Christianity. Does this work the other way as well? Would it be fair to consider angels as "lower gods"?
Zadok
Zadok
Logic would indicate that if there is a G-d then there are many. Some thought concerning logic that there is and can only be one G-d follow:
1. G-d does not have power to multiply and replenish? Seem odd such would be a commandment for ever other living thing and Biblical scripture claim G-d is a living thing
2. We define a living thing as something that not only exist but can reproduce itself.
3. G-d does not want anyone to be like him? False G-d commanded us to, be even as I am.
4. Being like G-d is evil? Some Christians point to Satan wanting to be G-d and say that even to desire such a thing is evil. The problem is that Satan is a lair and he never desired or intended to be like G-d. His desire was for control and power only and to exercise such without love and compassion. There is no attribute of G-d that is evil or unworthy to be us to seek to emulate.
5. Some argue that G-d is the creator and that G-d cannot be created? There is no scripture that teaches this doctrine. Plus it assumes that G-d cannot teach creation which is also a doctrine not justified by Biblical scripture. If G-d can exist outside of time then we must assume that he can act and do things outside of time.
6. G-d is not unknowable or impossible to understand. The great mystery of G-d is only what some wish to make of G-d to confuse and create ignorance and doubt concerning such things.
It is interesting that in Biblical scripture all references to G-d prior to the fall of man are plural and that only after the fall did the reference of G-d become singular. It makes sense that fallen man was cast off from the kingdom and society of G-d and those like him with the exception of one G-d to oversee and redeem fallen man. Some Christians argue that the plural references to G-d before the fall are an ancient form of regal speech. This does not coincide with the claim that Genesis was written by one individual.
Not only are there many G-ds but any possibility for G-d would prove that there are many. One last thought If it is possible to conceive a the universe happening without G-d creating it it is only logical that evolution would eventually somewhere and somehow result in a evolved being capable of duplicating what is possible to have occurred in the first place. So is someone does not believe in G-d because they believe evolution can occur without G-d then ether them must believe that evolution is finite must have a barrier beyond which nothing can evolve or that eventually a G-d (thus many) will evolve.
Zadok
Just a note - Mormons believe that Christianity fell into an era of apostasy which resulted in the "Dark Ages". We do not claim to be part of historical Christianity We are not Catholic or Orthodox nor are we protesting any religious faith. We believe G-d is in the process of "restoring" all things in preparation of the return of Jesus.
1. G-d does not have power to multiply and replenish? Seem odd such would be a commandment for ever other living thing and Biblical scripture claim G-d is a living thing
2. We define a living thing as something that not only exist but can reproduce itself.
3. G-d does not want anyone to be like him? False G-d commanded us to, be even as I am.
4. Being like G-d is evil? Some Christians point to Satan wanting to be G-d and say that even to desire such a thing is evil. The problem is that Satan is a lair and he never desired or intended to be like G-d. His desire was for control and power only and to exercise such without love and compassion. There is no attribute of G-d that is evil or unworthy to be us to seek to emulate.
5. Some argue that G-d is the creator and that G-d cannot be created? There is no scripture that teaches this doctrine. Plus it assumes that G-d cannot teach creation which is also a doctrine not justified by Biblical scripture. If G-d can exist outside of time then we must assume that he can act and do things outside of time.
6. G-d is not unknowable or impossible to understand. The great mystery of G-d is only what some wish to make of G-d to confuse and create ignorance and doubt concerning such things.
It is interesting that in Biblical scripture all references to G-d prior to the fall of man are plural and that only after the fall did the reference of G-d become singular. It makes sense that fallen man was cast off from the kingdom and society of G-d and those like him with the exception of one G-d to oversee and redeem fallen man. Some Christians argue that the plural references to G-d before the fall are an ancient form of regal speech. This does not coincide with the claim that Genesis was written by one individual.
Not only are there many G-ds but any possibility for G-d would prove that there are many. One last thought If it is possible to conceive a the universe happening without G-d creating it it is only logical that evolution would eventually somewhere and somehow result in a evolved being capable of duplicating what is possible to have occurred in the first place. So is someone does not believe in G-d because they believe evolution can occur without G-d then ether them must believe that evolution is finite must have a barrier beyond which nothing can evolve or that eventually a G-d (thus many) will evolve.
Zadok
Just a note - Mormons believe that Christianity fell into an era of apostasy which resulted in the "Dark Ages". We do not claim to be part of historical Christianity We are not Catholic or Orthodox nor are we protesting any religious faith. We believe G-d is in the process of "restoring" all things in preparation of the return of Jesus.
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
I realize that negative deity is a contraversial subject, but it makes sense. Imagine a deity dies, you just add a negative one to obtain the new population of the gods. One must also allow for the population to fluctuate when some deities take vacations via incarnations.
Somewhere in another universe a leprechaun version of myself is discussing this very question with a unicorn version of you via messages sent through rainbow vibrations in Morse code. My biggest problem with other universes is that there is no way to observe them because they are by definition self contained realities and not part of our universe. Is it simple to believe in an infinity of things that I can't observe in order to explain a few things that I can? Is it simple to even believe in one thing I can't observe in principle just to explain something I can?
I've solved wave equations, heat equations, and even whole systems of differential equations...still so much to learn though. I keep a fire extinguisher by my desk just in case of zero related combustion.
A good point there...definitely many types of simplicity. I fully agree.
Certainly, the concept of a negative deity serves a useful function in calculations of deity populations.
But the notion of a negative quantity of gods, perhaps more gods dying off than there are gods, is
utterly ludicrous. I wonder if gods are involved in some predator vs prey relationship?
The safest course is to believe in every fancy which is remotely possible.
Observation isn't necessary. (You'd make a lousy priest with your attitude!)
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
If the gods are living things as Zadok proposes, then a predator vs prey relationship isn't out of the question. What I want to know is whether Zadok thinks the gods reproduce sexually or asexually. I think the concept of negative deity might make sense depending upon the nature of the gods. If the gods are life forms, then you're right. There are some conceptions of gods that might allow for a negative number though. Suppose gods are vector valued quantities in a divine vector space and that the negative sign is associated with direction. Perhaps moral alignment is like direction. Equal numbers of evil and good gods add up (vector addition of course) to zero gods. (Or the Null God in vector space terminology) The question is, does the Null God count as a god, or is it the absence of one?
I think my parents always secretly hoped I would become a preacher or pastor. Perhaps you're right and I should believe in every remote possibility...the problem now is; what do I do when I disagree with someone else about what is remotely possible? How do you settle an arguement about things you can't both observe?