How an Omnipotent and All Loving God cannot exist.

[Koldo]

I mean that species adapt based on their needs and they don't adopt behavior or features which do not meet their needs.


Well that and the merit of the messages. Christianity is more or less a message of compassion and forgiveness, and Islam is more or less a message of tolerance and order. I find your opinion to be rather cynical. It's as if you are saying their adoption was only by means of compulsion.

Cynical ? You say that polytheism is inferior and my reply is cynical ?!

The Americas and Oceania are majorly christian because the colonizers were mostly christian themselves. And if you check the muslim conquests you will understand how and why Islam was spread. This kind of thing should be known to everyone by now...

So, I ask you again, where the heck did you get this idea that monotheism leads to more happiness ?

 

[Aquitaine]

Interesting. You may wish to give further thought to the notion of considering "responsibility" to be tied to having created something. The extended applications of this become... well... to use the word "absurd" is likely being kind.

But it sure would be amusing to hold all parents responsible for the actions of their children, no matter their age.

You can't compare the responsibility between a human reproducing, and an omnipotent creator who deliberately creates Hell of Earth, and refuses to alleviate the situation.
You can't just create diseases and then go "Meh, I'm not responsible for this".

 

[TheSounding]

Cynical ? You say that polytheism is inferior and my reply is cynical ?!

It depends on what you mean by inferior. In the way of producing happiness? Yes. But I am not saying that monotheism is any truer than polytheism.

The Americas and Oceania are majorly christian because the colonizers were mostly christian themselves. And if you check the muslim conquests you will understand how and why Islam was spread. This kind of thing should be known to everyone by now...
So, I ask you again, where the heck did you get this idea that monotheism leads to more happiness ?

I do agree with you. I am not saying it was by merit alone that these religion spread, but that it was merit in addition to conquest. You are right in what you say. However, I do in fact know how and why Islam spread and I do not understand what you are trying to imply.

This is what I am trying to say:

IF gratefulness is essentially happiness then an increase in gratefulness would likely lead to an increase in happiness.

IF monotheism is the worship of a sole omnipotent god then ALL happenings are manifestations of divine omnipotence. ALL—because there isn’t a credible way of determining which happenings are an exercise of divine omnipotence and which are not.

IF a worshiper takes every opportunity to offer gratitude to the god then the worshiper will receive the ‘blessings’ of the god, that is happiness. And because ALL things result from the will of the god, ALL things have the potential to be praised for various reasons.

 

[Sees]

It depends on what you mean by inferior. In the way of producing happiness? Yes. But I am not saying that monotheism is any truer than polytheism.

I do agree with you. I am not saying it was by merit alone that these religion spread, but that it was merit in addition to conquest. You are right in what you say. However, I do in fact know how and why Islam spread and I do not understand what you are trying to imply.

This is what I am trying to say:

IF gratefulness is essentially happiness then an increase in gratefulness would likely lead to an increase in happiness.

IF monotheism is the worship of a sole omnipotent god then ALL happenings are manifestations of divine omnipotence. ALL—because there isn’t a credible way of determining which happenings are an exercise of divine omnipotence and which are not.

IF a worshiper takes every opportunity to offer gratitude to the god then the worshiper will receive the ‘blessings’ of the god, that is happiness. And because ALL things result from the will of the god, ALL things have the potential to be praised for various reasons.

Some of those conclusions seem much more like leaps rather than sound reasoning for "this and this naturally means that _____."

 

[HekaMa'atRa]

In terms of applying gratefulness and yielding happiness, monotheism is best because it yields the most happiness.

This is your opinion. It is not factual.

Whereas polytheism convolutes this principle with the number and dimension of deities, monotheism is simple and straightforward, not to mention easier to pass down generationally. I would also assume monotheism is the more peaceable of the two because it suggests unity. Proponents of polytheism are liable to divide themselves based on their beliefs and conflict with each other.

Your comment here is in complete contrary to what we know about polytheism throughout history. Monotheism is a baby in the scheme of the history of religion, it'll have to survive a few thousand more years before we know if it can pass easier through the generations. Its strict dogma and primitive moral views leaves me to believe it won't stand the test of time.

As for promoting unity, again, wrong. Exchanging deities was a very common practice in the ancient world. You also see this with modern polytheists who worship a variety of deities from several pantheons. There was also a view point (expressed by the Greeks) that all the Gods were the same but just had different names depending on the culture. Zeus was called Jupiter to the Romans and Amun by the Egyptians. Thoth was Hermes, Aphrodite was Hathor, and so on.

If anything I see monotheism as the most divisive form of religion - Thousands of denominations, inability to agree on the "word" of God, differing views on Christ, Satan, the trinity, the afterlife, etc, and their archaic views on homosexuality and women.

 

[Koldo]

It depends on what you mean by inferior. In the way of producing happiness? Yes. But I am not saying that monotheism is any truer than polytheism.

I do agree with you. I am not saying it was by merit alone that these religion spread, but that it was merit in addition to conquest. You are right in what you say. However, I do in fact know how and why Islam spread and I do not understand what you are trying to imply.

To what extent do you think that "merit" plays any role into it?

This is what I am trying to say:

IF gratefulness is essentially happiness then an increase in gratefulness would likely lead to an increase in happiness.

IF monotheism is the worship of a sole omnipotent god then ALL happenings are manifestations of divine omnipotence. ALL—because there isn’t a credible way of determining which happenings are an exercise of divine omnipotence and which are not.

IF a worshiper takes every opportunity to offer gratitude to the god then the worshiper will receive the ‘blessings’ of the god, that is happiness. And because ALL things result from the will of the god, ALL things have the potential to be praised for various reasons.

And the SAME would apply to polytheism.

 

[JoStories]

In terms of applying gratefulness and yielding happiness, monotheism is best because it yields the most happiness. Whereas polytheism convolutes this principle with the number and dimension of deities, monotheism is simple and straightforward, not to mention easier to pass down generationally. I would also assume monotheism is the more peaceable of the two because it suggests unity. Proponents of polytheism are liable to divide themselves based on their beliefs and conflict with each other.

I would disagree that "everything I have said easily applies to polytheism too". If you considered the two objectively and in terms of gratefulness yielding happiness, which would you consider the most efficient? Is it polytheism or monotheism which best maximizes gratefulness?

So far as being grateful for afflictions, I did not say that gratefulness could not accompany grief. An example is when a loved one suffers from an illness and dies. The family feels grief at their loss but is grateful their loved one no longer suffers.

If you still think what I said about monotheism can easily apply to polytheism, would you care to elaborate?

Really? Can you please provide an example of Pagans that tried to enforce their religion on others such as the two main branches of monotheism do? Can you prove that polytheists are 'unhappy', with a true credible source of course. Can you prove that polytheists are unhappy? Again with credible sources. And as a nurse wirh over 40 years experience, almost all of which was in critical care areas, I can honestly say that the families that had the most trouble with loved ones passing were monotheists, and in particular, Christians.

 

[JoStories]

I require you to provide evidence that monotheism yields the most happiness.

Sorry Koldo. I should have read ahead.

 

[JoStories]

1. Gratefulness yields happiness—According to this Ted talk, gratefulness essentially means happiness. No scientific study has been done to confirm this, only a keen observation was made.
2. Happiness by worship—Worship entails expressing gratitude and reverence in the form of ritual. The more frequent the ritual, the more happiness.
3. Worship in monotheism—Pure monotheism is the worship of one being as the creator of all things and whose will is present in everything. Worshipping the deity is worshipping its will.
   
4. Monotheism and ToE—The behavior of worshiping one deity has virtually replaced the behavior of worshiping multiple deities. This is evident by the rapid adoption of the Abrahamic faiths throughout the world within the last few thousand years. It's like studying the behavior of other primates. Advantageous behaviors replace disadvantageous behaviors.

If you would make a point to dispute this then why don't you apply it and make a determination. Case studies and documentation is hard evidence and something I would be hard-pressed to find, but it really doesn't matter when you can apply these principles with ease. I think many people consider monotheism and God in a way other than what it is. It is the essence which matters, and I believe the #1–4 description is that essence.

If you would make the time to dispute it, then take the time to apply it. Think of it as atheism in the name of God. It is good for goodness' sake.

2 important points here. 1. A study done by Michael Neilsen does state that religious people are deemed as more happy BUT and that is important here, no differentiation is made between monotheistic and polytheistic.
2. A study Guntzel (2010), states that the 3 happiest countries in the world are also the least religious overall. Those being Sweden, Denmark and Finland.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Cynical ? You say that polytheism is inferior and my reply is cynical ?!

The Americas and Oceania are majorly christian because the colonizers were mostly christian themselves. And if you check the muslim conquests you will understand how and why Islam was spread. This kind of thing should be known to everyone by now...

So, I ask you again, where the heck did you get this idea that monotheism leads to more happiness ?

Through experience, scripture, and common sense. It shouldn't be about what brings you more happiness(mono). To consider poly as superior one must accept that the opposing negative force to creation is good. This just isn't the case. God is good and leads to happiness. The opposite of God is bad and leads to misery and the absence of existence. To worship a negative existence is obviously a negative thing.

 

[popsthebuilder]

You can't compare the responsibility between a human reproducing, and an omnipotent creator who deliberately creates Hell of Earth, and refuses to alleviate the situation.
You can't just create diseases and then go "Meh, I'm not responsible for this".

All suffering on earth is by human hands. Natural disasters and disease could be easily averted through global unity under the One God and the work, and advancement of civilization under God.

 

[popsthebuilder]

This is your opinion. It is not factual.



Your comment here is in complete contrary to what we know about polytheism throughout history. Monotheism is a baby in the scheme of the history of religion, it'll have to survive a few thousand more years before we know if it can pass easier through the generations. Its strict dogma and primitive moral views leaves me to believe it won't stand the test of time.

As for promoting unity, again, wrong. Exchanging deities was a very common practice in the ancient world. You also see this with modern polytheists who worship a variety of deities from several pantheons. There was also a view point (expressed by the Greeks) that all the Gods were the same but just had different names depending on the culture. Zeus was called Jupiter to the Romans and Amun by the Egyptians. Thoth was Hermes, Aphrodite was Hathor, and so on.

If anything I see monotheism as the most divisive form of religion - Thousands of denominations, inability to agree on the "word" of God, differing views on Christ, Satan, the trinity, the afterlife, etc, and their archaic views on homosexuality and women.

True Faith in the One Creator is the opposite of division. The belief that one entity is responsible for all creation and good is ancient. Man has skewed words true Faith is wholly good.

 

[Koldo]

Through experience, scripture, and common sense. It shouldn't be about what brings you more happiness(mono). To consider poly as superior one must accept that the opposing negative force to creation is good. This just isn't the case. God is good and leads to happiness. The opposite of God is bad and leads to misery and the absence of existence. To worship a negative existence is obviously a negative thing.

Except that in typical monotheism God is responsible for evil since it is the creator god.
Not to mention that a polytheist wouldn't need to worship anything that it deemed negative.

 

[Koldo]

All suffering on earth is by human hands. Natural disasters and disease could be easily averted through global unity under the One God and the work, and advancement of civilization under God.

Even if that were true, that still doesn't explain why natural disasters and diseases exist in the first place.
Humans beings are responsible for not averting suffering, but God isn't ? How come ?

 

[Koldo]

True Faith in the One Creator is the opposite of division. The belief that one entity is responsible for all creation and good is ancient. Man has skewed words true Faith is wholly good.

Thank you for providing an example of the religious exclusivism that causes major division.

 

[Aquitaine]

All suffering on earth is by human hands. Natural disasters and disease could be easily averted through global unity under the One God and the work, and advancement of civilization under God.

Surely you can't be serious?

So diseases (other life forms) are the result of humankind? The solution may lie in human hands, but we are not the cause - your God is the chief architect.

I honestly don't understand why so many theists will claim their God is the genuine supreme creator of all things, yet are perfectly happy absolving said God of any responsibility for bad design.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Even if that were true, that still doesn't explain why natural disasters and diseases exist in the first place.
Humans beings are responsible for not averting suffering, but God isn't ? How come ?

It has to do with free will, infinite opportunity under God, and responsibility.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Surely you can't be serious?

So diseases (other life forms) are the result of humankind? The solution may lie in human hands, but we are not the cause - your God is the chief architect.

I honestly don't understand why so many theists will claim their God is the genuine supreme creator of all things, yet are perfectly happy absolving said God of any responsibility for bad design.

It's not bad design. If we where unified and wholly peaceful to all other existence then we would have overcome these obstacles long ago. Is design of existence as a whole is to be a lesson that most are blind to. Some, willfully so.

 

[Koldo]

It has to do with free will, infinite opportunity under God, and responsibility.

In other words, God is responsible for diseases and natural disasters.

 

[Koldo]

What I describe is pretty much all inclusive except for pagans, idol worshippers, and true atheists or nonbelievers. Thanks for showing your true colors.

No. That is religious exclusivism within monotheism.