• 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!

How reasonable is monotheism, even hypothetically?

LukeS

Active Member
OP. Typical atheist.

No offence meant, its rude and harsh sorry but but I just invented a term. Khmer Rouge school of theology. Analogy with "What is rotten must be removed" - a Khmer Rouge slogan.

Considering spirituality often codes for a type of well being, even by secular standards that's not bad for "outdated, unscientific nonsense" etc.

Maybe its, its expressive of repressed jealousy of peoples "illegitimate cheat codes" for health.

Often as a decadent atheist I would resent peoples healthy spirituality - it wasn't fair play.

Ok, intellectually, you may win. You have Occam, that settles it. Is that all that matters?

Lets contrast spiritual music versus what the Latin Mass Society magazine lebelled "secular din".... is that relevant?

Ok, that's aesthetics, personal. So, is faith that different?

Or is it just about a proposition (there is but one God), isolated from its natural environment, and studied under a certain type of lens?

 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
You tell me. @LukeS . I take it that you disagree?

Because, really, I do not see anything beyond amorphous disapproval in your post. There does not seem to be an actual disagreement or argument there.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
LOL! Maybe God's just so uncomplicated to me that I have a hard time understanding the need for all that much analysis.

Odds are that for you there is, in fact, no such need. Some people seem to be strongly inclined towards god-belief almost from birth. That should be accepted as the natural thing that it is.

I've been fine! Still drop by almost daily, but just don't post as often. After so long, I guess you just run out of stuff to say. :p Hope you're doing well!

Nice to hear from you. Take care!
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
I can point to a watchmaker that exists and prove that he makes watches. I cannot point to any creator to prove that it created creation itself.
your pointer.....does not indicate the answer

the watch does not create itself
do you think creation can create it's.......'self'

and your.....'self'
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
How many people are praying for starving children? Who is actually trying to feed them?
My friend who has cancer that is eating her body and her wallet is being fed by people, including me. I honor the 21st century, which can let me order stuff through the internet to be delivered to her house after I moved out of state.

To be quite frank, God must not have an Amazon account.

Who gives the squirrel the instinct to gather nuts?
Ours typically gather whatever they want: from the garden, the birdfeeder, the ... :p

What if the one god is the universe and we are just like white blood cells living in God.
That's basically how I roll, theologically. It's like how many creation myths are basically "and such and such deity or deities carved themselves up or something and ended up being the universe."

Diversity will eventually destroy the group.
I was with you up until that point. I see diversity as the glue, not the solvent.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I think you are underselling the positive aspects of diversity, which are many, varied and solid.

Shouldn't have to sell it at all. Diversity is IMO neither necessarily good nor bad. It can be either.

People try to sell diversity to overcome the reality of what I said prior. Diversity is no gurantee of getting a better product.

In fact people preach diversity because it assumes people will look after their own. If this weren't the case, we wouldn't need to promote diversity.

You need something to unify folks.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
I was with you up until that point. I see diversity as the glue, not the solvent.

If folks could actually see everyone as equals, there'd be no need for diversity.

You need a unifying purpose to overcome diversity. You can't throw different cultures into the mix and expect them to all get along. You have to create maybe even enforce a common purpose.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
That is actually a valid point to raise.

If an elephant has to be pursued for it to be even perceived, how necessary is it to assume its existence, and how much of a right have people to demand its presumption of existence?

Necessary to what end? When something is considered necessary it isn't simply considered necessary, it's considered necessary for something. Even if you don't assume it's existence, it might still bump into you... but there is no guarantee that it will. If you assume it's existence and go looking for it, you might find it, but there is no guarantee that you will.

Even so, practically speaking, if you want to find the elephant, then you should first presume that it exists and then go look for it, not because presuming it's existence will guarantee that you find it, but because there's no reason to go looking for it unless you entertain the notion that it might be there. So it's practically necessary to demand that the presumption of it's existence. It may be that someone just happens to discover penicillin by accident on their bread, but in science the method is to form a hypothesis first and then conduct the experiment.

The degree to which you can force your findings upon others is, in general, not clear. If a meteor is about to hit Earth and wipe out life, it's really important to know, but there are probably still people who could care less: whatever will be will be. If I just want you to come outside and look at the North Star, it's a much less compelling priority for people or for society as a whole.

As regards monotheism, I take your question to mean the degree to which people have a right to demand the presumption of a single deity. But you can't really force a person to believe in single deity, can you? Really what it comes down to is that if you want to be part of a particular religious group, then you have to actually accept the beliefs that comprise their core doctrine. And, in this sense, they have a right to demand that you do... They don't really have a right to demand that people who don't want to be a part of their group accept their core doctrine. What I mean is: if you want to be a part of a religion that holds monotheism as part of their core doctrine, then they have a right to demand that you accept it, but they can't force people to believe in a single deity, can they?
 

The Emperor of Mankind

Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Yes, if you go off on the completely wrong tangent it could mean that.

Not true. You're trying to compare a being (your god) with apparently limitless power & knowledge, no peers of comparable power and no form of checks or balances with a being (the American president) who merely operates at the 'top' of an established hierarchy which limits his power and he can feasibly be supplanted by his subordinates.

Your analogy wasn't great to start with; I'm just going with it.
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Not true. You're trying to compare a being (your god) with apparently limitless power & knowledge, no peers of comparable power and no form of checks or balances with a being (the American president) who merely operates at the 'top' of an established hierarchy which limits his power and he can feasibly be supplanted by his subordinates.

Your analogy wasn't great to start with; I'm just going with it.

Yeah, well we don't have a Caesar. If we had a Caesar I would have used that.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Unity is not always, or even very often, a good thing.

I suppose there is a much deeper question here of how particular beliefs shape a culture or society. It's in the best interests of a group of people to have a unified belief when they desire to accomplish something decisively. Do you want to have a recreational park where everyone can go and relax? Everyone has to come together and make things work.

Diversity and Unity are not opposed. The arm is not like the leg, the leg is not like the liver, the liver is not like the arm, but they are all unified. If beliefs and attitudes create problems within the harmonious functioning of society, then everyone involved suffers. By the same token if you eliminate diversity in society, then it will be limited in it's function. A society that is neither unified nor diverse is the worst of both. They cannot agree and even if they could, they still can't function well. For example, a society without women will die out in a generation no matter how unified the men are and a society living in anarchy cannot advance in achievement, they will be too busy fighting each other.

Unity is something to be desired for the benefit of a nation's survival.
 

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
If only one God exists it doesn't really matter if you approve of H


You talking about God as if He were a science or math problem. He isn't.
Have you ever considered just having a reasonable conversation and explaining your point of view so that others can better understand it?

You're a pious man. We all get that. And that's great!
But threads like this would be a perfect time for you to reach out into the foray and explain why you think a Monotheistic god is not only reasonable, but factual and good, as the OP asked... Have more conversation and less posturing.
 

DavidFirth

Well-Known Member
Have you ever considered just having a reasonable conversation and explaining your point of view so that others can better understand it?

You're a pious man. We all get that. And that's great!
But threads like this would be a perfect time for you to reach out into the foray and explain why you think a Monotheistic god is not only reasonable, but factual and good, as the OP asked... Have more conversation and less posturing.

I'm not a pious man, I'm a sinner. Relax, bro, I'm cool.
 
Top