Why One God

[Truthseeker]

IF
each person just picks his own choice
THEN
there is no problem, right?
ELSE
trying to convince others...troubles arise

Dharmic Religions are more focused on introspection, whereas Abrahamic Religions tend to focus a lot on what others believe, which clearly is shown by their evangelizing

I agree on picking his own choice, but please folks try to base on something resembling reality. Trying to convince others I call debating, which I don't like at all. Introspection is fine as long as it illumines your being, and leads to action. Don't like this stereotyping of Abrahamic religions.

 

[stvdv]

Don't like this stereotyping of Abrahamic religions.

Just reality, and
I agree, I don't like it either
Too bad it still happens too much

Bringing to the surface
Until it goes into the background
That's all we can do

 

[stvdv]

More to the point, that lack of convergence is a big deal for Muslims. The contrast with Hinduism is very enlightening and, perhaps, a bit confusing or even disturbing for those who are not used to the freedom of interpretation that Hinduism offers.

I remember the first time reading Koran (1988), I just focused on the positive verses, which is the majority, and ignored the negative.

I was raised that my opinion does not matter, and I should please others. once taught (brainwashed) from 00 till ever, this is very hard to completely root out.

This is seen a lot in Christianity too. From young age kids are trained to please God, hence their true personal feelings are not important. I just heard this year, 2022, a Mega Church preacher declare "it's dangerous to trust your feeling, just follow what the Church teaches you"

So, from my experience I can understand some others might have this too. When natural feelings are suppressed and replaced with imposed feelings, it's almost impossible to "see straight" and take proper actions (happens too much, esp.in Religions), and is not healthy

It is only a problem because many people fail to expect that to be the real situation

Once I was able to "let go" of these limitations, I could could easily see the real situation. Impossible to ignore

 

[firedragon]

But it is just as reasonable to point out the (fairly obvious) fact that the end result are specific flavors of doctrine and deity that don't converge all that much with others.

When you say "other" do you mean every other theology? Could you tell me how it does not "converge"?

More to the point, that lack of convergence is a big deal for Muslims. The contrast with Hinduism is very enlightening and, perhaps, a bit confusing or even disturbing for those who are not used to the freedom of interpretation that Hinduism offers.

I think you should study Islam a little.

At the end of the day, the role, needs and limitations that Muslims expect their god to have are simply not very similar to those of other doctrines and beliefs.

On what basis are you making this claim? I think this is related to the first question I asked. Could you explain?

 

[LuisDantas]

By what he told us about reality.

I guess that if you believe in that, then you believe in that and that is it.

But there are some very bold assumptions sustaining that conclusion. Such as that there is an entity that is both the creator of existence itself and willing and able to communicate with humans with such clarity that it never sees fit to oversimplify anything and reliability.

Perhaps the most daring among those assumptions is that such a situation exists and fits what we can observe of our world.

 

[LuisDantas]

When you say "other" do you mean every other theology? Could you tell me how it does not "converge"?

I have just done this in this very thread. It is really very clear, even self-evident, if you do not come to look at the facts with the firm resolve to conclude that Islam must be true no matter what.

I think you should study Islam a little.

Yeah, you have probably convinced yourself of that. I would expect as much.

On what basis are you making this claim? I think this is related to the first question I asked. Could you explain?

Allah as described in the Qur'an is Abraham's God. It is also given an interesting personality, as well as role and goals. It is quite the colorful character.

What it is not is very similar to what is more generally understood to be a deity. Predictably, nor is Islam very similar to religions.

It is really rather self-evident.

 

[firedragon]

I have just done this in this very thread. It is really very clear, even self-evident, if you do not come to look at the facts with the firm resolve to conclude that Islam must be true no matter what.

Thats not what I was saying right here. I never said that "Islam is true no matter what". I asked you for your own justification for your own claim.

Yeah, you have probably convinced yourself of that. I would expect as much.

I mean it seriously. You should study islam a little bit at least prior to making such humungous claims about it which are so unfounded. You don't have to study anything in general unless you make expert claims about a particular subject.

Allah as described in the Qur'an is Abraham's God. It is also given an interesting personality, as well as role and goals. It is quite the colorful character.

What it is not is very similar to what is more generally understood to be a deity. Predictably, nor is Islam very similar to religions.

It is really rather self-evident.

See. Just saying "self evident" is not an argument. You are just making vague statements that may appeal to you, but its not a good explanation of your claim.

Try and justify your claim like I asked you replying to your own specific claims. If you wish, I can cut and paste the post again.

Thanks.

 

[LuisDantas]

Thats not what I was saying right here. I never said that "Islam is true no matter what". I asked you for your own justification for your own claim.

I was plenty clear enough.

If you disagree, you will have to be more specific. Or read again, I suppose.

I mean it seriously. You should study islam a little bit at least prior to making such humungous claims about it which are so unfounded. You don't have to study anything in general unless you make expert claims about a particular subject.

Eh. if you say so. I will give that advice all of its due attention.

See. Just saying "self evident" is not an argument. You are just making vague statements that may appeal to you, but its not a good explanation of your claim.

What do you know of the Qur'an or of Islam?

I mean, really. You seem to have convinced yourself that some fairy tale version is the real thing.

 

[firedragon]

What do you know of the Qur'an or of Islam?

I know that the Qur'an speaks of the Christians and the jews who believe in God and the last day will have protection of God with no problem as long people do righteous deeds.

So you alienating like this shows your ignorance.

Read up a bit. The oldest Muslim scholars like Imam Malik Ibn Anas from the school of Medina tradition proclaimed that the there is only one God, and all religions worship this one God that includes Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism etc although people have differences. So that's a traditional view.

The oldest traditions of Islam have been that.

Though people have made up concepts of God in various religions, it is the foundational Islamic creed that the largest group of religious people in the world worship the one God, though they have theological differences.

 

[LuisDantas]

I know that the Qur'an speaks of the Christians and the jews who believe in God and the last day will have protection of God with no problem as long people do righteous deeds.

So you alienating like this shows your ignorance.

Read up a bit. The oldest Muslim scholars like Imam Malik Ibn Anas from the school of Medina tradition proclaimed that the there is only one God, and all religions worship this one God that includes Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism etc although people have differences. So that's a traditional view.

The oldest traditions of Islam have been that.

Though people have made up concepts of God in various religions, it is the foundational Islamic creed that the largest group of religious people in the world worship the one God, though they have theological differences.

Pay more attention. I would rather not correct you outright on an open forum.

 

[firedragon]

Pay more attention. I would rather not correct you outright on an open forum.

You can correct me. No problem. I will either learn something new, or understand my error.

Please go ahead.

 

[firedragon]

trying to convince others...troubles arise

I understand what you say and agree with your principle, but there is a thing called an outcome. There is no evidence that trying to convince others create trouble. There is evidence trouble arise for various reasons and most of them political. But there is no evidence that evangelism per se creates trouble.

 

[LuisDantas]

You can correct me. No problem. I will either learn something new, or understand my error.

Please go ahead.

Sorry. Your homework, not mine.

I _have_ learned enough.

 

[stvdv]

I understand what you say and agree with your principle, but there is a thing called an outcome. There is no evidence that trying to convince others create trouble. There is evidence trouble arise for various reasons and most of them political. But there is no evidence that evangelism per se creates trouble.

There is a reason they created RF Rules, one of which says not to evangelize. Another rule is to always use "IMHO". Also that it's not allowed to try to convert people away from what they believe (incl. Atheists). These are already clear pointers

Furthermore it's very easy for me to prove that evangelism creates trouble (keep in mind that evangelism is not only "try to convert strangers" and trouble can be quite a few things; I have proven this today in more detail elsewhere).

I don't claim that evangelism creates always trouble. Some people might be happy, being Atheist or ... , hearing about Jesus or Muhammad and now seeing the light (plenty of examples on YouTube). But not all Atheists will experience this.

If 1 billion people evangelize "troubles arise" sooner or later

I just say that the usual way evangelism is done is at its core Adharmic.

 

[firedragon]

Sorry. Your homework, not mine.

I _have_ learned enough.

Then you just made that up.

Nevertheless, you should read at least a little bit on Islam or any other theology for that matter prior to making expert claims you made.

Islamic scholars even generally say that even Hinduism is very much aligned with the Islamic concept of God at fundamental levels. Hindu scripture make repeated claims like nathasya prathima asthi, Ekam evadivityam, in Yajurvedh and Chandogya upanishad. Absolutely the same as the Islamic concept of God and the so called Shema in the Tanakh. Traditionally as I said scholars have done this for over a thousand years and celebrated it. Even atheist scholars in modern times have written about it. Just that you have no knowledge of it.

I can, by your previous responses you don't care about any of this. But what has to be said has to be said.

 

[firedragon]

Furthermore it's very easy for me to prove that evangelism creates trouble

Please do. I would like to read up on that.

Thanks.

 

[stvdv]

Please do. I would like to read up on that.

Thanks.

The usual evangelism (here in Holland) originates from the belief "my Way is the Highway" (I did ask ca. 100 Christians and all of them confirmed that's exactly how they believe, also I went to a Mega Baptist Church with 4000 members, and these even have to make a vow that this is what they believe)

I know you are very creative, so it should be very easy for you too to prove "trouble arises" with such ideas.

I'll share just 1 clear example:
I think of psychological imbalances (being judgmental is just the start) in very young kids when being brainwashed by parents or Church before their self confidence is well developed. Not just trouble, this has major impact on the development of the child.

 

[BrightShadow]

Doesn't make sense to me.

I am of the opinion that there is more than One God. The Gods if you will.

This is because as I see it, something as complex as the Universe, with as many functioning and moving parts as it has, would take Many hands to Create; just like a complex open world RPG takes Many programmers to Create.

As things increase in complexity (cars, phones, houses), the number of creators always increases.

A Perfect Universe, does not mean we have only One perfect God. (I also don't think the universe is perfect, but that's a seperate issue).

Or another way to put it for @firedragon

1. Gods are Necessary beings for an Ordered universe and are Creators
2. To create, the creators have to have a will.
3. If there are two or more Gods there has to be two or more different wills.
4. Two or more wills bring about cooperation, and increase the overall complexity of the finished product (much like our cosmos)
5. The Gods are Many

I disagree with your reasoning, your hypothesis and your conclusion. Regardless of how complex our universe is - you don't need multiple gods to create it. All you need is one omniscience (all-knowing), omnipotence (all-powerful) God.
To me - your "complexity argument" has no merit because your example show a bunch of human beings are making complex things like car, cell phone etc. Who made these human beings? So, your example shows - creations can also invent things.
Although you need a creator to bring something into existence - his creations can also bring new ideas into existence. So, there is no need for multiple gods concept.
A monotheistic concept makes more sense to me because A God can create a bunch of angels to facilitate him with whatever project he undertakes.

 

[firedragon]

The usual evangelism (here in Holland) originates from the belief "my Way is the Highway" (I did ask ca. 100 Christians and all of them confirmed that's exactly how they believe, also I went to a Mega Baptist Church with 4000 members, and these even have to make a vow that this is what they believe)

I know you are very creative, so it should be very easy for you too to prove "trouble arises" with such ideas.

I'll share just 1 clear example:
I think of psychological imbalances (being judgmental is just the start) in very young kids when being brainwashed by parents or Church before their self confidence is well developed. Not just trouble, this has major impact on the development of the child.

Okay. What you are saying is that the attitude is trouble, not evangelism per se. It's the oppression that's trouble causing. Not evangelism.

And about the parents brainwashing affecting children psychologically can happen I suppose but it could happen worldwide, in all kinds of homes. Atheist, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, what ever it is. I would like to read a study on it rather than speculating. But logically, it could happen in any kind of family or society. And I don't know how relevant that is to evangelism. Nevertheless, you should consider that studies have shown children are born believing in a supernatural something. So grooming them to be atheists would also be deemed according to your own standards.

Anyway, thanks for your response. I understand where you come from.

 

[LuisDantas]

Then you just made that up.

Suuuure I did.

No, wait. Muhammad did.