if we lose religions data

[Heyo]

I disagree because if God

Definition of God according to the Merriam Webster dictionary.

capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: such as
a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe

Neither you nor I did capitalize "God" in our previous posts.

But even if you did, the"perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness" being is just a story without evidence. If someone comes along who tells a different story about a different "God" that created the universe, you have no method to validate or falsify the stories. You have now the possibilities
1. to disbelieve in gods altogether (which is against the premise)
2. to believe both stories
3. to believe both are talking about the same god but got the properties wrong
4. to believe only one story (which is irrational and therefore against the premise)
In the third case one of the properties that could be wrong is that there is only one "God".

 

[Earthtank]

Neither you nor I did capitalize "God" in our previous posts.

But even if you did, the"perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness" being is just a story without evidence. If someone comes along who tells a different story about a different "God" that created the universe, you have no method to validate or falsify the stories. You have now the possibilities
1. to disbelieve in gods altogether (which is against the premise)
2. to believe both stories
3. to believe both are talking about the same god but got the properties wrong
4. to believe only one story (which is irrational and therefore against the premise)
In the third case one of the properties that could be wrong is that there is only one "God".

I think we are talking about 2 different things here. I am discussing/talking about the idea and definition of God while it seems you are talking about proving/disproving God. Proving/disproving God is not what i am discussing, taking the definition of God and testing it against idea monotheism/polytheism and seeing how rational and logical that is, is that i am focusing on.

 

[Shad]

Of course I agree that almost all human beings follow the creed of their parents. Even their political parties.

But unless we put a lone child in isolation without any influence and watch what they come up with we cant make an assessment that they will be atheists or theists. They might put up a foot ruler and worship it. You never know.

So I just dont like assumptions.

Peace.

Such a test would be unethical anyways.

 

[firedragon]

Such a test would be unethical anyways.

Yep.

 

[Heyo]

I think we are talking about 2 different things here. I am discussing/talking about the idea and definition of God while it seems you are talking about proving/disproving God. Proving/disproving God is not what i am discussing, taking the definition of God and testing it against idea monotheism/polytheism and seeing how rational and logical that is, is that i am focusing on.

You are assuming that there is only one definition of "God". Let's call it the "Merriam Webster God". I agree that the Merriam Webster God is rationally a single entity.

God
[ god ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR God ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater.

1. the upper balcony in a theater.
2. the spectators in this part of the balcony.

Now we have the Merriam Webster God and 3 to 5 other Gods(gods) (dictionary.com Gods). Is it rational to dismiss the other definitions? They have the same validity as the Merriam Webster God.

 

[firedragon]

You are assuming that there is only one definition of "God". Let's call it the "Merriam Webster God". I agree that the Merriam Webster God is rationally a single entity.

God
[ god ]
SEE SYNONYMS FOR God ON THESAURUS.COM
noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater.

1. the upper balcony in a theater.
2. the spectators in this part of the balcony.

Now we have the Merriam Webster God and 3 to 5 other Gods(gods) (dictionary.com Gods). Is it rational to dismiss the other definitions? They have the same validity as the Merriam Webster God.

Have you explored the Hindu concept of God?

 

[Heyo]

Have you explored the Hindu concept of God?

Is there one? (I mean, is there only one, one you can give a definition of to that all Hindu will agree?)

 

[firedragon]

Is there one? (I mean, is there only one, one you can give a definition of to that all Hindu will agree?)

You will not get a definition for all to agree. 1 billion people? This is the wrong way to think.

Also, when ever you want to understand or even consider a concept of God, dont think of what a billion people will agree to?? At least try to go to the concepts in the scripture.

And yes. There is one concept of God in Hinduism.

 

[Earthtank]

Is it rational to dismiss the other definitions?

Only if it makes logical sense by using deductive reasoning, or any other method you want to propose. Personally, i think deductive reasoning fits best for this scenario but, open to others as well.

 

[Earthtank]

There is one concept of God in Hinduism.

Please correct if I am m wrong but, isn't the god of Hinduism similar to the trinity? Trimurti, which is 3 gods?

 

[sojourner]

At least it is more logical to believe in many gods than to believe in only one. Once you believe in one god story without (or little) evidence, there is no reason not to believe in a different god story that has the same amount of evidence.

But spirituality really isn’t in the realm of “logic” and “evidence.” It’s more in the camp of intuition and experience, since any expressions of the Divine are necessarily metaphoric and usually mythic in terms of the ways in which they reflect the human condition.

 

[sojourner]

Now we have the Merriam Webster God and 3 to 5 other Gods(gods) (dictionary.com Gods). Is it rational to dismiss the other definitions? They have the same validity as the Merriam Webster God.

The metaphor is never the reality, itself. Metaphor is a (necessarily narrow) reflection of the reality. Both (and all) metaphors can coexist side by side and still all truly reflect the reality.

 

[firedragon]

Please correct if I am m wrong but, isn't the god of Hinduism similar to the trinity? Trimurti, which is 3 gods?

Not really Earthtank. The God of the Veda's and the Upanishads, is a transcended God. God is the universe, the universe is God. All of these trinities, Shivan, Brahma, Vishnu and all the avatars, everything is secondary. God is one.

As in Vishvedevas, Rigveda, it says

"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān. To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan."

To what is one, sages give many names.

God is one. He is transcended. This is probably the older or oldest version of pantheism.

 

[Earthtank]

God is one. He is transcended

Not saying I accept nor reject Hinduism but, this is a statement i can support/get behind. Thank you for the "education" on Hinduism.

 

[firedragon]

Not saying I accept nor reject Hinduism but, this is a statement i can support/get behind. Thank you for the "education" on Hinduism.

The honour is mine.

 

[Heyo]

But spirituality really isn’t in the realm of “logic” and “evidence.”

I agree. But if you want to apply reason (and that was the question), polytheism is more rational then monotheism.

 

[j1i]

people.

Why don't you think that they would turn to polytheism - as this has already happened once?

I what.

Lord of the flies.

It's a mormon?

Is that a .

"All

Regards

Based on er parents.

Based on the factdevelopment

I once way.

That's an idea I can get behind.

Such a test would be unethical anyways.

The metaphor is never the reality, itself. Metaphor is a (necessarily narrow) reflection of the reality. Both (and all) metaphors can coexist side by side and still all truly reflect the reality.

If this teaching.

In Hindu mysticism again.

Thank you all for participating
Sincerely enjoyed reading your thoughts


Since the data was removed
It makes sense for children to think as they grow up and draw conclusions
Some may be wrong
But as a possibility of believing in one God, it will stand, like the faith of Muslims and Jews that I meant

I am surprised how people came to the idea that there is one God among the Jews and Muslims and many primitive tribes
this


The idea of monotheism is so widespread, this idea Cause anxiety especially for atheists,

I asked a Buddhist from Sri Lanka who is like my mother has been working in our house for thirty four years Who is God and she pointed to the heaven above and said God is above
I told her how many God is there
She said, only one

Faith in monotheism with man’s creation
Finding the idea of monotheism after its disappearance was optional
I did not find a plant or animal creature worshiping something on Earth
This is not evidence of atheism
animals and plants engages in activity with the Creator (communications) through a system that is definitely incomprehensible

Imagine that you were present at the beginning of the creation of the universe, that the possibility of your belief in the existence of gods created after you would be ridiculous because they arose after you (the planets of the sun, the stars of human beings, the stones of trees ....)

You will definitely look seriously at who was before you

That’s why scientists know that the universe is created and billions of years old, and if I follow the origin of existence,
We will discover logically that there is one Creator in comparison to the size of the universe

This is the smart truth for those who like whipped cream and honey

yumi yumi

 

[sojourner]

I agree. But if you want to apply reason (and that was the question), polytheism is more rational then monotheism.

How so? One Creative Principle seems more logical than several. One Impetus seems more logical than several Impetuses, yes?

 

[ChristineM]

Oh. If I missed your links, it's my bad. And since I didnt make a claim again......, no evidence needed.

You didn't miss my link, you chose to ignore it so you could make an unfounded claim based on ignorance

 

[firedragon]

You didn't miss my link, you chose to ignore it so you could make an unfounded claim based on ignorance

I didnt know you were God. Great.

Cheers.