The Concept of Being "an atheist to every god but your own"

[1137]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I think it's a consistency issue. Person X accepts god A exists as a faith premise, yet rejects epistemologically equal faith premises such as other gods, fairies, leprechauns and moth-men.

As ..Dawkins I believe, once said..I just take it one god further..or in the case of polytheists, a few gods further.

The only consistent position is to either accept every god-concept ever devised as true, or to reject them all; with the caveat of a yet undiscovered god concept that can raise itself above the epistemological void..ie.. can be demonstrated.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think it's a consistency issue. Person X accepts god A exists as a faith premise, yet rejects epistemologically equal faith premises such as other gods, fairies, leprechauns and moth-men.

As ..Dawkins I believe, once said..I just take it one god further..or in the case of polytheists, a few gods further.

The only consistent position is to either accept every god-concept ever devised as true, or to reject them all; with the caveat of a yet undiscovered god concept that can raise itself above the epistemological void..ie.. can be demonstrated.

no..
the theism is adherence /to any idea of theism, any idea of 'gods'. It's very broad, in meaning. and thats all different types of theism.

'atheism', /being defined by theism/,therefore, because it has to have a non-belief, in all these deities, different type of deity ideas, so forth, has to be very broad in its non-belief.

it is not necessary to accept all god concepts as true, thats ridiculous

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

It makes sense both monotheism and polytheism. Having one source or foundation for all things makes just as much sense as having many foundations for all things. One parent family can work just as well as a two parent family. In some areas of the world, villages each have their own separate god and religion with that deity they follow. Yet, it's the same foundation/source underlining their differing belief systems.

Both makes sense. I don't believe in deities and if I did, I'd go with polytheism because it is easier to understand how a group of "people" take care of the universe as we do as well than having one person at the head and everyone else leading. The former fosters working together. The latter fosters follow the leader.

 

[Desert Snake]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

Why not? And people might have different reasons for their monotheism, it's a subjective question

 

[Quintessence]

Eh, just another testimony to how useless the terms "theist" and "atheist" are, IMHO.

 

[psychoslice]

For me personally, its why any god ?.

 

[Willamena]

I think it's a consistency issue. Person X accepts god A exists as a faith premise, yet rejects epistemologically equal faith premises such as other gods, fairies, leprechauns and moth-men.

As ..Dawkins I believe, once said..I just take it one god further..or in the case of polytheists, a few gods further.

The only consistent position is to either accept every god-concept ever devised as true, or to reject them all; with the caveat of a yet undiscovered god concept that can raise itself above the epistemological void..ie.. can be demonstrated.

Why can't they rationally reject other people's faith premises?

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe it was originally a rebuttal for the claim that atheism was "weird" or "unnatural".

It is indeed of little value when the interlocutor is not an Abrahamic monotheist, for most other people understand that there is such a thing as the inherent liberty of belief.

Another reason why it is of limited value is because, of course, there is no objective parameter to decide what counts as a "god" - or, indeed, what should be considered belief in a deity.

So it is a deterrent against attempts to decide what other people "should" believe in, but has little use beyond that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

Some people see the body function by one source-the heart and everything works off the heart (monotheism)

Others believe that everything works together and is important in its own right (polytheism).

Why one god? Because that source gives function to the rest of every living thing. One foundation for everything to be built on. It makes sense. Why would you have more than one source (according to monotheism) when everything comes from A beginning. Why not many gods? Because many monotheist feel that more than one source of the same nature can't exist at the same time. That's like having two floors on the same building and you're trying to get both of them to fill the same space as a foundation. So, that's why only one foundation/god is seen rather than many.

I don't understand why some polytheist can't see the logic in it, though. Many monotheist can't see the logic in polytheism so I guess it's a tie, I suppose.

 

[Kartari]

Hi 1137,

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

I've not heard it used to claim theism doesn't work. It's been used to point out the hypocrisy inherent in the assertion that one particular god is real, yet others must be unreal, without logically sound reasoning offered in support (only subjective preferences and/or poor logic). This particularly occurs with some western monotheists (i.e. particularly fundamentalist Muslims and Christians), who merely presume the sole truth of their holy book alone.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.
But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

Arguments like this suggest to me that belief is more a matter of personal preference than objective evidence.

 

[interminable]

I'm not sure if you have heard this or not, but I often have heard people say that theism does not work because you accept your own god, but not others. First of all, this ignores basically everything but monotheism. I believe many gods exist, I'm not just making an exception for my personal favorite. I also don't think accepting the existence of god X means you accept every claim about it is true.

But I also think it's an interesting question, especially in monotheism. Why one god and not many?

Simply because it's impossible to have more than one god

God in Islam is a creator of everything
And it's impossible to have two or more creator of everything simultaneously

God is limitless and the existence of two limitless is impossible

Those things that u call Gods are nothing but a creature like u and me they don't have any power from themselves

It's interesting to know that Allah in his book intensely condemns polytheism while he didn't do that towards atheism

 

[ADigitalArtist]

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
...Stephen F Roberts

The man who wrote the quote made a second, refined quote a month or so later, but never really caught on. "We are all atheists, some of us just believe in fewer gods than others" It was a discussion about the quality of evidences for various gods, and the lack of clear or even non-arbitrary reasoning behind rejections of other gods, or whole pantheon, or specific attributes and qualities of a god or gods.

 

[Augustus]

The Concept of Being "an atheist to every god but your own" is sophistry.

A nice rhetorical flourish no doubt, but it is sophistry.

When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours

So he dismisses other people's gods because he has already found the 'One True God'?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The Concept of Being "an atheist to every god but your own" is sophistry.

No, it just means that people believe in one god or set of gods, and reject the others. Theism is always partial and subjective. Even monotheists believe in different versions of "God".

 

[Augustus]

No, it just means that people believe in one god or set of gods, and reject the others. Theism is always partial and subjective. Even monotheists believe in different versions of "God".

Yes, but they have significantly different reasons for doing so.

Most atheists have reached a conclusion about the nature of the world that makes belief in gods impossible. They don't move down a list rejecting gods one by one from a neutral perspective

Monotheists have a completely different worldview premised on the existence of a creator God and subscribe to an exclusive theology. They also don't tend to go through a list of gods rejecting them one by one from a neutral perspective.

Atheism an monotheism are more about a single positive belief than a multitude of negatives.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

no..
the theism is adherence /to any idea of theism, any idea of 'gods'. It's very broad, in meaning. and thats all different types of theism.

'atheism', /being defined by theism/,therefore, because it has to have a non-belief, in all these deities, different type of deity ideas, so forth, has to be very broad in its non-belief.

it is not necessary to accept all god concepts as true, thats ridiculous

As none of that related to or attempted to refute my point as presented, I feel no need to address it. It seems like you are not at all familiar with the concept of epistemology.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Why can't they rationally reject other people's faith premises?

Who said 'they' (we) can't? Is this going to be another thread where you claim to disagree with me and turn around an assert the exact thing I said?

 

[Desert Snake]

The only consistent position is to either accept every god-concept ever devised as true, or to reject them all; with the caveat of a yet undiscovered god concept that can raise itself above the epistemological void..ie.. can be demonstrated.

...Those are two extremely different positions, and would contradict each other, necessarily. Your theory doesn't even make sense