Comparative Discussion and Debate of Christianity and Other religions.

philologos

The Christian God implies monotheism. If monotheism is not a clause of the belief in God then the God as described by Christianity doesn't exist as it's not a monotheistic God, and thus by conclusion cannot exist as the God of Christianity. Either the God of Christianity is the only God or it does not exist at all as the God of Christianity

Nevyn

Jakkass wrote: »

The Christian God implies monotheism. If monotheism is not a clause of the belief in God then the God as described by Christianity doesn't exist as it's not a monotheistic God, and thus by conclusion cannot exist as the God of Christianity. Either the God of Christianity is the only God or it does not exist at all as the God of Christianity

Or the christian god is imperfect but has been putting up a good front.

"Pay no attention to that manthose gods behind the curtain
I am I AM The Great And Powerful Wiz god.

philologos

So God has being telling us fibs? Thaedydal seriously you'd have to throw out the Bible if we really thought that, we wouldn't be able to verify which bits were accurate and which bits were false. The text that has influenced Western civilization the most, thrown out the window. It's just the confusion of how you can continue to entertain the idea of the God of Christianity existing, yet being a chronic liar?

hiorta

According to the New Testament, the Christian God is not a solo god.

Regarding Jesus, the NT states that Jesus was the son of Joseph, with both being descended from the House of David. Agree?

Next we have Christ who, it is stated, was the hybrid result of an impossible sexual union between a 'holy' ghost (how this is determined is not explained) and a Jewish virgin named Mary. OK so far?

Therefore Jesus and 'christ' are two separate and distinct individuals, claimed by the NT to be gods and were being carried in Mary's womb simultaneously.

But Mary must have been carrying triplets, because a further child is said to have been ordered by God to be named Emmanuel. Who would dare ignore such a command?

Jesus and 'christ' seem to have mysteriously become only one person, while Emmanuel disappeared from the scene very quickly - or perhaps was still born - although this seems unlikely, given the background.

Theologians of all kinds have consistently glossed over this multiple contradiction, seemingly unable to enlighten their followers, but instead, claiming to believe Monotheism.

SkepticOne

kiffer wrote: »

Not so much... You could agree that he exists but disagree about his nature. The whole "only god" thing could just be propaganda...

If multiple gods exist then the christian god is one of many regardless of what monotheists claim.

Unfortunately he would not be the christian god then.

One of the central characteristics of the christian god is that he is the only god. If you add him to a load of other god then either he is not the christian god as was thought or the other gods aren't really gods. It is more a matter of definition than of empirical fact. Being the only god is what makes the christian god the christian god. If he were one god among many he would not be recognised as god (or a god) by christians and therefore would not be the christian god.

Nevyn

Jakkass wrote: »

Are gods which are imperfect gods at all?

In my estimation yes.

Jakkass wrote: »

How does one determine that there are many rather than one?

By interacting with them or being open to that possibility.

Jakkass wrote: »

What does that involve? I do believe that magic can occur, however I would consider it harmful rather than positive in any sense of the word, and moreover dangerous for those who practice it. Then again that's the Christian bias I guess.

Magic is the Science and Art of causing change to occur in conformity with
the Will.

Jakkass wrote: »

"Being gods to other people" doesn't neccitate that they must also exist. I personally think this comes from a misreading of what God is trying to tell people, and there is indeed truth in just about all religions, however I would see Christianity to be the ultimate truth.

So those who follow and worship gods other then the christian gods just got the wrong end of the stick somewhere along the line ?
or have been fooled by "the Adversary" and his dress up box ?

Jakkass wrote: »

By communication, I mean that God speaks through life experiences, and by things happening in your life He can guide you a certain way. I know this is certainly true of me. For some it comes differently, through visions amongst other things. I also think that when I read the Bible and something stands out in particular, that is also a means of divine communication.

I have the same happen, synchronicity, coincidences and the same when reading certain books and tracts. But I doubt very much it is the christain god trying to use the Charge of the Star Goddess to have a word.

Jakkass wrote: »

How is it? Is the world truly flat or is it round? I think it is true to say that it is round. Some may disagree with me but they are deviating from the truth.

Actually it's ovoid due to the bugle in the tectonics plates around the equator rather then 'round' or perfectly spherical.

Jakkass wrote: »

The use of the g, rather than G is rather important. Throughout the history of the State of Israel (Biblical) God came down rather harshly on people for holding other concepts of god besides Him alone. If I deemed it acceptable to hold other concepts of god beside God Himself, then I would be nullifying that God Himself was true.

But other gods are mentioned in the bible and the judaic god did pit himself against them.

Jakkass wrote: »

Due to my experiences,

Which are personal and there for subjective

Jakkass wrote: »

due to how reality and how people live seems to reinforce the concept of God being as well as the Biblical scriptures being confirmed and reinforced in other aspects such as historicity and archaeology.

Well if you are surrounded in your life by other christains that will be the case.

Jakkass wrote: »

It makes sense to me, but there is still much I am yet to understand. People grow in faith, it doesn't come of immediate effect always.

If christain spirituality fills your cup, means that you are living a good life
and are growing in understanding then I would say it is rigth for you and you are blessed but again it's not for me.

Jakkass wrote: »

It cannot be a God as it is described if one is to admit the existence of others.

Ever think that the description is flawed or was mistranslated or was just spun that way ?

Jakkass wrote: »

So if one of His followers needs help you would pray to a God that you don't particularly adopt?

I don't see any problem with addressing him and asking him to look after one of his own, it's his duty after all, is it not ?

If I light a candle for someone and send good wishes and nudge the universe on the behalf of someone who is christian ( with their permission ) and the christian god pays heed, what harm in that ?

Jakkass wrote: »

Surely you could recommend a prayer group or something? This is just a confusing notion.

I have bought mass cards.
I have suggested to people who are christian that they pray in thier own way
or if they need guidance or an ear to go to their priest/rev/pastor.
I have dropped into a church and lit a candle on their behalf.

What is so confusing about that ?

Jakkass wrote: »

Anyhow, thanks for entertaining yet another response. I'm just curious about how this understanding works that is all

Thats part of the point of this forum

Nevyn

Jakkass wrote: »

So God has being telling us fibs? Thaedydal seriously you'd have to throw out the Bible if we really thought that, we wouldn't be able to verify which bits were accurate and which bits were false. The text that has influenced Western civilization the most, thrown out the window. It's just the confusion of how you can continue to entertain the idea of the God of Christianity existing, yet being a chronic liar?

Have you meet/heard of Loki ?

The bible is a flawed collection of books tbh which have been edited and translated to push an agenda.

SkepticOne

hiorta wrote: »

According to the New Testament, the Christian God is not a solo god.

Regarding Jesus, the NT states that Jesus was the son of Joseph, with both being descended from the House of David. Agree?

Next we have Christ who, it is stated, was the hybrid result of an impossible sexual union between a 'holy' ghost (how this is determined is not explained) and a Jewish virgin named Mary. OK so far?

Therefore Jesus and 'christ' are two separate and distinct individuals, claimed by the NT to be gods and were being carried in Mary's womb simultaneously.

But Mary must have been carrying triplets, because a further child is said to have been ordered by God to be named Emmanuel. Who would dare ignore such a command?

Jesus and 'christ' seem to have mysteriously become only one person, while Emmanuel disappeared from the scene very quickly - or perhaps was still born - although this seems unlikely, given the background.

Theologians of all kinds have consistently glossed over this multiple contradiction, seemingly unable to enlighten their followers, but instead, claiming to believe Monotheism.

Despite this christianity is a monotheistic religion. It may not make total sense but there you are. Christians don't merely claim to believe in one and only god, they actually believe this.

What it means is that you can't mix the christian god in with other gods without either a) demoting the other gods to non-god status or b) changing the christian god to a non-christian god.

kiffer

SkepticOne wrote: »

What it means is that you can't mix the christian god in with other gods without either a) demoting the other gods to non-god status or b) changing the christian god to a non-christian god.

Christians claim that Yahweh, the god of the Christians and Jews, is the only god.
The nature of Yahweh can be different to the nature that his believers claim that he has. Even if they are wrong about his nature he would still be their god.

Is Yahweh omnipresent? No. or at least he can choose not to be, after all he is described as enjoying walking in the cool of the evening in the garden of Eden... he's described as leaving the garden...

Can he cause lies and the spread of untruths? Yes.

1 Kings 22 wrote:

22:19 And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
22:20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.
22:21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him.
22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persude him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
22:23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

and

2 Thessalonians wrote:

2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie

It is not outside God's nature to cause people to believe things which are less than completely true.
I'm happy to say that he could happily allow his followers to believe he was the only god, even if this was not the case.
It's a great bit of propaganda...

Nevyn

SkepticOne wrote: »

If we are talking about the Christian god then in order to be the Christian god he must be the only god. If you acknowledge this god then you are denying the other gods.

Nope, my truth is that there are many gods.
Some have no impact on me and my life what so ever and thier 'rules' or 'spin'
do not apply to me. Some have some impact on me and my life and others are
heavily invovled.

There are other creation myths then the christian one.

philologos

The issue is that the God of Christianity cannot be the God of Christianity unless it's the same God that is described in the Biblical scriptures. It would be a different god.

kiffer

Jakkass wrote: »

The issue is that the God of Christianity cannot be the God of Christianity unless it's the same God that is described in the Biblical scriptures. It would be a different god.

Why not?
When you were a child your parents knew everything... or so you thought.
When you grew up you realise that they don't.
They are still your parents.
You were wrong about there nature.

philologos

That's based on the assumption that every child thinks their parents know best however.

Christian divine revelation is a lot different from a child making assumptions about ones parents. From the early patriarchs right down to the modern day, peoples experiences have been grouped together in the Biblical text, that's how we get our measure of a continuous relationship between the Lord and humanity.

We know what we know of God from our own experiences and from the experiences of others as noted in the Bible. If this is false it isn't the same God.

kiffer

Jakkass wrote: »

That's based on the assumption that every child thinks their parents know best however.

Not every child thinks that...
and not everyone thinks there is only one god... or any gods at all.

Christian divine revelation is a lot different from a child making assumptions about ones parents.

Is it? It probably is fairly different, it's a simple analogue...
Who's Revelation is more valid... the Pagan's or the Christian's?

From the early patriarchs right down to the modern day, peoples experiences have been grouped together in the Biblical text, that's how we get our measure of a continuous relationship between the Lord and humanity.

This relationship is not static, it is dynamic and opinions on the nature of god have changed over time.

We know what we know of God from our own experiences and from the experiences of others as noted in the Bible. If this is false it isn't the same God.

So are you saying that if you are incorrect about any aspect of God then everything about him must be different?

Nerin

Jakkass wrote: »

The issue is that the God of Christianity cannot be the God of Christianity unless it's the same God that is described in the Biblical scriptures. It would be a different god.

this is kinda going around in circles. Jakkass, i think everyone gets that you believe in christianity, and that you see no wriggle room in the nature of your god.
have a little understanding that not everyone believes/follows those teachings to the letter.
christians have used the argument that other gods were lying to their followers and were really demons etc. i think the others are using the same argument.
(and at least everyone in the debate has been civil. which i thank ye for)

either way, this thread ,if it continues in such a circular motion, might be better suited to christianity forum. don't be shocked if it moves over there.
anyone with a problem can pm me, if ye want it to stay here, i dont mind either way. just be prepared to wait for a reply, ive been having connection issues.
Thanks

philologos

I'm quite aware that not everyone believes in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and I'm quite happy to accept that, it's just that there is an issue with this notion, that this God which is clearly monotheistic, can be a part of a panthenon of many gods.

As for Christians and considering that other gods have been formed from Satan and so on, I think I would have to consider that slightly more, and this is perhaps a good place to start in a new path of discussion on this. However the question would generally come down to how can I assess Christianity above and beyond other faiths as being inherently true, and I think this is the reasoning behind it. Part of this is seeing Biblical claims happening in the real world, and part of this is in Christian apologetics or seeing how the Bible can be explained or substantiated in the real world. Also, this question would also pertain to how other people can verify the existence of whatever life force they follow in the real world.

Thanks for moving it on to a new subject, I admit it was getting a touch tedious discussing monotheism vs polytheism.

Nevyn

Why do you keep using the term pantheon when no one else has ?

I do not and would not include the christain god in any pantheon, it's very much a case of one of these gods is doing thier own thing.

SkepticOne

Thaedydal wrote: »

Why do you keep using the term pantheon when no one else has ?.

I also used the term. What I meant was the set of entities regarded as gods.

The Christian god is a supreme, omni-potent being. Any other conception of this god (for example, the idea that god is the god over the Christian people but not other peoples but not all powerful) would not be recognised as god by Christians and therefore would not be the Christian god.

Note that I'm not saying the Christian view is more "correct" than any other. I don't.

PDN

Nerin wrote: »

either way, this thread ,if it continues in such a circular motion, might be better suited to christianity forum. don't be shocked if it moves over there.

And don't be shocked if we throw it back over the fence to you again.

Nevyn

Pantheon:All the gods of a people considered as a group.

There is no one all encompassing pantheon of gods.
There are several very seperate pantheons of different peoples.

Is there are Judaic pantheon ?

Well that I guess would depend on the nature of gods and if a person believes
that they can be created or changed or split off. IF they can be then it could be said that JVH, Allah, I am who I am, the holy spirit/ghost, god the father and Jesus

But personally I don't view it in that way at all.
Same facets of the same god, sure.
Same god in in many roles, most likely but not a pantheon.

hairyheretic

Thaedydal wrote: »

Is there are Judaic pantheon ?

I seem to recall reading somewhere about very early Jewish texts as mentioning a Goddess as well as their God, but don't ask me for where I remember it from.

Anyone else ever come across that?

Nevyn

Binah ?

hairyheretic

I couldn't give you a name I'm afraid. It's just a random bit of trivia floating at the back of my mind

Something I probably came across years ago.

philologos

Thaedydal, I was more referring to a personal panthenon of gods that you seem to have, just to clarify.

Nevyn

Jakkass wrote: »

Thaedydal, I was more referring to a personal panthenon of gods that you seem to have, just to clarify.

I am personally not a people there for I do not have a personal pantheon.
The idea of a personal pantheon is frankly an oxymoron.

I do have gods with whom I interact and deal with but they are an unusual group and thankfully none of them are a jealous god.

philologos

Thaedydal wrote: »

I do have gods with whom I interact and deal with but they are an unusual group and thankfully none of them are a jealous god.

I'm not here to make attacks at other peoples beliefs but simply to seek some refutations for any misunderstandings of this form of spirituality I may have.

As for the God being jealous, yes that's true, but He remains faithful to those who love Him for thousands of generations, and listen to all those who cry out for His name no matter of race, creed, gender, and so on. That's something I can be thankful for.