Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Did the One True God Ever Talk to Polytheists
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
If I say this world is caused by several gods, that has issues with logic
And God mentioning other gods is logical? If it is logical then according to your god there are more gods. God makes no distinction between the other gods, as to who possesses this power or that.
ultimate cause means what is the cause of the array of gods
for instance in the theogeny the cause of the greek pantheon is the "chos" (or void)
by ruminating on the nature of the chos, plato paved the way for the rejection of the greek pantheon and providing a philosophical system that in many ways is agreeable to monotheism
and on a further point, it was the lack of philosophy in the theogeny that inspired plato to move on to other things (if you ever go over it, you can see that the gods behave like teenagers with a host of unresolved anger issues)
(BTW - what makes you so sure that polytheism is the forerunner of monotheism and not the default position of monotheism that falls to the wayside?)
because that doesn't explain the cause of such gods
You have come up with this nonsense before. Plato was and remained a pantheist. I gave you references to his works but you seem to have ignored them. You have no respect for the truth.You will say anything to prove the existence of your non-existent god. Putting it politely, you are disingenuous.
careful
you might bust a vein
:splat:
as already mentioned that can be cleared up by linguisticsAnd God mentioning other gods is logical? If it is logical then according to your god there are more gods. God makes no distinction between the other gods, as to who possesses this power or that.
for instance if one ruler says there are other rulers, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all on par in terms of potency
careful
you might bust a vein
:splat:
That answer gives an insight into your intellect. If you have no answer, fudge the issue and, with any luck. your interlocutors will become as confused as you are
as already mentioned that can be cleared up by linguistics
for instance if one ruler says there are other rulers, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all on par in terms of potency
Well. if your god was the most powerful what did he have to fear from other gods. ?
I wasn't aware he had a fear issueas already mentioned that can be cleared up by linguistics
for instance if one ruler says there are other rulers, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all on par in terms of potency
Well. if your god was the most powerful what did he have to fear from other gods. ?
I wasn't aware he had a fear issue
He did. That's why he wanted no other gods put before him. If he was really the big boss, he would have known that he would automatically be first in line to be worshipped.
once again, its not clear how god has these issuesHe did. That's why he wanted no other gods put before him. If he was really the big boss, he would have known that he would automatically be first in line to be worshipped.
for instance if one ruler says there are other rulers, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all on par in terms of potency
No, but they are all rulers. Not subjects mistaken for rulers.
Last edited:
some rulers are subjects of other rulersNo, but they are all rulers. Not subjects mistaken for rulers.
some rulers are in contention with other rulers
some rulers have an absolute position that no other ruler can be equal or above
etc etc
some rulers are subjects of other rulers
some rulers are in contention with other rulers
some rulers have an absolute position that no other ruler can be equal or above
etc etc
But they are all rulers. Hate to repeat myself. I see you're still referring to them as rulers.
it has something to do with understanding how the words god and gods can be differently appliedBut they are all rulers. Hate to repeat myself. I see you're still referring to them as rulers.
Not ok to say all gods including #1 are gods?
no problemNot ok to say all gods including #1 are gods?
just like its okay to say all rulers including #1 are rulers
no problem
just like its okay to say all rulers including #1 are rulers
So all gods including #1 are gods? Does that include U.S. cargo? God is lumped in with U.S. cargo?
not necessarilySo all gods including #1 are gods? Does that include U.S. cargo? God is lumped in with U.S. cargo?
since we have had incredible tough going so far I have purposely kept the scenario simple
as I mentioned earlier in the piece, there is also the possibility of mistaken perception (eg - cargo cult and USA WW2 vehicles) as well as proper perception (something underneath god but above humans eg angels, etc)