Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Christianity Polytheistic?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 38 of 375 (563794)
06-06-2010 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Straggler
06-06-2010 3:58 PM


Re: Is greek mythology none-theistic ?
This means that there were no gods, religions or forms of theism (poly or otherwise) prior to Christianity doesn't it?
Is that really what you mean?
[...]
If you think about it you will realise that you are committing the no true Scotsman fallacy. No?
But slevesque isn't saying that the attitude he describes is his attitude, just that it makes as much sense as the attitude in the OP.
So what is this definition of god that I should be using and how does it do anything but limit theism in it's entirety to Judeo-Christian concepts of god.
There isn't one unequivocal definition.
It's rather like the word "dragon". We translate various Chinese and Persian words by the English word "dragon", but all they really have in common is being mythical and scaly.
Now, when we translate a Greek pagan using the word "θεός" as saying "god", it's not really clear what he does mean. An entity counted as a θεός if it was recognized as a θεός. It wasn't necessarily genetic --- for example, Arion was the child of two θεός-es, but wasn't a θεός himself. Nor does being a powerful mythical entity necessarily qualify one as a θεός --- Prometheus would been a θεός by that criterion, and is also one of the most sympathetic characters in Greek myth. But he's not a θεός, he's a Titan.
Really, the concept doesn't translate very well. I suppose we use the word "god" for θεός because it comes closer to it than anything else does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Straggler, posted 06-06-2010 3:58 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Straggler, posted 06-07-2010 10:42 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 43 of 375 (563823)
06-06-2010 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by slevesque
06-06-2010 10:38 PM


The Trinity
But I'm not interested in discussing for a simple reason: it won't amount to anything.
Because whenever the concept of trinity is explained with more complexity beyond the basic 1+1+1=3, atheist will discard it as being ''mental gymnastics''. But of course, this simplistic view is a strawman of the actual thing, because the trinity concept isn't simple, it's complex.
You're not kidding.
We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit. The Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, and the Holy Spirit uncreated. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet they are not three eternals but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensible, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty. And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; And yet they are not three Lords but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say; There are three Gods or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is afore or after another; none is greater or less than another. But the whole three persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by slevesque, posted 06-06-2010 10:38 PM slevesque has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 46 of 375 (563840)
06-07-2010 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Straggler
06-06-2010 6:58 PM


Re: Godly Criteria
If I define pencils as being "gods" and choose to worship pencils does that make me a theist?
All hail the mighty pencil!
There is no pencil but The Pencil, and medium is its graphite.
Its devotees fear a time they know as The Coming Of The Great Eraser.
---
But, yes, seriously, if you started worshiping pencils as gods, then I guess they'd be your gods. It's not actually cheating to worship something that really exists. Perhaps a little unconventional.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Straggler, posted 06-06-2010 6:58 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Straggler, posted 06-07-2010 1:57 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 67 of 375 (563989)
06-07-2010 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Straggler
06-07-2010 1:57 PM


Re: Godly Criteria
Actually in the fast paced world of personal theistic belief things have moved on.
I have now defined god to be - me.
* ritually sacrifices the blasphemer with a very sharp pencil *
It's mightier than the sword, you know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Straggler, posted 06-07-2010 1:57 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Straggler, posted 06-07-2010 8:34 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 86 of 375 (564272)
06-09-2010 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Straggler
06-09-2010 11:05 AM


Re: Godly Criteria
The point is that one cannot simultaneously advocate the widespread cultural belief in gods as evidence favouring the theistic position whilst simultaneously asserting that Christianlty is monotheistic because nothing but the narrow Christian version of God qualifies for use of the term god.
But Dr Sing and slevesque have disclaimed this point of view. I don't recall that anyone on this thread has advocated these two contradictory positions.
It is true that some theists have advocated one position, and others have advocated the other --- and some theists have been dumb enough to advocate both, but you're not talking to them.
If you want to say to Dr Sing and slevesque that such a position would be self-contradictory, then I think they'd agree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Straggler, posted 06-09-2010 11:05 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Straggler, posted 06-09-2010 12:35 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 88 of 375 (564280)
06-09-2010 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Straggler
06-09-2010 12:35 PM


Re: Godly Criteria
Slevesque has indisputably previously advocated the theistic position as being supported by widespread cultural belief in gods and has even promoted the idea that belief in god is innate in humans from birth. However in this thread he has taken the position that there are no universal criteria for god concepts and that god is whatever one ascribes that word to.
I'm not yet seeing a contradiction, though I do see one looming in the distance.
Produce some quotes from slevesque and bring him to his knees ... uh ... up from off his knees ... oh, you know what I mean.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Straggler, posted 06-09-2010 12:35 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Straggler, posted 06-09-2010 1:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 106 of 375 (564457)
06-10-2010 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Straggler
06-10-2010 9:57 AM


Re: Equivocations and Contradictions
So what are the recognisable criteria for objectively identifying god concepts regardless of language or culture?
Well surely being an object of worship is part of it.
And this, I think, rules Satan out as a god of the Christians.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 9:57 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 4:55 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 109 of 375 (564460)
06-10-2010 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Straggler
06-10-2010 4:48 PM


Re: Thanks
So Satan is excluded from the general concept of god because the specific Christian concept of god won't allow it.
Well yes.
Satan is a figure in Christian mythology, which does not recognize him as a god.
Just as Prometheus is a figure in Greek mythology, which did not recognize him as a god; so he isn't a god, he's a Titan, because the Greeks said so.
The people who make the myths get the last word on this. You might as well ask whether Sherlock Holmes was really a detective. Well, since he exists only within a fictional canon in which he is a detective, then the answer is "yes". Sir Arthur Conan Doyle could not have been wrong about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 4:48 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 5:10 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 115 of 375 (564471)
06-10-2010 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Straggler
06-10-2010 5:10 PM


Re: Thanks
If you were writing a book about theism and belief in gods (more fool you) how would you recognise such concepts in different cultures? By them telling you?
I suppose one would have to. If you were writing a similar book, would you call Angra Mainyu a god of the Zoroastrians? Or Prometheus a god of the Greeks? Would you call Ymir a Norse god, even though the Prose Edda explicitly states:
By no means do we acknowledge him [i.e. Ymir] God; he was evil and all his kindred: we call them Rime-Giants.
Bear in mind that most such cultures won't use the term "god" at all. In fact anthropologically studied primitive cultures in many cases have no actual word for the supernatural so intertwined with observed phenomenon are their theistic beliefs. Yet we still manage to recognise their belief in that which we call "gods" all the same.
Some specific examples would be nice, otherwise I hardly know how to begin to discuss this.
Or are you denying that such concepts can be recognised unless actually specified by those who believe in them?
I don't see how people can be said to believe in gods as such unless they have some sort of concept of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 5:10 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 8:31 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 117 of 375 (564504)
06-10-2010 7:04 PM


Prometheus
Modulous has pointed out to me that Aeschylus' Prometheus Bound refers to Prometheus as a god. So I withdraw him as an example.

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 133 of 375 (564561)
06-10-2010 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Straggler
06-10-2010 8:31 PM


Re: Thanks
The Semang Hunter Gathers as discussed in the book I am currently reading The Evolution of God by Robert Wright are an example of a culture that fuses the concept of the supernatural with the observed without any form of verbal differentiation.
I can't find out much about them, but their religious ideas seem conventional enough from what I can find out.
Can we not all broadly recognise such concepts based on common criteria or characteristics?
Apparently not, since you think that Satan is a deity and no-one else does.
If you consider the term god without recourse to any particular religion what do you think of?
I think of Wittgenstein's discussion of the meaning of the word "game".
Yes - Each religion will impose it's own qualifications and subtleties. But so what? Satan is a god in every way that is used to define gods in every objective use of the term.
Not necessarily. For example it would be an objective criterion to require that a "god" should be an object of veneration and worship.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Straggler, posted 06-10-2010 8:31 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Straggler, posted 06-11-2010 6:41 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 139 of 375 (564623)
06-11-2010 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Straggler
06-11-2010 6:41 AM


Re: Thanks
Satan is the "object of veneration and worship".
Yes, but not by Christians. Satanists can't introduce Satan into the Christian pantheon by worshiping him any more than you can introduce pencils into the Christian pantheon by worshiping them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Straggler, posted 06-11-2010 6:41 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Straggler, posted 06-11-2010 12:09 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 165 of 375 (564719)
06-12-2010 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Straggler
06-11-2010 2:22 PM


Re: Specifics and
If Christians will objectively and religion-independently consider Loki (for example) as a god concept why won't they (with the same objective hat on) accept Satan as a god concept?
And they would accept pencils as the god-concept of pencil-worshipers. But that doesn't make Christians polytheistic, even though Christians believe in the existence of pencils.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Straggler, posted 06-11-2010 2:22 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Straggler, posted 06-12-2010 1:22 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 171 of 375 (564726)
06-12-2010 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by Straggler
06-11-2010 12:09 PM


Re: Thanks
We can recognise theism and god concepts in vastly diverse cultures, ancient and modern ...
Speak for everyone except yourself.
How do we do this?
Well, how do you do this?
Present some objective definition for identifying a god. Then we'll see if it include the tooth fairy, ghosts, gravity, natural selection, the river Ganges, and funny-shaped rocks.
Of course Christians are going to rebrand the term god to uphold their own self proclaimed assertions of monotheism. But to anyone not applying the specific Christian definition, including Christians when they are discussing theism more objectively, biblical Christianity is polytheistic. Not monotheistic.
When I discuss theism objectively, I would say that pencils are the gods of pencil-worshipers. And I believe in the existence of pencils. But that doesn't make me a polytheist, because pencils are not my gods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Straggler, posted 06-11-2010 12:09 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Straggler, posted 06-12-2010 1:43 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 173 of 375 (564740)
06-12-2010 3:39 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by Straggler
06-12-2010 1:43 AM


Theology
Are you suggesting we haven't identified god concepts in different cultures?
I'm suggesting that you do it differently from everyone else.
A newly discovered culture that believes in a horned fiery supernatural entity which tortures wicked people in a lake of fire for all eternity after they die would probably would be classed as theistic and said entity as a "god". No?
That would depend on their attitude to him. Consider the following scenario.
On examination, you find that they believe in a class of beings known collectively as the vespuna. There is the vespu Kathru, who made the stars and guides fishermen; there is the vesp Hanr-s-moqs, who brings the harvest and makes women fruitful; there is the vesp Duhr, who is invoked when brewing the qersu, an alcoholic drink consumed ritually at festivals; there is the vespu Doghru, who brings luck in the hunt ... and so forth.
You then ask them about this horned being (whom we shall call Qaghru). Is he one of the vespuna? you ask them. No, not at all, they reply, deeply shocked. After they have purified your impious mouth with the sacred salt and the ritual of yashn, they explain that Qaghru is by no means a vespu, but rather the chief enemy of the vespuna. Well what is he then? you ask. He is the leader of the qaghruna, they reply. Who are the qaghruna? you ask Well, they say, besides Qaghru, there's the qaghru Meknu, who blights the crops; the qaghr Gint, who causes cot-death, jealous of those who bear children; the qaghru Yentu, who brings nightmares ... and so on.
So, what is the best English translation of (a) vespuna and (b) qaghruna? Do these people believe in (a) gods and (b) more gods --- or do they believe in (a) gods and (b) devils?
(For bonus points, what is their word for "goddesses"?)
Well what would you say is common to all the concepts that we do label as "god" ...
Well, what would you say is common to all the concepts that we label as "a game"?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Straggler, posted 06-12-2010 1:43 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Straggler, posted 06-13-2010 3:13 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024