Money Isn't a False God

Phat.

All the Jews actually *know* God and that God had no son.

All the Muslims actually *know* God and that God is Allah and that Jesus is his prophet.

All the Buddhists actually *know* God and that God is all of the enlightened ones.

All the Hindus actually *know* God and that God is actually many Gods.

And they don't simply switch.

my belief is t that 1) GOD is not a relativistic concept
2) Jesus Himself is what makes GOD absolute

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

LOL

And so it is YOUR belief, the god you created.

Got it.

But the Jews KNOW that God has no son so your belief or your God cannot be absolute or correct.

AbE:

Phat, once again you are simply marketing your own brand of snake oil and it still has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

Edited by jar, : AbE

jar writes: Phat, once again you are simply marketing your own brand of snake oil and it still has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

We all market our own snake oil. The topic concerns a "false god" and the possibility or suggestion that money be it. I am simply attempting to nail down what is and is not an absolute truth (the right choice) in regards to GOD, God, and god. While you are correct in that I am most definitely marketing Jesus Christ as the only possible way, I have long since concluded that your chosen argument is and always has been contrary to that assertion. (which begs the question of why on earth you claim to represent Christianity---since to you it is entirely an altruistic philosophy of community service--no God required. ) but what "God" the Jews market is irrelevant to my point. The Jews either will wake up and realize that Jesus directly represents their "God" or they won't. That is not for us to determine. And you are simply defending the idea that since humans create their own Gods, relativism is fair game. I would of course argue that you were intellectually deceived.

Straggler, to PD writes: Nobody is suggesting that those who can be said to "worship" money are going to setup their prayer mats outside the local branch of HSBC. In the sense of being directly comparable to a supernatural being worthy of appeasement through worship you are right that the two things are incomparable. But that isn't what people mean when they say money is a false god (IMHO). We quite legitimately and meaningfully use words like "worship" or "idolize" and even "god" to mean things beyond their strict religiously related definition. For example David Beckham is (or at least was) referred to as a football god. He is arguably idolised and worshiped in a genuine sense of the word that has everything to do with a devout following and nothing to do with being a supernatural entity that needs to be appeased. The use of these terms in such a context is kinda metaphorical and kinda literal in a non-religious sense of the terms being used.

Good point. Many of the so-called "gods" that we latch on to are nothing more than football players, Penthouse Centerfolds, or gun and pen collections. And upon observation, no one would suggest a collector actually groveling on the floor and worshiping their collection.

What one may find, however, is that the object of "reverence" or excessive interest often takes up a large percentage of that persons time and focus on a daily basis. A coin collector, for example may not do anything more than spend a great deal of time finding more coins to add to his collection.

And while none of us can really judge the intentions of another, we can draw a corollary between traditional worship in a religious sense versus attention given to a hobby and how much daily time it actually occupies. One spends more time with those (things) which they love.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Phat writes: I would of course argue that you were intellectually deceived.

No Phat. You have never argued, never presented evidence or rational argument to support your position; you do not argue and have never even shown that you know what it even means.

You assert.

I point out the FACT that the members of every other religion know that their position is correct and that you are wrong and so they demonstrate that your position has no more validity than their position. All are simply unsupported assertions including your assertion.

To argue against that fact you need to present evidence or reasoned argumentation to support the validity of your position.

You do not even sell any sizzle much less a steak.