Discussion:
Monotheism - One God
(too old to reply)
b***@gmail.com
2015-03-19 21:57:56 UTC
Permalink
Monotheism - One God


The religion of Islam is based on one core belief, that there is no god worthy of worship but Allah. When a person embraces Islam or a Muslim wants to renew or confirm his or her faith, they profess their belief that there is no god worthy of worship but Allah and that Muhammad is His final messenger. Ashadu an la ill laha il Allah wa Ashadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah, Saying these words, the Testimony of Faith, is the first of five pillars or foundations of the religion of Islam. Belief in God is the first of six pillars of faith.[1]

Muslims believe that there is only One God. He alone is the Sustainer and Creator of the universe. He is without partners, children, or associates. He is the Most Merciful, the Most Wise, and the Most Just. He is the all hearer, all seer, and the all knowing. He is the First , He is the Last.

"Say (O Muhammad), He is Allah, (the) One. Allah-us-Samad (The Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, He neither eats nor drinks). He begets not, nor was He begotten; And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him." (Quran 112)

"He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. How can He have children when He has no wife? He created all things and He is the All-Knower of everything. Such is Allah, your Lord! La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), the Creator of all things. So worship Him (Alone), and He is the Trustee, Disposer of affairs, Guardian, over all things. No vision can grasp Him, but His Grasp is over all vision. He is the Most Subtle and Courteous, Well- Acquainted with all things." (Quran 6:101-103)

This belief is sometimes called Monotheism which is derived from the Greek words 'monos' meaning only and 'theos' meaning god. It is a relatively new word in the English language and it is used to denote a supreme being Who is all-powerful, the One who is responsible for life, the One who rewards or punishes. Monotheism is directly opposed to Polytheism, which is belief in more than one god, and to Atheism, a disbelief in all deities.

If we were to take into consideration the general meaning of the word 'monotheism' Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Zoroastrianism, and some Hindu philosophies could all be included. However it is, more commonplace to refer to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as the three monotheistic religions and group them together; nonetheless, there are glaring differences between Christianity and Islam.

The concept of a trinity inherent in most Christian denominations ostensibly includes aspects of plurality. The belief that one God is some how three divinities (father, son, and holy spirit) contradicts the concept of Monotheism inherent in Islam, where the Oneness of God is unquestionable. Some Christian groups, including those known as Unitarians believe that God is One and cannot be God and human at the same time. They take the words of Jesus in John 17:3, "the One True God" literally. However, the vast majority of Christians do not share this belief.

In the religion of Islam belief in One God, without partners or associates is essential. It is the focal point of the religion and it is the essence of the Quran. The Quran calls on humankind to worship God alone and to give up worshipping false gods or associates. The Quran urges us to look at the wonders of creation and understand God's greatness and power, and it speaks directly of His names, attributes, and actions. The Quran commands us to reject anything that is worshipped instead of, or along with God.

"And I (God) created not the jinns and humankind except they should worship Me (Alone)." (Quran 51:56)

Islam is often referred to as pure monotheism. It is not adulterated with strange concepts or superstitions. Belief in One God entails certainty. Muslims worship God alone, He has no partners, associates, or helpers. Worship is directed solely to God, for He is the only One worthy of worship. There is nothing greater than God Alone.

"Praise and thanks be to God, and peace be on His slaves whom He has chosen (for His Message)! Is God better, or (all) that you ascribe as partners (to Him)?" (Of course, God is Better)

Is not He (better than your gods) Who created the heavens and the earth, and sends down for you water (rain) from the sky, whereby We cause to grow wonderful gardens full of beauty and delight? It is not in your ability to cause the growth of their trees. Is there any god with God? Nay, but they are a people who ascribe equals (to Him)!

Is not He (better than your gods) Who has made the earth as a fixed abode, and has placed rivers in its midst, and has placed firm mountains therein, and has set a barrier between the two seas (of salt and sweet water).Is there any god with God? Nay, but most of them know not.

Is not He (better than your gods) Who responds to the distressed one, when he calls Him, and Who removes the evil, and makes you inheritors of the earth, generations after generations. Is there any god with God? Little is that you remember!

Is not He (better than your gods) Who guides you in the darkness of the land and the sea, and Who sends the winds as heralds of glad tidings, going before His Mercy (rain)? Is there any god with God? High Exalted be God above all that they associate as partners (to Him)!

Is not He (better than your so-called gods) Who originates creation, and shall thereafter repeat it, and Who provides for you from heaven and earth? Is there any god with God? Say, "Bring forth your proofs, if you are truthful." (Quran 27:59-64)

http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/3298/
Jim_Higgins
2015-03-19 22:58:04 UTC
Permalink
On 3/19/15 5:57 PM, ***@gmail.com wrote:

Islam-the religion of murder
--
"Guarded by a tired cohort of Roman Heavy Infantry"
David Moorman
2015-03-20 04:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Joanna Shuttleworth
2015-03-20 08:10:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
gtr
2015-03-20 15:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
Sound like party politics to me.
David Moorman
2015-03-21 03:34:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
Sound like party politics to me.
Apt description, gtr.
D.F. Manno
2015-03-20 19:47:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
Christianity will just have to catch up then.
--
D.F. Manno | ***@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
Savageduck
2015-03-21 01:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by D.F. Manno
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
Christianity will just have to catch up then.
No need. All three of the religions following the Judeo-Christian-Islam
god have more than enough blood on their hands, historically and in
recent times.
...and they aren't particularly picky when it comes to deciding just
who will shed that blood.

There is no real tolerance and/or acceptance of any one of those great
religions by any of the other members of the club led by the one CEO;
Yahweh-God(the trilogy)-Allah.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
D.F. Manno
2015-03-21 21:55:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Savageduck
Post by D.F. Manno
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
Christianity will just have to catch up then.
No need. All three of the religions following the Judeo-Christian-Islam
god have more than enough blood on their hands, historically and in
recent times.
...and they aren't particularly picky when it comes to deciding just
who will shed that blood.
There is no real tolerance and/or acceptance of any one of those great
religions by any of the other members of the club led by the one CEO;
Yahweh-God(the trilogy)-Allah.
Whoosh!
--
D.F. Manno | ***@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
David Moorman
2015-03-21 03:33:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.

However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Savageduck
2015-03-21 04:27:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
I never thought of the Inquisition, the Crusades, the pogroms across
Europe, witch trials with hangings & burnings, and the ethnic cleansing
in the Balkans as particularly goofy Christian behaviour.
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
...and they all kill, oppress, exploit, and control, in the name of
that manmade population control device. That "god" is no better than a
much crueler cattle prod.
--
Regards,

Savageduck
gtr
2015-03-21 06:17:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Savageduck
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
I never thought of the Inquisition, the Crusades, the pogroms across
Europe, witch trials with hangings & burnings, and the ethnic cleansing
in the Balkans as particularly goofy Christian behaviour.
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
...and they all kill, oppress, exploit, and control, in the name of
that manmade population control device. That "god" is no better than a
much crueler cattle prod.
They're all doing a great job ensuring that all this horseshit should
die and be blown away by a strong breeze over the next 30-40 years.
Huge
2015-03-21 09:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 7th day of Discord in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem. If you have a problem with my attitude,
that's your problem.
gtr
2015-03-21 16:05:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
Savageduck
2015-03-21 16:13:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
Thathss dithspicable!!
--
Regards,

Savageduck
Warren Oates
2015-03-21 17:54:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Savageduck
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
Thathss dithspicable!!
I'll put my trutht in Daffy before Allah or Yahwoo. Pork isn't a Pig?
Bugs isn't a Bunny? What about Rudolph?
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner
gtr
2015-03-21 18:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warren Oates
Post by Savageduck
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
Post by Joanna Shuttleworth
Post by David Moorman
Post by b***@gmail.com
Monotheism - One God
Allah = God = Jehovah. One God, three religions, with most of their
adherents believing that *their* religion is the one true faith,
following the one, true God. It's all incredibly human.
Not so. Asserting the equivalence of two human and one sub-human
religions is an error.
I know, I know, but we must treat Christians with respect, goofy as
they can be.
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
Thathss dithspicable!!
I'll put my trutht in Daffy before Allah or Yahwoo. Pork isn't a Pig?
Bugs isn't a Bunny? What about Rudolph?
There's many things that Rudolph isn't. But if one of you fuckers
tries to spread doubts about the Easter Bunny,
you'll see me get MAD!
Michelle Steiner
2015-03-21 23:38:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
He is a drake.
Jamie Kahn Genet
2015-03-22 07:24:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michelle Steiner
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
He is a drake.
Ha :-D
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
gtr
2015-03-22 16:30:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michelle Steiner
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
He is a drake.
You gotta love the drake!
Michelle Steiner
2015-03-23 00:35:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by Michelle Steiner
Post by gtr
Post by Huge
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
Since they do not exist, they aren't anything, deity or otherwise.
Next you'll be saying that Daffy Duck isn't a duck!
He is a drake.
You gotta love the drake!
I love Drake's Yankee Doodles; too bad they're not available here.
Peter James
2015-03-22 07:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
If they exist. If not, they can hardly be different to any number
(zero) of things that are not.
I do hope you're not including Middle Earth in that wild statement. I
mean, I'm all for free speech but if the holy J R Tolkien is included in
your statement you've gone too far.

Peter
--
It is necessary for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph.

Attributed to Edmund Burke 1729 - 1797
dorayme
2015-03-22 19:59:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter James
Post by David Moorman
However, God, Allah, and Jehovah are the same deity.
If they exist. If not, they can hardly be different to any number
(zero) of things that are not.
I do hope you're not including Middle Earth in that wild statement. I
mean, I'm all for free speech but if the holy J R Tolkien is included in
your statement you've gone too far.
There is a controversial theory that says that all possible things are
in their own worlds and that from the point of view of those worlds,
they all exist alright. The other side of this coin is that we are
mere possibilities from their point of view. Only *logical*
impossibilities are excluded. So, if gods are possible, I would be
wrong.

As it happens, I believe that the Christian god, an allegedly
omniscient being, is logically impossible. Not sure about other gods.
I think the Greek and Roman ones might be possible, or at least some
of them. And certainly some of the monsters that I came across in
Latin in a primary reader called Septimus (the name of a schoolboy who
has adventures in the underworld).
--
dorayme
gtr
2015-03-22 20:58:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by dorayme
There is a controversial theory that says that all possible things are
in their own worlds and that from the point of view of those worlds,
they all exist alright. The other side of this coin is that we are
mere possibilities from their point of view. Only *logical*
impossibilities are excluded.
The idea that logic must be a structural demand of a religious *faith*,
has never been a theory I've heard stated with much enthusiasm.
Post by dorayme
So, if gods are possible, I would be wrong.
As it happens, I believe that the Christian god, an allegedly
omniscient being, is logically impossible.
I once heard a radio drama in which a man climbed to a mountain top to
shout to God and lo and beholde he answered. He began, "I don't
understand how you can let criminals live and take children away in
horrible events and deseases." God answered, "That's right you don't
understand, because as a mortal you don't have the capacity to
understand the workings of the mind of God."

He went on with this correlary: The absolute smartest dog in the world
can never be trained over the course of his entire life to play a
simple game of blackjack. He doesn't have the mental capacity to learn
it or play it. Similarly there is a range of constructs that the tiny
little brains of humans can never understand, not even Einstein's or
Newton's nor anyone yet to be born.

So it's not so much "illogical", these gods and their angels, so much
as it is outside our range of understanding. We have to simply take it
on faith that no demonstration of their works or existence will ever
exist except in fairy tales and biblical writings whose intent it is to
supply "evidence" of their existance by creating a bunch of bogus
stories.

If the manifestations of God are all about us saving the one child out
of 8 that doesn't die in a boating accident, why isn't this so rarely
seen as the work of an evil diety that took the other seven? "It was a
miracle." What a lame-ass miracle! Back in yonder days we had some
real miracles, scores of sages turning water to wine, parting the
waters, pulling down mighty columns, sounding horns that tumbled walls.
Then suddenly 1900 years of bupkis. What's up with that? See how
logic doesn't help us so much?
Post by dorayme
Not sure about other gods.
I think the Greek and Roman ones might be possible, or at least some
of them. And certainly some of the monsters that I came across in
Latin in a primary reader called Septimus (the name of a schoolboy who
has adventures in the underworld).
Warren Oates
2015-03-22 21:25:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
What's up with that? See how
logic doesn't help us so much?
My cat can play blackjack. She's better at euchre, though.
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner
gtr
2015-03-22 21:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warren Oates
What's up with that? See how logic doesn't help us so much?
My cat can play blackjack. She's better at euchre, though.
I think you may be thinking of SLAPjack. Blackjack is a different game.
Michelle Steiner
2015-03-23 00:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warren Oates
Post by gtr
What's up with that? See how
logic doesn't help us so much?
My cat can play blackjack. She's better at euchre, though.
My cat plays duplicate bridge; he needs only 15.38 master points to
become a Life Master.
Tim Streater
2015-03-22 22:23:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
There is a controversial theory that says that all possible things are
in their own worlds and that from the point of view of those worlds,
they all exist alright. The other side of this coin is that we are
mere possibilities from their point of view. Only *logical*
impossibilities are excluded.
The idea that logic must be a structural demand of a religious *faith*,
has never been a theory I've heard stated with much enthusiasm.
Post by dorayme
So, if gods are possible, I would be wrong.
As it happens, I believe that the Christian god, an allegedly
omniscient being, is logically impossible.
I once heard a radio drama in which a man climbed to a mountain top to
shout to God and lo and beholde he answered. He began, "I don't
understand how you can let criminals live and take children away in
horrible events and deseases." God answered, "That's right you don't
understand, because as a mortal you don't have the capacity to
understand the workings of the mind of God."
He went on with this correlary: The absolute smartest dog in the world
can never be trained over the course of his entire life to play a
simple game of blackjack. He doesn't have the mental capacity to learn
it or play it.
Or even to understand the concept. Equally, if the dog swishes its tail
and down crashes the Ming vase, the notion that one piece of stuff (the
vase) is somehow different from another piece of stuff (a chair) is
entirely beyond it.

Humanity is not able to tell whether it is in the same position as the
dog, simply at a higher level.

I sometimes wonder if there is a God who, having used magic to create
the world around us, is now forced by our constant experimenting and
poking, at places like CERN, to keep one step ahead of us by having to
invent "laws" of nature that allow us humans to make sense of it all.
--
"People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility
with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy
Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc
dorayme
2015-03-23 10:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
There is a controversial theory that says that all possible things are
in their own worlds and that from the point of view of those worlds,
they all exist alright. The other side of this coin is that we are
mere possibilities from their point of view. Only *logical*
impossibilities are excluded.
The idea that logic must be a structural demand of a religious *faith*,
has never been a theory I've heard stated with much enthusiasm.
What religious person would happily allow that their belief systems
contains a logical contradiction? People who have faith presumably
have faith in that something is the case, I cannot imagine a serious
religious person easily admitting this proposition is either self
contradictory or that it contradicts something else they agree is
true. So, while you might not have heard of this as some theory, it is
not hard to appreciate it being true. To that extent, it is as much a
structural demand as any belief.
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
So, if gods are possible, I would be wrong.
As it happens, I believe that the Christian god, an allegedly
omniscient being, is logically impossible.
I once heard a radio drama in which a man climbed to a mountain top to
shout to God and lo and beholde he answered. He began, "I don't
understand how you can let criminals live and take children away in
horrible events and deseases." God answered, "That's right you don't
understand, because as a mortal you don't have the capacity to
understand the workings of the mind of God."
He went on with this correlary: The absolute smartest dog in the world
can never be trained over the course of his entire life to play a
simple game of blackjack. He doesn't have the mental capacity to learn
it or play it. Similarly there is a range of constructs that the tiny
little brains of humans can never understand, not even Einstein's or
Newton's nor anyone yet to be born.
So it's not so much "illogical", these gods and their angels, so much
as it is outside our range of understanding. We have to simply take it
on faith that no demonstration of their works or existence will ever
exist except in fairy tales and biblical writings whose intent it is to
supply "evidence" of their existance by creating a bunch of bogus
stories.
Normally, atheists do not charge theists with contradiction, rather
they are accused of believing things which are highly unlikely. Saying
stuff about things being beyond our understanding to ward off
criticism of a pet theory is a simple cop out which can be employed
anytime anywhere on anything - but always totally unimpressively. So
we need not worry about this. If anyone does worry about it, I will
help them further.
--
dorayme
gtr
2015-03-23 15:25:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
The idea that logic must be a structural demand of a religious *faith*,
has never been a theory I've heard stated with much enthusiasm.
What religious person would happily allow that their belief systems
contains a logical contradiction?
What religious person considers logic a consideration of faith, happily
or otherwise?
Post by dorayme
People who have faith presumably have faith in that something is the
case, I cannot imagine a serious religious person easily admitting this
proposition is either self contradictory or that it contradicts
something else they agree is true. So, while you might not have heard
of this as some theory, it is not hard to appreciate it being true. To
that extent, it is as much a structural demand as any belief.
I didn't get a bit of that. I don't think faith pivots on logic nor
vice versa. I have heard doctors and scientists who are Christians
specifically say that they are unrelated. And the usual escape hatch
is that we don't know the mechanics of what we don't know, either
within a framework of logic or outside it.
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
So, if gods are possible, I would be wrong.
As it happens, I believe that the Christian god, an allegedly
omniscient being, is logically impossible.
I once heard a radio drama in which a man climbed to a mountain top to
shout to God and lo and beholde he answered. He began, "I don't
understand how you can let criminals live and take children away in
horrible events and deseases." God answered, "That's right you don't
understand, because as a mortal you don't have the capacity to
understand the workings of the mind of God."
He went on with this correlary: The absolute smartest dog in the world
can never be trained over the course of his entire life to play a
simple game of blackjack.
Normally, atheists do not charge theists with contradiction, rather
they are accused of believing things which are highly unlikely.
I hear atheists make this charge of those who use Biblical edict to
validate their actions and judgements all the time. They cite
Leviticus with the one-liner on homosexuality, but don't seem to care
about the edict regarding eating shell-fish, slavery, head-coverings,
etc.
Post by dorayme
Saying stuff about things being beyond our understanding to ward off
criticism of a pet theory is a simple cop out which can be employed
anytime anywhere on anything - but always totally unimpressively.
If God is bigger than man's capacity for understanding, what use is
logic to understanding? If logic is critical, then God has failed,
religions have failed.
dorayme
2015-03-23 20:56:41 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
What religious person would happily allow that their belief systems
contains a logical contradiction?
What religious person considers logic a consideration of faith, happily
or otherwise?
Pretty well all educated serious religious people. I think you might
have a different idea about what is meant by logic here (most people
do). It is not the very same as scientific practice or scientific
theory, it is merely about consistency and validity, empty of
substantial truth. For example, it is illogical to argue that if p is
true then so is q and then to explain, or already have explained that
q is not-p.
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
People who have faith presumably have faith in that something is the
case, I cannot imagine a serious religious person easily admitting this
proposition is either self contradictory or that it contradicts
something else they agree is true. So, while you might not have heard
of this as some theory, it is not hard to appreciate it being true. To
that extent, it is as much a structural demand as any belief.
I didn't get a bit of that.
None of it at all? Have you ever seen an educated, serious or sensible
commonsensical, religious person say something along the lines of that
he knows the earth is round but that his god says it is flat and he
believes both things? Religious people are not all stupid, illogical,
crazy in such blatant ways and few would admit to simple errors of
logic.
Post by gtr
I don't think faith pivots on logic nor vice versa.
Perhaps because you have too grand a view of what logic is. It is
always a background thing that no rational person will easily admit to
not having. It is not some complex jewelled fulchrum on which
particular positions turn on, it is neither like the pasta nor the
sauce in a great spag bowl, it is simply a requirement of being
rational, of being able to communicate.
Post by gtr
I have heard doctors and scientists who are Christians
specifically say that they are unrelated.
But that is probably because they are confusing logic itself with
other things like, say, specific or general science.
Post by gtr
And the usual escape hatch
is that we don't know the mechanics of what we don't know, either
within a framework of logic or outside it.
...
Post by gtr
If God is bigger than man's capacity for understanding, what use is
logic to understanding? If logic is critical, then God has failed,
religions have failed.
Elementary logic is not a tool, critical or otherwise, thinkers of all
fields do not use it as *a technique* in their investigations, it is a
background assumption, it is the very condition for thinking. (I say
elementary because there is a view that maths is logic, and I don't
want to say that maths is not a useful tool but this is quite a
further topic and, naturally, I would hate to get off-topic in this
usenet group, I know how strict you all are).

About this oft repeated idea about something beyond the understanding
of men, it is not any real refuge. If it is beyond a mind's capacity
to fathom something, then it is beyond its capacity to argue the case
for it.
--
dorayme
gtr
2015-03-23 22:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by dorayme
...
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
What religious person would happily allow that their belief systems
contains a logical contradiction?
What religious person considers logic a consideration of faith, happily
or otherwise?
Pretty well all educated serious religious people. I think you might
have a different idea about what is meant by logic here (most people
do). It is not the very same as scientific practice or scientific
theory, it is merely about consistency and validity, empty of
substantial truth. For example, it is illogical to argue that if p is
true then so is q and then to explain, or already have explained that
q is not-p.
I'm talking about (as was attempted upstream) the idea of holding the
existance of God, and the miracles of the bible up to logical scrutiny.
Pointless. Faith is to be built upon, not scrutinized for continuing
validity. No, I don't believe that Christians, by definition, use no
logic in measuring their lives against religious doctrine, nor flights
of philosophical "logic" that fill thousands of related books.

I had a conversation with a Jewish person where I said pork was
rejected because during ancient times it was had more potential danger.
"Irrelevant", she was quick to point out. Her assertion: The demands
of the religious are followed not because they meet some kind of
case-by-case passage of logic or reasoning by each adherent. You
adhere because that's part of the tradition, and such traditions ARE
the religion.
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
People who have faith presumably have faith in that something is the
case, I cannot imagine a serious religious person easily admitting this
proposition is either self contradictory or that it contradicts
something else they agree is true. So, while you might not have heard
of this as some theory, it is not hard to appreciate it being true. To
that extent, it is as much a structural demand as any belief.
I didn't get a bit of that.
None of it at all? Have you ever seen an educated, serious or sensible
commonsensical, religious person say something along the lines of that
he knows the earth is round but that his god says it is flat and he
believes both things?
No, but in all candor I don't really have a lot of interaction any more
with religious people. When I did, though, I never heard them say they
believed both the impossible and their own demonstrable perceptions
about as a flat earth, earth as the middle of the solar system, or
anything quite so radical. "Who you gonna believe? Me or your lying
(heretical) eyes?" I have heard the opposite though: They said they
didn't need to believe the veracity of Daniel in the lion's den, or
Moses parting the Red Sea to believe in God, Jesus, the resurrection
and all the "important" parts of Christianity. Similarly they didn't
need to *question* it as fundamental to their faith. On the other hand
questioning the existance of God, the relationship to Jesus and where
the resurrection occured--that's a little more dicey on the faith v.
logic meter.
Post by dorayme
Religious people are not all stupid, illogical, crazy in such blatant
ways and few would admit to simple errors of logic.
Nor do I think they are. But you threw illogical in there like it was
an important way of calling the stupid or crazy. Logic isn't part of
defining them. Faith is part of defining them.
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
I don't think faith pivots on logic nor vice versa.
Perhaps because you have too grand a view of what logic is. It is
always a background thing that no rational person will easily admit to
not having. It is not some complex jewelled fulchrum on which
particular positions turn on, it is neither like the pasta nor the
sauce in a great spag bowl, it is simply a requirement of being
rational, of being able to communicate.
"Complex jewelled fulchrum", huh? I don't think you need to put the
pig in so glorious a ballgown: Look up faith in a dictionary and
consider if logic or reasoning is fundamental to its definition.
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
I have heard doctors and scientists who are Christians
specifically say that they are unrelated.
But that is probably because they are confusing logic itself with
other things like, say, specific or general science.
Yeah, perhaps everybody everywhere is confused.
Post by dorayme
About this oft repeated idea about something beyond the understanding
of men, it is not any real refuge.
No, not a refuge a metaphor.

Well, this was fun and done.
dorayme
2015-03-23 23:47:08 UTC
Permalink
In article <2015032315154154322-***@yyyzzz>, gtr <***@yyy.zzz> wrote:

...
Post by gtr
I'm talking about (as was attempted upstream) the idea of holding the
existance of God, and the miracles of the bible up to logical scrutiny.
Pointless. ...
When people say they hold things up for logical scrutiny they usually
mean looking at a theory and seeing if it is plausible. But that is a
different thing to strictly looking for its contradictions or mere
strict invalidity of argument.

...
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
Religious people are not all stupid, illogical, crazy in such blatant
ways and few would admit to simple errors of logic.
Nor do I think they are. But you threw illogical in there like it was
an important way of calling the stupid or crazy.
It is an important test of someone being these things, it being so
blatantly irrational. Most sane people and especially educated self
conscious people and especially scientific people who happen to be
religious would be concerned about at least being logical. You are
using the concept loosely.
Post by gtr
Logic isn't part of
defining them. Faith is part of defining them.
No one is disputing you on this. Logic is not part of defining anyone
at all in any field except perhaps logic teachers.
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
I don't think faith pivots on logic nor vice versa.
Perhaps because you have too grand a view of what logic is. It is
always a background thing that no rational person will easily admit to
not having....
... Look up faith in a dictionary and
consider if logic or reasoning is fundamental to its definition.
Once again, it has nothing to do with any definition of faith, no one
is claiming that. But people who have faith are not as happy as you
are to think they can happily defy simple logic.

...
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
About this oft repeated idea about something beyond the understanding
of men, it is not any real refuge.
No, not a refuge a metaphor.
No, this is not right. It is *also* a refuge that is sought by those
who want to justify themselves in various respects when their views
and arguments are questioned.
Post by gtr
Well, this was fun and done.
I can understand you saying this. Nice talking to you gtr. Have a nice
day, missing you already and ... anyway, I will be coming to USA soon
and I will pick up more of these expressions soon... btw, I've heard
USA is a real god fearing country, I will be very careful!
--
dorayme
Warren Oates
2015-03-24 00:10:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by dorayme
I can understand you saying this. Nice talking to you gtr. Have a nice
day, missing you already and ... anyway, I will be coming to USA soon
and I will pick up more of these expressions soon... btw, I've heard
USA is a real god fearing country, I will be very careful!
Watch out for that Cruz arsehole.
--
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing room scene.
-- notes for Blade Runner
dorayme
2015-03-24 00:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warren Oates
Post by dorayme
I can understand you saying this. Nice talking to you gtr. Have a nice
day, missing you already and ... anyway, I will be coming to USA soon
and I will pick up more of these expressions soon... btw, I've heard
USA is a real god fearing country, I will be very careful!
Watch out for that Cruz arsehole.
All I want to do is check to see if Elvis is around, where exactly
Garry Cooper had that showdown at High Noon, where in the New Mexico
desert, Walt hid his money, if Hank was really deadums - I liked Hank,
he had MF (moral fibre). And I want to see where Peggy Sawyer danced
in 42nd Street. And like that... politics and religion, nope, ...

I'm practising various American drawls in preparation. My partner
tells me I should not under any circumstances try to be when in
America because its folks' sense of humour is very different to mine.
I am inclined not to believe her, how come I can just split up merely
seeing Bob Hope's face on stage, get asthma from watching Planes,
Trains and Automobiles, delight in Steve Martin's putdown of that big
oaf in the beer barn? I'll play it by ear if that's ok with you Oatsie.
--
dorayme
D.F. Manno
2015-03-24 23:00:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Warren Oates
Watch out for that Cruz arsehole.
Yeah, this country really needs another Texas wingnut in the White House.
--
D.F. Manno | ***@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
Michelle Steiner
2015-03-25 00:29:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by D.F. Manno
Yeah, this country really needs another Texas wingnut in the White House.
 "Next time I tell you someone from Texas should not be president of
the United States, please pay attention."  -- Molly Ivins

D.F. Manno
2015-03-23 23:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by gtr
Post by dorayme
Post by gtr
The idea that logic must be a structural demand of a religious *faith*,
has never been a theory I've heard stated with much enthusiasm.
What religious person would happily allow that their belief systems
contains a logical contradiction?
What religious person considers logic a consideration of faith, happily
or otherwise?
Presuppositionalists.
--
D.F. Manno | ***@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...