Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Oddly enough I already answered you a long time ago, please refer
to a few posts back.
But it seems that you are unable to do anything but ask questions,
had you chosen to at least taken a little bit of time to answer
things might be more productive. But since to jolt your memory and
to destroy the myth of your question not being answered, I thus
refer you to:
[b]Arguing down on line, while
internally consistent, does not mean your logic would be consistent
when finally exposed to all of logicdom.
You asked a question if we truly believed with everything that
there was only one God, then how can there be a right and wrong
God?
Simply put there isn't- there is only one correct notion of God
that everybody should (and I believe will) finally believe in the
end. The real debate is over which notions of God get as closer to
this absolute.
And in this you seem to have it mixed up somehow that wanting to
hold a notion for a particular monotheism destroys theism itself,
which is thinly argued out in your arguments on people co-opting
ideas and writing books.
In the end views on a subject are views from a prespective, but
certainly it cannot be said that all views are equal, but rather to
be judged by the absolute itself. The very fact there is debate is
because there is an absolute to be argued over in the first place,
and the fight is all about if this or that view is better at
grasping this absolute.
In the end your stance is self-defeating in the end. To accept
truth claims as all equally valid would be to dissolve the absolute
itself. It is as good as saying nothing by saying alot.
And another thing I don't quite get why you don't seem to get. Just
because I may be of an opposing point of view with another person
does not mean that I will have to be totally opposed to them. As
far as I am concerned I am only in opposition when the first
principle of non-contradiction is concerned. We will oppose when
one says that Jesus was just a prophet while we see Him as God. We
will oppose when they think that He never died on the cross while
we think he did.
All the same we would agree if we both think that there is only one
true God seperate from his creation as opposed to polytheism and
pantheism. All the same we would hold the same view if we believed
that He created all that we can observed.
That is not hard to understand at all, what is hard to understand
is that while you appeal to the winds of logic at one moment,
telling us to watch for contradictions in our own logic, the very
next you decry objective logic itself by suggesting that to make an
absolute truth claim destroys truth itself.
I believe wrong does not create or exist to itself, it is simply an
lack of right. Right can exist without wrong but wrong cannot
without some right to make it the way it is, that part is clear to
me. So to answer your question, yes we do believe there is One God,
and in no way that belief creates an paradox of
'how-can-there-be-a-right-and-wrong-god'... the paradox as it is,
is purely imaginary and can only happen when one decides to abandon
first principles (and oddly enough use them to construct some other
arguments for the paradox).
To make it simpler for you to understand, I put it to you as
this:
1) That your very question is a logical incongruity when tested
against first principles. Unfortunately you cannot deny first
principles
2) It is this incongruity that renders your question largely
illogical, but yet I have tackled it in it's logical form. And the
conclusion is largely as this: The notion of One God is perfectly
logically (as a concept) sound.
3) Your orginal question is akin to asking: 'If there is only one
answer, how can there be a wrong and right answer?' So let me
answer you this:
We can logically believe there is only One God
-The right God is this One God
-And the wrong god is not this one God... in fact, it can't be said
to be even a God at all. In that sense, no wrong 'Gods' exist but
fallacies elevated to the level of them being God, but yet that
does not make them God at all.
Apparently you know the solution to this very question yourself,
but it seems you are reluctant to answer anything at all.
As apologists of old have pointed out, it's a question largely of
nonsense and a failure to understand certain first principles.
Garbage in, garbage out.
Let me alert you to another principle, as much as I do not approve
of people mocking you, let me put it to you that it is very much
deserved should you choose to go on this way. Obviously you have
been putting out much nonsense as I can see from the way you are
answering less and less and hoping to get by by shooing
questions.
Now ask yourself this, what is the point
of all this except to tire everybody with wild goose chases and
feel better about yourself? Are you sure you are even living up to
the standards of intellectual honesty, fair debate and scientific
method you so confidenty touted when you first came in?
From what I have seen, people in here have been very patient and
tolorent of your behaviour and sharp (and often unwarranted)
attacks. I suspect you know you have been beaten in many areas fair
and square, and pushing the issue will not make your case stronger
at all. In any case, pushing about mostly-nonsensical questions and
notions does neither you or me much good.
I suggest you leave here for a moment, go do your research, come up
with a cohorent worldview, and then bring it back here for debate.
Until you can do that, you have no true right to speak here at all
except by the grace of others who have so kindly decided to take
you like a kind teacher takes in a wayward pupil.
[/b]
I know you did but I was more interested in what that guy who
made that post was going to say. Well it turns out he was not
serious.
Let's say I am Abraham and have nothing but idols around me. How
then do I make that leap and put my faith in GOD? Just because it
was never written down does it mean that there were none other than
Abraham?
Are the "false Gods" just notions of God?
The Hindus put it nicely, they are manifestations of God. So if God
is manifested in a tree, they worship that tree as God. That is
pantheism, God is everywhere. Where they went arwy is that indeed
God is everywhere and you do need need God to be manifested and
worship the objects.
The error as far as I can see is that they do not worship God as
GOD. If one worships God as GOD, one cannot be wrong as indeed
there is only one God.
If one puts his faith in GOD, then one cannot be wrong as there is
only one GOD. Next we look at the Jews.
