Oh, but we both agree that there is an absolute assessment behind the nature of reality, do we not? So what else is there to prove? Who can make a bigger ass out of himself perhaps?
Monotheism Compatibility
- Thread starter ReFLeX
- Start date
-
- Tags
- compatibility monotheism
Tricky
Briefly immortal
No we do not. In fact, I consider this to be at best a meaningless statement, and at worst, a claim unsupported (as always) by either logic or evidence.
I yield.
Logic? What is that? Even if we were to deem something were logical, on what "grounds" would you base it? That which is wholly imaginary, as you seem to suggest?
Chicken ◊◊◊◊.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
As always, evidence. Logic works whether or not you have evidence for your assumptions, but unless your assumptions are based on evidence, it's GIGO.
I never suggested any such thing. That is your
LOL. Getting all blustery again, I see.
It's purely a matter of noumenal versus phenomenal, as HypnoPsi suggests. So this "all is relative" crap is not going to cut it.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
Who said that? You're the first person on this thread to use the word "relative".
But I must say I find it amusing that the person who has continually said that everything is relative to some hypothetical "absolute" is now calling that sort of comparison "crap".
Yes, "meaning" is relative but, relative to what? This is usually where it cuts off you see. And then we go on about explaining our own little "pet theories." For example, there's no relation between one God and another in terms of what they represent.
fruit_loup
Student
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 36
I ,personally, do not believe that any of the monotheistic religions are truly monotheistic. In Zoroastrianism you have Ahura mazda, the creator god and all powerful. But you also have his antithesis Angra Mainyu. For them to truly be monotheists with an all powerful deity the existence of Angra Mainyu would not be a tolerable idea. By giving him someone even remotely powerful enough to psoe a challenge to the system you move into duotheism. It does not end just there as there are various angelic spirits which are rather powerful in their own right. This is comprable to the systems used in many polytheistic soscieties. You could look at Hellenic paganism for example and see a similar rift between Mt. Olympus ruled by Zues and the underworld ruled by his brother Hades. The main difference is that the split in traditional monotheism has one side of the rift "good" and the other "evil". Judaism is the same way, with even the ten commandments acknowledging the existence of other deities(an interesting aside, most Jews do not consider Satan to be on the side of "evil"). This rift is also evident in Christianity and Islam. Essentially we are not seeing on deity but several deities with the toughest lording over the title of "one true god".
Well, yes, but we must also remember that we're speaking in terms of God's relationship with man, not the other way around ... Unless of course we wish to use this as a means discount the notion that such God(s) exist. In essence, however, it is all one and the same.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
I'm curious. Where did you garner this information about God's relationship to man? I'd say you'd have to be God in order to speak authoritatively on that issue. It appears that you think you are God sometimes.
Listen, you can fit this scenario into the known Universe with or without a God, in which case it's just a matter of trying to keep the logic consistent.
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2004
- Messages
- 34,330
It's clear San Lee's Thor is a major league wimp as far as gods go, though he is fairly powerful in the Marvel Universe. He's hardly deserving of having a day of the week named after him.
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2004
- Messages
- 34,330
I classify religions and politicial .isms as belonging to the same category of "streams of words goofballs believe in when following power hungry leaders". Just as I wish to be free from your religion to live my life the way I want to, I wish to be free from your politics and economic theories to live my life the way I want to.
An anarchist, huh?
Actually, that's the definition of liberalism, an ideology that favors religious, political and economical freedom for individuals.
Anarchism and liberalism may share a few common values, but they are quite different.
kmortis
Biomechanoid, Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
Actually, I've found that concervatism, taken to its most logical extreme, is more like anarchy. WHat with the emphasis on personal responsibility that the traditional concervatives are always going on about.