Every god is true but one, should the other gods do something about it?

[TillICollapse]

I think the problem you are experiencing is a lack of personal relationship with the definitions you are using.

But I'm not asking for my own definition, I'm asking for yours ... and you appeal to "Christian definition" which is generic and vague. The problem I'm experiencing, is that I'm asking for YOUR definition in the context you meant it. You gave it, but then tacked on, "Christian definition", to which I responded, "Don't YOU ever get tired of it ?" I'm having a personal relationship right now in this conversation, with *you*.

Do you think if you went to a speed dating night and every girl you met, as soon as they told you their name, you said "oh, you are girl though, that must mean you are Michelle" you would get somewhere? Honestly?

Well, same thing.

I asked you to define what you meant by "true god" and "false god" in the context you used it. I then jumped off your "Christian definition" and "with words" to focus on the vagueness of it, and ask if you ever honestly grow tired of the circular nature and moving goalposts. You never answered.

As for you having a problem with words - of all things - I don't suppose you have a rational reason, do you? I'm not saying "any words", as you glibly suggest (quite foolishly).

You are the one who said that a gods are those that can back up what they believe with words. If there are specific words you are suggesting, then say so.

You do realize your attempts to assert that I have a problem with words, perhaps rational reason, and that I'm quite foolish for something I didn't even suggest but you claimed I suggested ... you do realize the irony in all those fallacies and statements, right ? I mean, you have to, yes ? I find it hard to believe a person can be so blinded that they honestly can't see what they/themselves are doing. Sometimes I think such a person who exhibits the type of reasoning you are exhibiting must actually see quite clearly what you are doing, but you keep doubling down nonetheless, hoping that at the end of all the attempts a treasure will pop out. I mean ... do you honestly not see the irony ? Do you honestly see such statements as valid and reasonable, and the expectation of the other person to forgo reason and pretzel it all up in order to converse as reasonable ? If you think I'm attacking you, you don't have to answer. I'll only pry so much then I'll drop it, as I tend to shy away from circular arguments filled with ad homs and straw since I don't like going in circles myself to try and chase something in a ball.

 

[Gottservant]

The same thing Baal did when challenged by Elijah. Baal did what all false gods do. Nothing.

The problem is what do gods do about a false god, not what does Elijah do.

Also did you notice that the thread became incredibly wide when you posted? I have been watching to see who is causing this problem and I think it may be you? What is in your signature?

 

[Aldebaran]

The problem is what do gods do about a false god, not what does Elijah do.

Well, in Elijah's case, God (the real one) worked through Elijah. It wasn't Elijah's idea. He can work through ANY of His people.

Also did you notice that the thread became incredibly wide when you posted? I have been watching to see who is causing this problem and I think it may be you? What is in your signature?

I hadn't noticed. Right now, I just have a text phrase. I guess I could take it out and see if anything changes.

 

[Gottservant]

But I'm not asking for my own definition, I'm asking for yours

And how do you think I came up with my definition? Not by merely accepting someone else's.

... and you appeal to "Christian definition" which is generic and vague. The problem I'm experiencing, is that I'm asking for YOUR definition in the context you meant it. You gave it, but then tacked on, "Christian definition", to which I responded, "Don't YOU ever get tired of it ?" I'm having a personal relationship right now in this conversation, with *you*.

I asked you to define what you meant by "true god" and "false god" in the context you used it. I then jumped off your "Christian definition" and "with words" to focus on the vagueness of it, and ask if you ever honestly grow tired of the circular nature and moving goalposts. You never answered.

Woah! I answered, I told you you are wasting your time, looking for an answer elsewhere. Slow down, all I said was that by the Christian definition a god is someone who can back up their "godness" with words, that is extremely broad - I wasn't cramming my religion down your throat, as you seem to suggest. Can you think of a broader definition of a god, than words? If so suggest it, if not what's the problem?

You are the one who said that a gods are those that can back up what they believe with words. If there are specific words you are suggesting, then say so.

You do realize your attempts to assert that I have a problem with words, perhaps rational reason, and that I'm quite foolish for something I didn't even suggest but you claimed I suggested ... you do realize the irony in all those fallacies and statements, right ? I mean, you have to, yes ? I find it hard to believe a person can be so blinded that they honestly can't see what they/themselves are doing. Sometimes I think such a person who exhibits the type of reasoning you are exhibiting must actually see quite clearly what you are doing, but you keep doubling down nonetheless, hoping that at the end of all the attempts a treasure will pop out. I mean ... do you honestly not see the irony ? Do you honestly see such statements as valid and reasonable, and the expectation of the other person to forgo reason and pretzel it all up in order to converse as reasonable ? If you think I'm attacking you, you don't have to answer. I'll only pry so much then I'll drop it, as I tend to shy away from circular arguments filled with ad homs and straw since I don't like going in circles myself to try and chase something in a ball.

Just focus on the problem: the problem is what do gods do about a false god - its open generic philosophy with Christian suggestions made as they are asked for.

This business of answering you about an account I gave is ridiculous, you are turning the tables back on me before I have even said anything out of context.

Just focus on the problem, once you realize how generic the problem is you will laugh that you took defining part of it so seriously.

 

[Gottservant]

Well, in Elijah's case, God (the real one) worked through Elijah. It wasn't Elijah's idea. He can work through ANY of His people.

Ok. Ok. I'm not criticizing you. I'm just saying in the context of gods the question is more abstract, and philosophically that is to be preferred initially. Try to work with me, try to put God aside for a moment and just consider the problem itself.

I am looking for an abstract answer, not a theological one.

I hadn't noticed. Right now, I just have a text phrase. I guess I could take it out and see if anything changes.

If you changed it, it does seem to have fixed the problem.

 

[Aldebaran]

Ok. Ok. I'm not criticizing you. I'm just saying in the context of gods the question is more abstract, and philosophically that is to be preferred initially. Try to work with me, try to put God aside for a moment and just consider the problem itself.

I am looking for an abstract answer, not a theological one.

I guess I'm not understanding the question, or how to answer in an abstract way. I guess if a god is false (such as a carved out piece of wood people could bow down to), then there's nothing they can do since they don't live, think, breathe, or have any ability.

If you changed it, it does seem to have fixed the problem.

I deleted it. I never knew it affected the forum before.

 

[TillICollapse]

And how do you think I came up with my definition? Not by merely accepting someone else's.



Woah! I answered, I told you you are wasting your time, looking for an answer elsewhere. Slow down, all I said was that by the Christian definition a god is someone who can back up their "godness" with words, that is extremely broad - I wasn't cramming my religion down your throat, as you seem to suggest. Can you think of a broader definition of a god, than words? If so suggest it, if not what's the problem?



Just focus on the problem: the problem is what do gods do about a false god - its open generic philosophy with Christian suggestions made as they are asked for.

This business of answering you about an account I gave is ridiculous, you are turning the tables back on me before I have even said anything out of context.

Just focus on the problem, once you realize how generic the problem is you will laugh that you took defining part of it so seriously.

NM Gotts.

 

[Gottservant]

NM Gotts.

If you want to give up, that's fine - but I reserve the right to be disappointed.

 

[TillICollapse]

If you want to give up, that's fine - but I reserve the right to be disappointed.

It's not always giving up, when someone backs away to follow another route.

And I can understand being disappointed.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Hi there,

So this is a fairly simple hypothetical, say every god but one is true, should the other gods do something about the one god that is false? Would they?

Thanks.

Sahih International [koran 23:91]​

Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him].​

http://quran.com/23/88-94​

 

[Gottservant]

Sahih International [koran 23:91]​

Allah has not taken any son, nor has there ever been with Him any deity. [If there had been], then each deity would have taken what it created, and some of them would have sought to overcome others. Exalted is Allah above what they describe [concerning Him].​

Surat Al-Mu'minun [23:88-94] - The Noble Qur'an - ?????? ??????​

Great.

And what are your thoughts about this?

Do you agree?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I looked at some theology. Either God has an equal (no difference in that case, only one god remains after the analysis) or he does not (thereforethe other is not a god).

I agree.

 

[Freodin]

The same thing Baal did when challenged by Elijah. Baal did what all false gods do. Nothing.

That is an interesting statement.

Do you know what happens everytime when I "challenge" your deity?

I get several different explanations why God does nothing.


So it seems that this is something "true gods" do as well.