And now for something completely different: Prove Monotheism

I know that you might be thinking: "madness is spewing out the same atheist fecal matter again?" but that's not the case.

This is more of a thought experiment. Let's say that science proves that there is in fact a divine aspect of the universe and that deities can exist. How would you go about proving that it's just one deity that exists? We're in a situation where I have to accept that at least one deity exists and possibly created the universe, but that doesn't necessarily imply that only one deity exists.

Answers that will not be acceptable are those from holy books, those from direct faith, and those from direct insults against me.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


No.

This is getting boring.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


How else do you find out who created something, and if the effort was solo or a team colaboration? Check the records at the Patent Office!

I have no idea how to go about this! Because a creator would need a place to create. So would this mean a higher up creator created the space? If an ultimate creator created all, I guess it would have to create "within" itself to avoid creating in a previously created space. So would the ONE top creator actually be everything that it created inside itself? Then if there were an "inside" itself, would there be an "outside" itself? So outside itself would be another space other than itself? Has this "outside" of the creator been created by another creator? Paradox.... running in circles now!

A one top creator would be hard to conceive as "only" if we are applying that kind of logic. But it's the best I can do trying to propose a test.

Any ideas madness?

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
I know that you might be thinking: "madness is spewing out the same atheist fecal matter again?" but that's not the case.

This is more of a thought experiment. Let's say that science proves that there is in fact a divine aspect of the universe and that deities can exist. How would you go about proving that it's just one deity that exists? We're in a situation where I have to accept that at least one deity exists and possibly created the universe, but that doesn't necessarily imply that only one deity exists.

Answers that will not be acceptable are those from holy books, those from direct faith, and those from direct insults against me.

Well let me first state that I am a Believer in one God his name is Jesus. I would also say that I know that He would try and communicate with me and anyone who would want to know about him.

Sure he could just show himself but that is not why he created us he wishes us to choose him not through force but upon faith.

Your constrictions upon the use of the Bible make it a bit difficult but let me try.

Science has shown us that DNA is a language of organism construction, now an intelligent person knows that language requires an intelligence to create and understand it does not happen by chance.
Now if there were many deity's in the creation process do you think they would all agree upon what we should look like, or what about DNA would they all use the same 4 letters?

As we are men and can not agree upon anything wholly I would believe that many gods would be the same in the creation process.

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38

Now if there were many deity's in the creation process do you think they would all agree upon what we should look like, or what about DNA would they all use the same 4 letters?

As we are men and can not agree upon anything wholly I would believe that many gods would be the same in the creation process.

What about when a team at MIT cooperatively creates one of their cool projects? Or an entire production team pumps out a finished, final edition to a movie? Or an entire team of writers, artists, and programmers create a video game?

Yes, this is a good question, madness. S&F.

As Alec Issigonis said, "A camel is a horse designed by a committee."

Perhaps it really was .

reply to post by OutKast Searcher


Then why did you bother posting?

I'm trying to take part in a theological debate using a hypothetical. If you find it boring, don't bother clicking on the thread.


reply to post by ACTS 2:38


That doesn't prove the influence of only a single individual 'creator' merely the existence of at least one.

Well, in this hypothetical situation where I'm not discussing whether or not theism is correct, merely where the discussion would go following the establishment that it is.



Again, taking the hypothetical situation where I won't argue about the merits of theism, how do we know it's monotheism rather than polytheism that is correct?

I'll give it a go, though you're not going to like my answer :-)

One cannot prove monotheism. The only way to prove that there is one God is to disprove the existence of any others, and this is impossible, because you cannot make an absolute conclusion ("There is only one God!") from non-absolute observations (eg: lacking complete knowledge of everything.)

It is the same difficulty that an atheist has -- one can say "I don't believe in God" or "I believe that there is no God," but one cannot say "There is no God," because this is an absolute, based on non-absolute data. If there is knowledge, it is knowledge of one's belief/non-belief/disbelief, but not the knowledge of existence.

However...

If one has access to said deity, you can simply ask him. If you have no reason to believe him to be deceptive (and, if you do, you have far bigger problems than taking a divine census :-) then you have an answer which is based on absolute data, and you may draw your absolute conclusion from it.

This is, of course, the belief of the Abrahamic religions -- at some point, someone asked, and God said "Yep, I'm all that there is."

The issue isn't that obscure, even within the Biblical tradition.

There seems every reason to believe that Hebrews in the relatively cosmopolitan north, Israel as opposed to Judah, were comfortable with their neighbors' gods being gods. The Hebrew God was the one and only patron god of Israel and Judah, but not the only god there was.

Only in the post-exilic period, maybe, did the hard monotheism that was typical of the more isolated, desert south, Judah, come to characterize the whole of the Hebrew approach to religion.

By Jesus' time, rock solid monotheism would be yet another distinction bewteen the politically oppressed Hebrews and their polytheistic, syncretist, pantheon-packing Roman oppressors.

So, when you say

This is, of course, the belief of the Abrahamic religions -- at some point, someone asked, and God said "Yep, I'm all that there is."

Moses may have asked. One answer is the Ten Commandments.

Exodus 20: 1-6 (Deuternomy 5: 6-10 is paralell)

Then God delivered all these commandments: I, the LORD, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. You shall not have other gods besides me. You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers' wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments.

That answer leaves considerable room for maneuver. Possibly, it is brokering the difference between a northern and southern theological perspective. No question how many gods the Hebrews are to worship; some wiggle room on how many gods there actually are.

As to the other Abrahamic view, Islam is clearer on this point, but then Mohammed did not consult with his God, but instead he was filled in by staff. Allah doesn't do personal appearances.

My unacceptable opinion is that there are several levels of god, so god is infinite seeing how everywhere you might go in the universe would have some sort of a god presence.
The actual ultimate god would be the one that you never find because it would not really be part of creation.

Monotheism is actually pretty easy to prove. If you have ONE omnipotent, omniscient omnipresent deity, how can you have another?

reply to post by madnessinmysoul

How would you go about proving that it's just one deity that exists?

Come on, madness, this is too easy...

What's a god if there are more gods than one? If we can prove that polytheism forbids the generally accepted defining terms of divinity, then we may regard monotheism as proved.

These attributes are:

1. Omnipotence
2. Omniscience
3. The ability to create worlds
4. The ability to perform miracles

If there are many gods, omnipotence is obviously out as a divine attribute, since one god could easily undo what another had done.

And for any one god to be omniscient, all the others would have to be deprived of free will, therefore not god. It is not possible for there to be more than one all-knowing being per universe.

The ability to create worlds is the ability to define the laws of physics. Despite a few minor hiccups, the laws we observe look pretty universal. So either they were the work of one god, or all the gods agreed on a single set of laws when they co-created the world. Either of these possibilities effectively equates to monotheism in terms of this aspect of divinity.

And as for the miracles... well, where are they?

Monotheism QED.

Two words.

I AM.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


It's impossible to prove monotheism just as its impossible to completely prove that gods don't exist. So even if you prove that one DOES exist it is very difficult to prove that that deity is the only one. Unless we could establish that the proven deity is all powerful, in which case the likelihood of a second all powerful god is extremely unlikely...after all how can two separate beings exist which both possess infinite power?

Personally I think that polytheism makes far more sense. The idea that one being is responsible for creating everything and has ALL the power creates serious issues (particularly the problem of suffering). I was actually planning on doing a post on my blog about the subject of polytheism versus monotheism (there's a link to my blog in my signature if anyone is interested, it deals mainly with Christianity because I used to be a Christian)...

What's a god if there are more gods than one? If we can prove that polytheism forbids the generally accepted defining terms of divinity, then we may regard monotheism as proved.

These attributes are:

1. Omnipotence
2. Omniscience
3. The ability to create worlds
4. The ability to perform miracles

No, the task is to prove monotheism, not to restate the attributes that the various Abrahamics attribute to their respective gods. There is no general acceptance among human beings that their gods must resemble any of the Abrahamic gods.

Numbers 1, 2, and 3 are not attributes of the Greco-Roman gods, for instance. They explicitly constrained one another (one god could not undo what another had done), and were subject to Fate. Different gods had different levels or kinds of knowledge, no god knew everything. They were not creator gods. They came to power by defeating Giants of one kind or another (their parents in some versions), and now rule a world which they did not make.

Although you didn't number it, you also mentioned free will. Putting aside that predictability does not impeach free will (unless you define free will to make it so, in which case, none of the Abrahamic gods has free will, since their omniscience extends to their own behavior), the Greek gods, being subject to Fate, had at best limited free will.

It is entirely possible that most living Greeks think that they personally have more "free will" than their forebears attributed to the classical Greek gods.

Of course, number 4 is the family business. So, Artemis turns Actaeon into a stag, or Circe turns men into other mammals. Even in the Abrahamics, Satan, The Devil or Iblis (um, who would very likely qualify as gods in other religious systems... part of being a monotheism, then, may well consist of word lawyering) manage some fancy tricks. Ask Job about that.

And in the Christian conception, even mortal men can work miracles that pass for divine by some human standards. For example, Paul and a companion were mistaken for Jupiter and Mercury on tour, according to Acts 14:12.

Anyway, number 4 obviously presents no impediment to polytheism, since it is found in polytheisms.

Number 3, I think, is speculative. There is no particular reason for the Universe to have been created, nor is the subject matter inherently religious. Long ago, a small nation decided that its patron god was a big deal. What bigger deal claim is there?

If number 3 is important, then why not design by committee? Or, since even secular scientists can propose multiverses with a straight face, then why not theologians? Any god who's interested in such things can have his or her very own universe. Within that universe, they're omniscient, omnipotent, ..., or mobility impaired (Vulcan was), or lacking depth perception (Odin was), or whatever they want to be.

Or, maybe the gods are willing to abide by a single set of ground rules (like a speed limit for light, inverse square laws for gravitational force, etc.), the way human athletes agree to the rules of a sport or game. Part of the fun may be to do things within voluntarily accepted constraints (only the goalies may pick up the ball with their hands). Under that system, maybe different gods carve out territories within the one Universe.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Your question remind me of Columbus insisting he had sailed to Asia when all the evidence pointed to otherwise . Something would have to materialise to suggest the work of more then one god was at work . That is the best way I could put it . Unless you want to treat beautiful women as gods then pick your religion .

Cheers xpert11 .

reply to post by eight bits

Nicely argued. Let's see if I can offer you a meaningful response.

No, the task is to prove monotheism, not to restate the attributes that the various Abrahamics attribute to their respective gods. There is no general acceptance among human beings that their gods must resemble any of the Abrahamic gods.

Agreed. However, what are the divine attributes of the Graeco-Roman gods, or their equivalents in other polytheisms? Superhuman powers of a kind easily attained by modern humans through the use of technology, give or take the odd Ovidian metamorphosis. Plus, of course, 'dominion' over a particular human drive or sphere of activity. In fact these gods are merely human drives and activities personified. If they lack the attributes of divinity I listed (which are not only those of the Abrahamic deities but are also shared by the various 'gods of the philosophers, by the way), what can their claim to divinity be?

You could have any number of 'gods' like Hephaestos, but what makes 'em gods?

(The Greco-Roman gods...) explicitly constrained one another (one god could not undo what another had done), and were subject to Fate. Different gods had different levels or kinds of knowledge, no god knew everything. They were not creator gods. They came to power by defeating Giants of one kind or another (their parents in some versions), and now rule a world which they did not make.

Sure, but this description could apply equally well to any cabal of human oligarchs. What was it that made the Greek gods divine? Human worship? Then Caligula was a god.

Putting aside that predictability does not impeach free will...

This, to me, is the most interesting bit of your post. Care to elaborate?

Anyway, number 4 obviously presents no impediment to polytheism, since it is found in polytheisms.

Ah yes, but where are the miracles? And since the gods of monotheism also perform miracles, where's the difference?

See, you have to think of it in terms of madness's original proposition. Divinity (undefined) has been discovered as being involved in the universe. If it wasn't creatively involved, what form would the involvement take and, arising from this, what manifestation would this divinity have? Again, it is the same question: what would be the attributes, the characteristics, of divinity?

I can't think of any of the traditional attributes of divinity not listed above that cannot also be attributed to technologically advanced humans (or aliens).

Can you?

reply to post by yeahright

That would be Attribute 3, more or less.