[I fail to see the significance. I'm not an atheist.]
O... you are a theist? Come on now... There is a god, there is not a god... if you want to say there are many gods, does that make you a subset of theism or atheism?
Of course, you can not claim either, can you? That is because there can not be many gods. It is an illogical and insupportable thesis.
50 comments
"That is because there can not be many gods. It is an illogical and insupportable thesis."
One magical sky pixie makes sense but a whole pantheon of them is illogical? ROFLMAO!!!!!!!! So close, yet so far......
if you want to say there are many gods, does that make you a subset of theism or atheism?
Uhh...theism. Is this a trick question?
if you want to say there are many gods, does that make you a subset of theism or atheism?
Theism. Read the dictionary. Next stupid question.
That is because there can not be many gods. It is an illogical and insupportable thesis.
Illogical and unsupportable? Wow. So you have a proof there is one and only one god? Congratulations. Maybe you can get it published in the Harvard Theological Review so the rest of us can be enlightened. Theologists and philosophers have been looking for that proof without success for 2,500 years.
I agree, there cannot be many Gods, so you Christians with your 'Father, Son, Holy Ghost' stuff can just be silent.
Actually, that would make him a poly-theist. Hence he would be more theist that KCDAD, who is a poor-poor-second in the believing in god stakes.
Sorry, KCDAD, but this guy really is 'holier than thou'!
Hehehe. So explain to me again how God could have a divine, immortal Son? If you're a True Christian (TM) and not a Catholic, you won't buy into that Holy Trinity shit, but you worship both Jesus and God. Sounds like two gods to me. :D
What to say when you're losing an argument, but don't want to admit that you are:
#784. Say that your position is logical, or that the other person's is illogical, but don't show your logic.
You know, KCDAD, you don't have to openly express EVERY random, nonsensical thought that enters your head. Practice a little self-censorship once in a while.
Monotheism - the belief in one, omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, God.
Pantheism - the belief in many Gods, which may or may not be all of those things.
They are both forms of theism.
Which would explain why the world is so fucked up: bureaucracy in heaven.
That would be funny, imagine the Jesus we know as a regional supervisor.
"Actually if you are a Christian you accept at least three Gods in the trinity, not counting Satan who is, at least a demi-god. So you lose Dad."
That is false. First of all, a Christian need not be a Trinitarian. (I am not.) Secondly, even Trinitarians do not believe in three Gods; they believe in 3 hupostases in one ousia. Finally, no Christian believes Satan is a demi-god.
Brennin:
Also, the many-gods belief is just as feasible as the one-god belief. It's just easier to keep track of one deity, as opposed to an entire pantheon.
O... you are a theist?
What's with the 16th century O? For realz dawg, we ain't even be talkin' like that nomo.
...
if you want to say there are many gods, does that make you a subset of theism or atheism?
I can only think KCDAD thought that this was a clever and biting retort, when, in fact, the answer is quite obvious to everyone with a brain. It definitely makes you a theist.
Here's an idea. When you want to make a logical extension of an argument, you might want to make sure the original argument makes an ounce of God damn sense. Yes, you can.
That is because there can not be many gods. It is an illogical and insupportable thesis
I might have agreed with you if this were in another post, written by a person with half a brain. As it stands ... no.
Kryten: Don't you believe that God exists in all things? Aren't you a Pantheist?
Lister: Yeah, I just don't think it applies to kitchen utensils. I'm not a Fryingpantheist.
Deists only use the term "God" because it's convenient. "Great Spirit" would perhaps be more apt. "Brahman", also.
Gods and goddesses are limited to a human scale due to their anthropomorphic natures. Those of us who accept the all-encompassing nature of the Deity, refuse to assign gender to "Brahman": perfect, complete, needing nothing, wanting nothing.
I conceptualize "Brahman" as being the psyche of the universe...and at a certain ineffable level, the vehicle for a psychic internet. I figure that's why I occasionally find myself communing with trees and ant colonies and stoof like that.
On a side note, I implore zat ze Stewards of ze English Language, like, cough up an ambiguously gendered (but non-neuter) third person *singular* pronoun, with appropriate declensions, of course....
Thank you.
"That is because there can not be many gods"
@Adrian
Bastet. Sekhmet. Anubis. Invisible Pink Unicorn. Princess Celestia. Princess Luna. Fausticorn.
I'm sure the OP will realise the paradox they're in now. >:3 /)^3^(\
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
