Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Would it upset you greatly if you learned that all supreme beings were actually only one? Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Buddhist et al? Why?

Would it upset you greatly if you learned that all supreme beings were actually only one? Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Buddhist et al? Why?

If the Supreme Being were just different manifestations to different groups then "better than" would have no meaning. If there were no competition among deities would the competition among cease human lessen? If we are all variations on the same melody how can one be better than the other? They are just different and the same simultaneously. Why would that be so bad?

Posted - May 15, 2018

Responses


  • 32529
    I guess you have never heard the term Abrahamic religions....(Judaism,  Christian and Islam).
      May 15, 2018 9:27 AM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    There is only one "God."

    The difference in the perceptions of Him lie with the humans who come to worship "Him."

    For me, Catholicism is the most intellectually and philosophically satisfying model of God and the reality He has created---as well as all that He continues to create and renew.
      May 15, 2018 12:34 PM MDT
    1

  • 2657
    Yes, philosophically satisfying to you, regardless of what God's word says.

    (Colossians 2:8) Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ;

    (Ephesians 5:6) Let no man deceive you with empty words, for because of such things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience.
    (Hebrews 13:9) Do not be led astray by various and strange teachings, for it is better for the heart to be strengthened by undeserved kindness than by foods, which do not benefit those occupied with them.
    (Romans 10:2, 3) For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to accurate knowledge. 3 For because of not knowing the righteousness of God but seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God.
      May 15, 2018 4:46 PM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    Tex, every bible quote you post refers to the JW's and their false doctrines.

    You make no progress in convincing anyone that you are right by saying that what you quote doesn't apply to you.

    Pretty much all of us on here know that throwing shade at those of us who rightly disagree with the JW's is hardly something that is consistent with the God you say is the real one.
      May 18, 2018 8:49 PM MDT
    0

  • 2657
    You are the one that claims to follow a philosophically satisfying model of God instead of the true God described in the Bible.
      May 18, 2018 11:11 PM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    How do you KNOW that the different deities we celebrate aren't really ONE?  Would you believe that one of the others is the REAL one? Of course not. You believe YOURS is the real one. Logically speaking you could not possibly believe elsewise. But no one KNOWS for sure. You do know how the Bible came into being? About the councils over the years who gathered together and decided which books would be in the bible? And much of it was based on the politics of the time. There are dozens of authors over many decades. So how can you be sure that the Bible you revere is THE WORD OF GOD when so many humans with so many agendas wrote it? I don't want to quarrel with you tom. You have a right to what you believe. But the circumstances surrounding Christianity in terns of how it is recorded are clouded and not easy to ascertain. At least not for me. I believe in a Supreme Being but not in the supremacy of the Christian Bible. Because there are too many actors, too many cooks, too many engaged in deciding what could be included and what should be excluded. You could say they were inspired by GOD but you know better. Much of the church was embroiled in factions that fought for supremacy over the other factions. A lot of themselves were in the mix, not entirely inspired by GOD.  Just my view. How many Councils of Niceae were there where such decisions were made? Thank you for your reply tom.
      May 16, 2018 6:42 AM MDT
    0

  • 32529
    Bible was written over centuries....most books were not included based on knowledge of them not being factual....
      May 16, 2018 6:53 AM MDT
    1

  • 2657
    Tom didn't and usually doesn't bring up the Bible. That is not where he gets his beliefs.
    Reading the Bible is the best way to get familiar with it and to know rather or not there is something special about it. Other than Catholics, you are the first person I have seen reject the supremacy of the Christian Bible yet still refers to them self as a Christian. Along with reading the Bible, the following article may be of some assistance. 


    Hopefully one of these links will work?

    https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101990131?q=%22Studies+on+the+Inspired+Scriptures+and+Their+Background%22&p=par

    https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101990131?q=%22Studies+on+the+Inspired+Scriptures+and+Their+Background%22&p=par

    Studies on the Inspired Scriptures and Their Background

    Study Number 4​—The Bible and Its Canon

    The origin of the word “Bible”; determining which books rightfully belong in the Divine Library; rejection of the Apocrypha.

      May 16, 2018 7:11 AM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    How I know is immaterial, Rosie.  

    And whether or not I'm right about that statement is the only real issue. for me.

    And ultimately, isn't that the only real issue that will matter in end.

    You might win the lottery with a special system, or you may simply win by using numbers from your birth date---the payoff or lack thereof is the same in boh cases.. 
      May 18, 2018 8:57 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    So method is irrelevant. Results are all the counts. Isn't that the same as "the end justifies the means"? Do you believe in that tom? Doing "whatever it takes"? No matter what? I don't but then I'm not a power broker or obscenely wealthy or a Player. Thank you for your reply! I'm gonna ask.
      May 19, 2018 3:53 AM MDT
    1

  • 7280
    Actually, the end is precisely what justifies the means.  But not all means are justified by the specific end in question---and I'm not inclined to give that lecture.

    Truth is conformity of the mind to that which exists.  

    I remember a final physics exam in senior year.  The professor said he would be back to pick up the papers in 2 hours.  We were free to consult whatever references wherever they were---al he wanted were the correct answers.

    Point---you only got credit for getting the right answers---absolutely nothing for effort.

    And Yeah, I got an A in that course also. 


      May 19, 2018 3:47 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    So if you encouraged to consult whatever references you needed to get the answers how was that a test of anything? We call it cheating. Whatever point he was trying to make escapes other than cheating will guarantee a good grade. What is it I do not understand about it tom. There must be something more than meets the eye here. He should have wanted to find out what you had learned in class. If all he wanted were correct answers why go through the charade of "test"? Thank you for your reply and Happy Sunday. If the means were evil how can the end be good? I shall ask.
      May 20, 2018 4:40 AM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    It was a real life lesson, Rosie.  Being right is important.  You can not take a senior level physics exam without knowing the material, and just like doctors in the emergency rooms, research particular issues to validate their diagnoses is common and quite a useful practice.

    You would apparently say those doctors must possess by recall every answer to every possible question a patient may present to that doctor without the doctor confirming the likelihood of his diagnosis.

    It was less a test of what we learned in his class than a test of whether or not we deserved to be called theoretical physicists.
      May 21, 2018 3:18 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Oh. I get it now tom. Your example of doctors researching to confirm/verify is excellent. What threw me off was the test setting. Lawyers are always consulting books to read up on precedent or refresh their memories on things they learned but "forgot". For lawyers it might be a life-or-death proposition for the client. For doctors it does mean life or death for surgeons. Every time someone goes under the knife the life could be in jeopardy. For accountants if their numbers aren't right then the decisions management makes could be very costly. Being right is necessary if you expect to have people accept what you tell them. That makes excellent sense. No one can know everything. Science is fast-moving. Accepted accounting practices are fairly well established.  Science is always on the edge of a new frontier. The more knowledgeable you are when you "guess" the more likely it is that your guess will be pretty good. Thank you for the clarification and the time you spent explaining it. I knew I was missing something! Happy Tuesday! :)
      May 22, 2018 5:01 AM MDT
    0

  • 7280
    You're welcome---sometimes I forget that my examples may only be obvious to me.
      May 22, 2018 12:22 PM MDT
    0