Can the gods be misunderstood?
Most topics here seem to inherently see belief in gods as all or nothing. Either X view of god is 100% right or 100% wrong. Either Jehovah is the only God or he doesn't exist. Why? Why can't one's belief in gods be sort of correct and sort of incorrect? Why can't jehovah be one of many gods simply lying to his followers about being the only one? Why can't multiple paths be valid in the arena of spirituality and religion?
Yes, I understand some positions require themselves to be 100% true like monotheism, I'm just asking "if gods exist, could they lie to us, could we misunderstand their nature, personality, goals, etc?"
Board index ‹ God
30 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Can the gods be misunderstood?
by The Ancient Snake » Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:22 pm
- The Ancient Snake
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by jimwalton » Mon Mar 05, 2018 2:46 pm
Yes, deity can be misunderstood. It happens all the time, even on this forum, believe it or not. People misread texts, misinterpret texts, believe what they want to believe, insert their own beliefs and opinions into their faith systems, ad infinitum.
I, for one, believe there's such a thing as objective truth. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, button to his own facts." Many people don't see belief in gods as all or nothing. There are ideas along the entire continuum, I'm sure.
But it has to be right that either YHWH is the only God or doesn't exist. He says He's the only God, and since by His own affirmation a real God doesn't lie (Num. 23.19), if he is lying He is not God and therefore doesn't exist.
> Why can't ones belief in gods be sort of correct and sort of incorrect?
Belief can easily be sort of correct and sort of incorrect. People believe whatever they want, and they do. Some get it all wrong, some sort of right, some half right, some mostly right, and there's even a possible that some people have got it right!
> Why can't jehovah be one of many gods simply lying to his followers about being the only one?
Because one of the attributes of YHWH is truth. He, by biblical definition, doesn't have the weaknesses or immoralities of humans. I already gave you Numbers 23.19, but there's also isa. 40.7; Ps. 119.89; and Jn. 14.6.
> Why can't multiple paths be valid in the arena of spirituality and religion?
The teachings of the religions contradict each other at the core, though they all intersect at various places. But all religions, without exception, are exclusive. While it's logically possible that none are true, it's not possible that several are true, unless we can believe that A can equal non-A, which is logical nonsense.
Ravi Zacharias says, "Tolerance of someone else's belief is the gracious thing to do; acceptance of the person is the loving thing to do. But loving a belief that violates the starting point of your own belief is the hypocritical thing to do. To sound grand and magnanimous by saying, 'I accept all religions' is actually to either violate them all or violate reason, or both. We all have a right to proclaim what we believe about ultimate things, but that doesn't mean that everything we believe is right. The thinking person must honestly weigh the evidence and come to the right conclusion."
> if gods exist, could they lie to us, could we misunderstand their nature, personality, goals, etc?
If God lies, there is no reason, morality, or purpose, because the underpinning of all creation is unstable, unreliable, and uncertain. We cannot create truth if there is none in the system. It's like this: suppose the creators of the iPod made it so that it could only play on "Shuffle." What are the odds I could ever get a playlist of my favorites all in a row? The odds are minuscule, but it could potentially happen once, potentially. But how long would it take the iPod to learn what my favorites were and play them for me? This is not possible. Reason, purpose, and a "good" list are not in the system. You can't draw blood from a stone. The system can only give you what is in the system to give.
I, for one, believe there's such a thing as objective truth. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, button to his own facts." Many people don't see belief in gods as all or nothing. There are ideas along the entire continuum, I'm sure.
But it has to be right that either YHWH is the only God or doesn't exist. He says He's the only God, and since by His own affirmation a real God doesn't lie (Num. 23.19), if he is lying He is not God and therefore doesn't exist.
> Why can't ones belief in gods be sort of correct and sort of incorrect?
Belief can easily be sort of correct and sort of incorrect. People believe whatever they want, and they do. Some get it all wrong, some sort of right, some half right, some mostly right, and there's even a possible that some people have got it right!
> Why can't jehovah be one of many gods simply lying to his followers about being the only one?
Because one of the attributes of YHWH is truth. He, by biblical definition, doesn't have the weaknesses or immoralities of humans. I already gave you Numbers 23.19, but there's also isa. 40.7; Ps. 119.89; and Jn. 14.6.
> Why can't multiple paths be valid in the arena of spirituality and religion?
The teachings of the religions contradict each other at the core, though they all intersect at various places. But all religions, without exception, are exclusive. While it's logically possible that none are true, it's not possible that several are true, unless we can believe that A can equal non-A, which is logical nonsense.
Ravi Zacharias says, "Tolerance of someone else's belief is the gracious thing to do; acceptance of the person is the loving thing to do. But loving a belief that violates the starting point of your own belief is the hypocritical thing to do. To sound grand and magnanimous by saying, 'I accept all religions' is actually to either violate them all or violate reason, or both. We all have a right to proclaim what we believe about ultimate things, but that doesn't mean that everything we believe is right. The thinking person must honestly weigh the evidence and come to the right conclusion."
> if gods exist, could they lie to us, could we misunderstand their nature, personality, goals, etc?
If God lies, there is no reason, morality, or purpose, because the underpinning of all creation is unstable, unreliable, and uncertain. We cannot create truth if there is none in the system. It's like this: suppose the creators of the iPod made it so that it could only play on "Shuffle." What are the odds I could ever get a playlist of my favorites all in a row? The odds are minuscule, but it could potentially happen once, potentially. But how long would it take the iPod to learn what my favorites were and play them for me? This is not possible. Reason, purpose, and a "good" list are not in the system. You can't draw blood from a stone. The system can only give you what is in the system to give.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by Victory » Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:27 pm
What if the being who sent the bible isn't "God"? Doesn't that address all of your concerns?
- Victory
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by jimwalton » Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:31 pm
Well, that's a good question. If the being who sent the Bible isn't God, then the Bible is nothing more than an aggregation of stories and moral teachings. I might as well put it on the shelf next to Aesop's Fables. So the important question at hand is, "Is there evidence in the Bible that gives evidence that the Bible is a divine document?" I think there is, and there's enough to it to be convincing. (Obviously, since I'm a Christian.)
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by Victory » Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:47 pm
Not at all. A Zeus or Odin level entity would certainly be capable of producing a book like the bible.
Is there anything in the bible that would indicate it could only be the result of an entity who is capable of creating the universe?
Is there anything in the bible that would indicate it could only be the result of an entity who is capable of creating the universe?
- Victory
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by jimwalton » Mon Mar 05, 2018 4:05 pm
> A Zeus or Odin level entity would certainly be capable of producing a book like the bible.
Not at all. First of all, Zeus and Odin are mythological. As I mentioned, "If God lies, there is no reason, morality, or purpose, because the underpinning of all creation is unstable, unreliable, and uncertain. We cannot create truth if there is none in the system." But, if you want to play this out, since Zeus was infamous for his many affairs, he was unfaithful, unreliable, and ultimately untrustworthy. He would not be capable of producing a book like the Bible. Regarding Odin, since he isn't the most powerful god, he can't be relied upon to know and do all of what a truly sovereign God needs to do. Since he is only the purveyor or wisdom, but is not omniscient, we cannot count on that he speaks all truth and only the truth.
> Is there anything in the bible that would indicate it could only be the result of an entity who is capable of creating the universe?
Sure.
Not at all. First of all, Zeus and Odin are mythological. As I mentioned, "If God lies, there is no reason, morality, or purpose, because the underpinning of all creation is unstable, unreliable, and uncertain. We cannot create truth if there is none in the system." But, if you want to play this out, since Zeus was infamous for his many affairs, he was unfaithful, unreliable, and ultimately untrustworthy. He would not be capable of producing a book like the Bible. Regarding Odin, since he isn't the most powerful god, he can't be relied upon to know and do all of what a truly sovereign God needs to do. Since he is only the purveyor or wisdom, but is not omniscient, we cannot count on that he speaks all truth and only the truth.
> Is there anything in the bible that would indicate it could only be the result of an entity who is capable of creating the universe?
Sure.
- - First of all, ordering the cosmos to function as His dwelling place (Genesis 1).
- Only an omniscient being could write the prophecies of the Bible, as only an omniscient being could create something so beautiful and so complex as the universe.
- Only an all-powerful being could govern the direction of history through all its obstacles and machinations to fulfill the plan of salvation as written in the Bible, as only an omnipotent being is capable of creating the universe.
- To write the Bible would take a deity with a perspective on eternity. And since we know the universe isn't eternal but rather had a beginning, there makes sense that there is an eternal first cause—something had to have always existed. The Bible could only be the result of an eternal being, and it's logical that the universe could only be the result of an eternal being.
- Communication is a personal act. Humans are personal beings. Therefore there must be a personal cause to the universe, because impersonal causes (as in chemical, biological, or laws of nature) must have first causes, and only personal causes are capable of being first causes. That we are personal beings and that the Bible is God's revelation of himself are both functions of a personal cause to the universe.
- To produce the Bible requires intelligence. To produce the universe requires intelligence (we have no scientific evidence or example that informational data can come from anything but an intelligent cause). The Bible indicates that it can only be the result of an intelligent cause.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by Victory » Tue Mar 06, 2018 9:19 am
> Not at all. First of all, Zeus and Odin are mythological. As I mentioned, "If God lies, there is no reason, morality, or purpose, because the underpinning of all creation is unstable, unreliable, and uncertain. We cannot create truth if there is none in the system." But, if you want to play this out, since Zeus was infamous for his many affairs, he was unfaithful, unreliable, and ultimately untrustworthy. He would not be capable of producing a book like the Bible. Regarding Odin, since he isn't the most powerful god, he can't be relied upon to know and do all of what a truly sovereign God needs to do. Since he is only the purveyor or wisdom, but is not omniscient, we cannot count on that he speaks all truth and only the truth.
Again, I'm merely referring to beings that are superhuman as opposed to omnipotent/omnisience. Whether or not an omnipotent being is required by the universe or not isn't the question. It's whether the bible was written by that entity or not.
> First of all, ordering the cosmos to function as His dwelling place (Genesis 1).
This is a claim of the writer. Not a proof. I could claim that I ordered the cosmos to function as my dwelling place and I am not a God.
> Only an omniscient being could write the prophecies of the Bible, as only an omniscient being could create something so beautiful and so complex as the universe.
Two parter. What prophecy in particular would required omniscience to know, rather than simply, say, a time machine?
> Only an all-powerful being could govern the direction of history through all its obstacles and machinations to fulfill the plan of salvation as written in the Bible, as only an omnipotent being is capable of creating the universe.
Well, again a time machine would mean the being would not have to govern the direction of history at all. Merely record what was going to happen.
> To write the Bible would take a deity with a perspective on eternity. And since we know the universe isn't eternal but rather had a beginning, there makes sense that there is an eternal first cause—something had to have always existed. The Bible could only be the result of an eternal being, and it's logical that the universe could only be the result of an eternal being.
What passage in the bible in particular would require " a deity with a perspective on eternity"?
Your last two points don't really relate to the issue at hand.
Again, I'm merely referring to beings that are superhuman as opposed to omnipotent/omnisience. Whether or not an omnipotent being is required by the universe or not isn't the question. It's whether the bible was written by that entity or not.
> First of all, ordering the cosmos to function as His dwelling place (Genesis 1).
This is a claim of the writer. Not a proof. I could claim that I ordered the cosmos to function as my dwelling place and I am not a God.
> Only an omniscient being could write the prophecies of the Bible, as only an omniscient being could create something so beautiful and so complex as the universe.
Two parter. What prophecy in particular would required omniscience to know, rather than simply, say, a time machine?
> Only an all-powerful being could govern the direction of history through all its obstacles and machinations to fulfill the plan of salvation as written in the Bible, as only an omnipotent being is capable of creating the universe.
Well, again a time machine would mean the being would not have to govern the direction of history at all. Merely record what was going to happen.
> To write the Bible would take a deity with a perspective on eternity. And since we know the universe isn't eternal but rather had a beginning, there makes sense that there is an eternal first cause—something had to have always existed. The Bible could only be the result of an eternal being, and it's logical that the universe could only be the result of an eternal being.
What passage in the bible in particular would require " a deity with a perspective on eternity"?
Your last two points don't really relate to the issue at hand.
- Victory
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by jimwalton » Tue Mar 06, 2018 9:30 am
> Again, I'm merely referring to beings that are superhuman as opposed to omnipotent/omnisience.
OK, then, bottom line is you are asking about hypothetical/mythical beings rather than Christianity. I get it. It is, after all, DebateReligion and not necessarily asking about Christianity.
> Whether or not an omnipotent being is required by the universe or not isn't the question. It's whether the bible was written by that entity or not.
You're right. That's why I was speaking of the attribute of omniscience, not of omnipotence. I don't think omnipotence relates to whether or not the omnipotent (or non-omnipotent) being wrote the Bible.
> Not a proof. I could claim that I ordered the cosmos to function as my dwelling place and I am not a God.
Right. Anyone can claim anything they know. The proof is in the pudding, as it is said. When Jesus healed people, walked on water, stilled the storm, and multiplied bread, he showed sovereignty over natural laws, meaning he had the power and authority to also order the cosmos to function as his dwelling place. The claim, to be believable, has to be backed up by evidence.
> What prophecy in particular would required omniscience to know, rather than simply, say, a time machine?
Well, since time machines are fictional, any prophecy would require omniscience to know. We can't even predict the winner and score of a football game, where the stock market will go today, or even the weather (with total accuracy). Any prophecy is therefore unusual, and hundreds of them is beyond human capability.
> Well, again a time machine would mean the being would not have to govern the direction of history at all.
Time machines are completely fictional and most likely always will be. You can't use time machines to argue your point. They don't exist.
> What passage in the bible in particular would require " a deity with a perspective on eternity"?
Genesis 1-2, Revelation 21-22, for starters. The theology of election (Eph. 1.4).
> Your last two points don't really relate to the issue at hand.
Thank you. Nor does your fictional "time machine".
OK, then, bottom line is you are asking about hypothetical/mythical beings rather than Christianity. I get it. It is, after all, DebateReligion and not necessarily asking about Christianity.
> Whether or not an omnipotent being is required by the universe or not isn't the question. It's whether the bible was written by that entity or not.
You're right. That's why I was speaking of the attribute of omniscience, not of omnipotence. I don't think omnipotence relates to whether or not the omnipotent (or non-omnipotent) being wrote the Bible.
> Not a proof. I could claim that I ordered the cosmos to function as my dwelling place and I am not a God.
Right. Anyone can claim anything they know. The proof is in the pudding, as it is said. When Jesus healed people, walked on water, stilled the storm, and multiplied bread, he showed sovereignty over natural laws, meaning he had the power and authority to also order the cosmos to function as his dwelling place. The claim, to be believable, has to be backed up by evidence.
> What prophecy in particular would required omniscience to know, rather than simply, say, a time machine?
Well, since time machines are fictional, any prophecy would require omniscience to know. We can't even predict the winner and score of a football game, where the stock market will go today, or even the weather (with total accuracy). Any prophecy is therefore unusual, and hundreds of them is beyond human capability.
> Well, again a time machine would mean the being would not have to govern the direction of history at all.
Time machines are completely fictional and most likely always will be. You can't use time machines to argue your point. They don't exist.
> What passage in the bible in particular would require " a deity with a perspective on eternity"?
Genesis 1-2, Revelation 21-22, for starters. The theology of election (Eph. 1.4).
> Your last two points don't really relate to the issue at hand.
Thank you. Nor does your fictional "time machine".
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by Walrus » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:01 am
Is the god of the bible transcendent and perfect?
- Walrus
Re: Can the gods be misunderstood?
by jimwalton » Tue Mar 06, 2018 10:12 am
Yes. According to the Bible, God is both transcendent and immanent. Hebrews 1.3; Isaiah 55.8-9; Romans 11.33-36 speaks to His transcendence, and immanent in the person of Jesus (Philippians 2.5-8; see also Deuteronomy 4.7; Ezekiel 11.34, 37).
And yes, he is perfect. Deuteronomy 32.4; 2 Samuel 22.31; Psalm 18.30; Isaiah 25.1.
And yes, he is perfect. Deuteronomy 32.4; 2 Samuel 22.31; Psalm 18.30; Isaiah 25.1.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9112
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
30 posts
• Page 1 of 3 • 1, 2, 3
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest