butterflylion:


You seem to be all over the place. You cannot say the below earlier and be saying the above now.

Your words below earlier




One minute you say you do not know these gods and have not gone through them and the next you rule them out and say MAJORITY are irrelevant. What are these majority?

they are irrelevant because I and most other people do not know them. the ones that are known are regarded as myths.



"Monotheists do not disprove each other. They focus on approach or doctrine and not outright existence or inexstence."


so gods who claim they are the one and only could be lying?

e. g. Christians and Muslims claim their Gods are the only ones. so in order to validate any of them, you have to disprove the others. unless you subscribe to polytheism and admit they were lying



"This is my point. You as an atheist cannot base your assessment on anothers claims without carrying out your own findings as people who believe in evidence. Do you see how lazy atheism is? They simply make assertions not bound to proof or experiences but simply as the words from mischief."


that is left for the atheist to do.

by the way when people carry out researches, they also rely on previous researches. like that of the monotheists.

"Like I said, monotheists do not disprove existence. They rather focus on approach and doctrine. If monotheists disprove existence why then do we talk about God AND gods and not just GOD?[/quote]"



then you are advocating polytheism. a monotheistic religion claims their god is the only god. for a monotheist god to be true, automatically all others have to be false.

if you are arguing general monotheist god it is pointless.
the farthest you can go is the god created the universe and wants to have a relationship with us. you cannot state the nature of this relationship, whether this god is good/evil... if you do, you are beginning to advocate for a particular religion.

so at best a god wants to have a relationship with us but we don't know who this god is. which is rather dumb.

butterflylion:


Proving wrong is not proving existence wrong. Proving wrong is proving method or approach or doctrine wrong. We do not discuss existence because we KNOW that other gods exist.

Is this hard to understand?

Atheism focuses on inexistence. So you cannot use anothers experiences to assert for yourself. Where is your own experience as an atheist who believes in self evidence?

how does a monotheist know that other gods exist

monotheist is one god!!!

if a monotheist knows other gods exist, the basis of monotheism are destroyed.

I never said I'm an atheist.

where is the experience of the monotheists/theists that all other religions are false and theirs is right?


when a religion proves another religions false. and other religions prove it false at the same time. it is best to assume they are all false. because all can be false at the same time but no two can be true at the same time.

this is how you can use others experience to come to your conclusion.

butterflylion:

if you are arguing general monotheist god it is pointless.
the farthest you can go is the god created the universe and wants to have a relationship with us. you cannot state the nature of this relationship, whether this god is good/evil... if you do, you are beginning to advocate for a particular religion.
so at best a god wants to have a relationship with us but we don't know who this god is. which is rather dumb.

Gggg102:


they are irrelevant because I and most other people do not know them. the ones that are known are regarded as myths.



"Monotheists do not disprove each other. They focus on approach or doctrine and not outright existence or inexstence."


so gods who claim they are the one and only could be lying?

e. g. Christians and Muslims claim their Gods are the only ones. so in order to validate any of them, you have to disprove the others. unless you subscribe to polytheism and admit they were lying



"This is my point. You as an atheist cannot base your assessment on anothers claims without carrying out your own findings as people who believe in evidence. Do you see how lazy atheism is? They simply make assertions not bound to proof or experiences but simply as the words from mischief."


that is left for the atheist to do.

by the way when people carry out researches, they also rely on previous researches. like that of the monotheists.

"Like I said, monotheists do not disprove existence. They rather focus on approach and doctrine. If monotheists disprove existence why then do we talk about God AND gods and not just GOD?"



then you are advocating polytheism. a monotheistic religion claims their god is the only god. for a monotheist god to be true, automatically all others have to be false.

if you are arguing general monotheist god it is pointless.
the farthest you can go is the god created the universe and wants to have a relationship with us. you cannot state the nature of this relationship, whether this god is good/evil... if you do, you are beginning to advocate for a particular religion.

so at best a god wants to have a relationship with us but we don't know who this god is. which is rather dumb.

SMH I have said this before and will say this again. I do not wish any to believe or have a relationship. We are simply talking God.

When you speak and draw out pointers using specific gods you are straying from the OP. This thread is about a one God concept. Do get it right.
There is no segregation or separation. Although I know you are deliberately trying to make me separate them but I won't.

Derivatives of the concepts of God have come in a threefold manner for all God concepts there is and they are experience, revelation, and reason.

As it stands, experiences of God in all concepts are astonishingly in various forms though have produced equally rated concepts of what is perceived as a divine being.

These experiences have come about by things that are external and universally there for all, things like a star filled sky, or through something as external and private like a rock or bush. These Experiences though are often internal and effable for example, vision, or can be said to also be internal and ineffable, as portrayed by those who practice mysticism.

Revelations of such nature are often linked to experiences of a God or gods or a type of it, this is all inclusive for those originally having it and the one simply embracing it as an authority.

So if I speak from the side of a specific God or god I simply voice my experience or opinion and not speaking ON BEHALF of the other who has his or her own opinion or experience which can comparatively be put alongside mine.

This is why I said we do not disprove existence. We focus on approach, doctrine and methods (which are all experiences). Atheism on the other hand deals with inexistence which from what you are saying so far seems not to be borne from experience but simply laziness and a lack of understanding.

butterflylion:


SMH I have said this before and will say this again. I do not wish any to believe or have a relationship. We are simply talking God.

When you speak and draw out pointers using specific gods you are straying from the OP. This thread is about a one God concept. Do get it right.
There is no segregation or separation. Although I know you are deliberately trying to make me separate them but I won't.

Derivatives of the concepts of God have come in a threefold manner for all God concepts there is and they are experience, revelation, and reason.

As it stands, experiences of God in all concepts are astonishingly in various forms though have produced equally rated concepts of what is perceived as a divine being.

These experiences have come about by things that are external and universally there for all, things like a star filled sky, or through something as external and private like a rock or bush. These Experiences though are often internal and effable for example, vision, or can be said to also be internal and ineffable, as portrayed by those who practice mysticism.

Revelations of such nature are often linked to experiences of a God or gods or a type of it, this is all inclusive for those originally having it and the one simply embracing it as an authority.

So if I speak from the side of a specific God or god I simply voice my experience or opinion and not speaking ON BEHALF of the other who has his or her own opinion or experience which can comparatively be put alongside mine.

This is why I said we do not disprove existence. We focus on approach, doctrine and methods (which are all experiences). Atheism on the other hand deals with insurance which from what you are saying so far seems not to be borne from experience but simply laziness and a lack of understanding.

if you are arguing general monotheist god it is pointless.
the farthest you can go is the god created the universe and wants to have a relationship with us. you cannot state the nature of this relationship, whether this god is good/evil... if you do, you are beginning to advocate for a particular religion.
so at best a god wants to have a relationship with us but we don't know who this god is. which is rather dumb.

budaatum:

Yes! All gods are human creations, myths, at best.


Shows the limits of your ability to comprehend, I suppose, or you might offend me by calling me a liar!

In the story you mention, I said I go up into the heavens to bring down light. But I am very certain that you don't think I literally went there. Or do you?

How am.i calling you a lait nah? You told me a story with all amount of sincerity because you wanted me to.know you well know what you were talking about, but here you are calling calling gods the figment of people's imaginations.

Did you lie about your story? Did you defy your communities deities and walk away unhurt?

Your story shows that, even as you claim to be an atheist, any day you go home, you bow to those gods and do what is expected of you as a Bashorun.

Why do you do that, after all, you are now an atheist and those gods don't really exist.

Why do you talk the midnight walks?

Gggg102:



how does a monotheist know that other gods exist

monotheist is one god!!!

if a monotheist knows other gods exist, the basis of monotheism are destroyed.

I never said I'm an atheist.

where is the experience of the monotheists/theists that all other religions are false and theirs is right?


when a religion proves another religions false. and other religions prove it false at the same time. it is best to assume they are all false. because all can be false at the same time but no two can be true at the same time.

this is how you can use others experience to come to your conclusion.

Monotheism simply teaches that all concepts of God are the same and one regardless of the names they are known by. It can be all inclusive in the case of gods Vs God comparison and holding the belief that even the gods work for God to bring oneness.

You keep talking about false false. This false you mean is not about inexistence of said gods but rather their Godship. I will say this for the last time we do not disprove existence but rather focus on methods or approach, doctrine, etc.

Gggg102:




if you are arguing general monotheist god it is pointless.
the farthest you can go is the god created the universe and wants to have a relationship with us. you cannot state the nature of this relationship, whether this god is good/evil... if you do, you are beginning to advocate for a particular religion.
so at best a god wants to have a relationship with us but we don't know who this god is. which is rather dumb.

Sorry but you seem unable to grasp what I have been telling you. I am not interested in you having a relationship or not or which is good or evil. That is not the focus of this thread. I will not be made to bring separations here much as you would want me to.

butterflylion:


Monotheism simply teaches that all concepts of God are the same and one regardless of the names they are known by. It can be all inclusive in the case of gods Vs God comparison and holding the belief that even the gods work for God to bring oneness.

You keep talking about false false. This false you mean is not about inexistence of said gods but rather their Godship. I will say this for the last time we do not disprove existence but rather focus on methods or approach, doctrine, etc.

OK describe this monotheist god to me.
what kind of relationship does he want?

are there rules guiding his relationship?

how as he shown himself to us?

Gggg102:



OK describe this monotheist god to me.
what kind of relationship does he want?

are there rules guiding his relationship?

how as he shown himself to us?

Here you are again repeating relationship. SMH.

It's clear you have no idea what I have been saying.

Read my last post again.

Every concept of God or god has via experience etc made itself felt or seen by its adherents. But monotheism teaches that all work together for oneness otherwise we would not have one underlying God concept despite varied approaches or experiences.

butterflylion:


Sorry but you seem unable to grasp what I have been telling you. I am not interested in you having a relationship or not or which is good or evil. That is not the focus of this thread. I will not be made to bring separations here much as you would want me to.

so why are you talking about a god who wants to have a relationship with me if you are not interested in me having a relationship or not.

the theist god wants to have a relationship with us.
how do you know he does?

do you even know the kind of relationship he wants?

butterflylion:


Here you are again repeating relationship. SMH.

It's clear you have no idea what I have been saying.

that's because a theistic god is a god that wants to have a relationship with man.


if I don't use the word 'relationship', he becomes a deistic god.

butterflylion:


Sorry but you seem unable to grasp what I have been telling you. I am not interested in you having a relationship or not or which is good or evil. That is not the focus of this thread. I will not be made to bring separations here much as you would want me to.

sooo you are arguing for a deist god.

Gggg102:




so why are you talking about a god who wants to have a relationship with me if you are not interested in me having a relationship or not.

the theist god wants to have a relationship with us.
how do you know he does?

do you even know the kind of relationship he wants?

We are done here!

Where in anything I wrote did I advocate for a relationship for any god?

The deist God does not want to have a relationship and does not care so will you force him?

Please stop trying to derail.

Gggg102:


that's because a theistic god is a god that wants to have a relationship with man.


if I don't use the word 'relationship', he becomes a deistic god.

Sorry I am not. I am simply on a single God concept in whatever form.

butterflylion:


We are done here!

Where in anything I wrote did I advocate for a relationship for any god?

The deist God does not want to have a relationship and does not care so will you force him?

Please stop trying to derail.

a theistic god advocates for a relationship. that is the difference between a theist god and a deist god.

you said your op is talking about the general theistic god.

it you are not advocating relationship, you are advocating a deistic god.

butterflylion:

Sorry I am not. I am simply on a single God concept in whatever form.

general god concept without relationship= deistic god.

Gggg102:



general god concept without relationship= deistic god.

Let me repeat! I am not interested in you or anyone else who is an atheist having a relationship. I am simply not interested. This is MY position and does not mean I am talking about a deistic god. You all like tags and separations so automatically your mind jumps to "no relationship = deistic god". That is YOUR mind and not mine.

butterflylion:


Let me repeat! I am not interested in you or anyone else who is an atheist having a relationship. I am simply not interested. This is MY position and does not mean I am talking about a deistic god. You all like tags and separations so automatically your mind jumps to "no relationship = deistic god". That is YOUR mind and not mine.

what then is the point of this topic. why were you trying to sell a theistic god.


it's not a separation, it's a fact

you said you are talking about a theistic god without any regards to relationship ignoring the fact that it is the relationship that makes a theistic god who he is.

if you take away that relationship, he becomes a deist god.


deist god= creator of universe, no relationship with man.

theist god = creator of universe, relationship with man

butterflylion: let's talk about theistic god without relationship with man.

Gggg102:




what then is the point of this topic. why were you trying to sell a theistic god.


it's not a separation, it's a fact

you said you are talking about a theistic god without any regards to relationship ignoring the fact that it is the relationship that makes a theistic god who he is.

if you take away that relationship, he becomes a deist god.


deist god= creator of universe, no relationship with man.

theist god = creator of universe, relationship with man

butterflylion: let's talk about theistic god without relationship with man.

Listen carefully and try to involve your brain when reading.

This thread is not about relationships, good or evil or any of the numerous attributes you wish to hear coming from a monotheistic angle. It is simple the all inclusiveness of God or gods.

Atheists claim there are 4999 variants of these Gods or gods so let's do iustice to all of them at once or you can itemise them too if you wish so we see how a supposed emprircal mind arrived at his assertion that God or gods do not exist without going through these 4999 gods and how this is even possible because each variant talks about self experiences, their effability or ineffability, etc.

Based on what did an atheist arrive at his or her conclusion devoid of these experiences.

That is the crux. If you still do not get it then quietly leave.

butterflylion:


Listen carefully and try to involve your brain when reading.

This thread is not about relationships, good or evil or any of the numerous attributes you wish to hear coming from a monotheistic angle. It is simple the all inclusiveness of God or gods.

Atheists claim there are 4999 variants of these Gods or gods so let's do iustice to all of them at once or you can itemise them too if you wish so we see how a supposed emprircal mind arrived at his assertion that God or gods do not exist without going through these 4999 gods and how this is even possible because each variant talks about self experiences, their effability or ineffability, etc.

Based on what experience did an atheist arrive at his or her conclusion devoid of these experiences.

That is the crux. If you still do not get it then quietly leave.

to do justice to each of the gods, you have to dwell on their relationship.

you said you are talking about a general god, now you want atheists to disprove 4999 individual god's
how do you do that if you are not focusing on these god's type of relationship.

based on the experience that these gods contradict their worldview which they base on science.
the atheist experience is based on the individual theistic gods. the bone of contentment for atheists is the religious god. you can't talk about them outside their religion.

arguing about a general god concept is arguing about deism which most atheists don't bother with.

Gggg102:


to do justice to each of the gods, you have to dwell on their relationship.

you said you are talking about a general god, now you want atheists to disprove 4999 individual god's

based on the experience that these gods contradict their worldview which they base on science.

Since it's their worldview and not those of others and since these individual 4999 god concepts all have an underlying GOD position how then did an atheist arrive at there is no God since it CONTRADICTS their worldview based on science?

Does a self contradiction mean a general contradiction?

This was exactly my comment to seun earlier when I said

You are making my point for me seun. Talking about Nigeria or Israel or Saudi Arabia and disproving them does not mean that COUNTRIES do not exist in its broadest form. You simply just narrowed them down.

Got it now?

Let's talk God in its broadest form. It's better you disprove ALL COUNTRIES if they all follow a pattern than to disprove 2 or 5 when there are 195 countries in the world

You cannot attempt to impose YOUR self contradictory worldview on others who do not have or share your self contradiction.

I refuse to separate them and would rather put them all together and let's disect them all so we see how an atheist got his atheism.

If he got his atheism from his failed experiences with one god does It then translate to all gods not existing?

If one Mercedes Benz is bad does it mean all are bad?

Monotheists NEVER argue using the 4999 gods angle. Atheists do. So they should be able to push forward their facts based on their 4999 gods position of falsehood.

This they do without realising that falsehood does not mean nonexistence but simply means no supreme authority or supreme divinity because if some are false then it means one must be true.

So how did they arrive at this falsehood which they term as nonexistence devoid of experiences from these 4999 they love pushing forward.

butterflylion:


Since it's their worldview and not those if others and since these individual 4999 god concepts all have an underlying GOD position how then did an atheist arrive at there is no God since it CONTRADICTS their worldview based on science?

Does a self contradiction mean a general contradiction?

This was exactly my comment to seun earlier when I said



You cannot attempt to impose YOUR self contradictory worldview on others who do not have or share your self contradiction.

their underlying world view is the deist god position. they created the universe.

just like the underlying world view of Nigeria, Ghana, USA is that thru are countries.

you can argue against a Nigeria, that doesn't mean you are arguing against countries.

you can argue against the 4999 gods, that doesn't mean you are arguing against the deist god.


I do not think atheist argue against the deist god.

the deist god cannot be proven or disproved. since he is not involved with humanity. he doesn't interfere.

how do you know an invisible and intangible person is around you if he doesn't reveal Himself?

the deist god as I said earlier does not contradict the atheist world view and science since he does nothing. all scientific facts can be attributed to a deist god since he has no action to contradict them. the deist god is more like an intelligent big bang. an atheist could easily become a deist but nothing will change.
deist god= intelligent cause.
atheist= unintelligent cause.

the atheist Vs deist argument is pointless because it does not change any pre held worldview.

butterflylion:


You cannot attempt to impose YOUR self contradictory worldview on others who do not have or share your self contradiction.

I refuse to separate them and would rather put them all together and let's disect them all so we see how an atheist got his atheism.

If he got his atheism from his failed experiences with one god does It then translate to all gods not existing?

If one Mercedes Benz is bad does it mean all are bad?

joining them together creates a deist god since most of these gods have contradicting opinions. so their relationships cancel each other out. leaving only their creator position.

butterflylion:
Monotheists NEVER argue using the 4999 gods angle. Atheists do. So they should be able to push forward their facts based on their 4999 gods position of falsehood.

This they do without realising that falsehood does not mean nonexistence but simply means no supreme authority or supreme divinity because if some are false then it means one must be true.

So how did they arrive at this falsehood which they term as nonexistence devoid of experiences from these 4999 they love pushing forward.

exactly. atheist have an issue against individual gods and not with general/deist gods.

Gggg102:



their underlying world view is the deist god position. they created the universe.

just like the underlying world view of Nigeria, Ghana, USA is that thru are countries.

you can argue against a Nigeria, that doesn't mean you are arguing against countries.

you can argue against the 4999 gods, that doesn't mean you are arguing against the deist god.


I do not think atheist argue against the deist god.

the deist god cannot be proven or disproved. since he is not involved with humanity. he doesn't interfere.

how do you know an invisible and intangible person is around you if he doesn't reveal Himself?

the deist god as I said earlier does not contradict the atheist world view and science since he does nothing. all scientific facts can be attributed to a deist god since he has no action to contradict them. the deist god is more like an intelligent big bang. an atheist could easily become a deist but nothing will change.
deist god= intelligent cause.
atheist= unintelligent cause.

the atheist Vs deist argument is pointless because it does not change any pre held worldview.

Please I need to stop responding to you now because you never seem to understand anything I am saying. For the umpteenth time I am not talking about a deist god.

I CHOSE not to discuss relationships or good or evil or any of the likes. It is my choice and not my belief.

This your fixation on the deist god is totally off.

And just as a side talk, the deist god is not seen as the big bang it is a real creator god but simply does not interfere any longer with his creation.

For sake of emphasis this thread is not about relationships, good or evil, deism, Yahweh, Allah as single units but based on the atheists position of 4999 gods being bandied around as their case for nonexistence when such simply speaks on falsehood per Godship and translates to falsehood which automatically indicates the existence of a truth.

If you said that monotheists say to each other that his or her own god concept is false, THAT IS WHERE IT STOPS. Monotheists do not and i repeat DO NOT talk about nonexistence because we KNOW there are other gods but focus on authority, supreme divinity out of the entire lot.

Please I honestly need you to stop or I will stop responding.

the only way you can separate the deist god from the general monotheist god, is that the deist god does not contradict science and does not have any inaccurate position.


the monotheistic god in general, contradicts science and history, makes inaccurate claims, makes promises that prove his existence but this promises fail. majority of the signs and evidence that is used to prove his inexistence are false, the effects of his existence are not felt. most of his attributes are based on human ignorance. the fact that he cannot prove himself undeniably. the only time he does this is in the tales of his existence.

butterflylion:


Please I need to stop responding to you now because you never seem to understand anything I am saying. For the umpteenth time I am not talking about a deist god.

I CHOSE not to discuss relationships or good or evil or any of the likes. It is my choice and not my belief.

This your fixation on the deist god is totally off.

And just as a side talk, the deist god is not seen as the big bang it is a real creator god but simply does not interfere any longer with his creation.

For sake of emphasis this thread is not about relationships, good or evil, deism, Yahweh, Allah as single units but based on the atheists position of 4999 gods being bandied around as their case for nonexistence when such simply speaks on falsehood per Godship and translates to falsehood which automatically indicates the existence of a truth.

If you said that monotheists say to each other that his or her own god concept is false, THAT IS WHERE IT STOPS. Monotheists do not and i repeat DO NOT talk about nonexistence because we KNOW there are other gods but focus on authority, supreme divinity out of the entire lot.

Please I honestly need you to stop or I will stop responding.

the monotheistic god in general, contradicts science and history, makes inaccurate claims, makes promises that prove his existence but this promises fail. majority of the signs and evidence that is used to prove his inexistence are false, the effects of his existence are not felt. most of his attributes are based on human ignorance. the fact that he cannot prove himself undeniably. the only time he does this is in the tales of his existence.

Gggg102:



exactly. atheist have an issue against individual gods and not with general/deist gods.

Why have an issue with individual gods yet they always present the 4999 gods angle without EVER itemising them or dealing with them as pushed but simply throw them out there.

You seem conflicted.

Putting all the gods together does not make them deist. Like I said earlier and I quote

butterflylion:


Monotheism simply teaches that all concepts of God are the same and one regardless of the names they are known by. It can be all inclusive in the case of gods Vs God comparison and holding the belief that even the gods work for God to bring oneness.

butterflylion:


Why have an issue with individual gods yet they always present the 4999 gods angle without EVER itemising them or dealing with them as pushed but simply throw them out there.

You seem conflicted.

Putting all the gods together does not make them deist. Like I said earlier and I quote

the issue with the 4999 gods is the same with individual gods.

they are 1. scientifically inaccurate.
2. unable to be proven undeniably.
3. give false and extraordinary
promises to their followers that
fails.

Gggg102:
the only way you can separate the deist god from the general monotheist god, is that the deist god does not contradict science and does not have any inaccurate position.


the monotheistic god in general, contradicts science and history, makes inaccurate claims, makes promises that prove his existence but this promises fail. majority of the signs and evidence that is used to prove his inexistence are false, the effects of his existence are not felt. most of his attributes are based on human ignorance. the fact that he cannot prove himself undeniably. the only time he does this is in the tales of his existence.

Now I really need to stop.

You say the words in bold yet said the below earlier.

I have only heard atheists talk about 4999 gods. I do not know if the number is accurate, I haven't gone through them and I haven't made a claim concerning them.

most of these gods by the way are forgotten and now just make up mythologies e. g Zeus, Odin, Thor, Ra, Mayan gods...

How can you make such assertions such as "they are false, they contradict science, they make inaccurate claims etc despite admitting YOU HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THESE GODS?

this is dishonest.