Theism vs. Reality

[Elect Marx]

This seems to be a topic that many members touch on here; where others write lengthy and in-depth posts and I thought we might organize these thoughts into an easy to understand list.


I invite everyone to help in giving me suggestions for this list, of scriptural, cultural and any other references.

I will be writing this in the format of clauses (what religion; their “god(s),” necessitates to be true) and this will be preceded by the code of that religion.

I WILL BE CONTINUALLY REVISING THIS LIST.

Here is the key to the formatting I will use:
“T” will stand for all forms of theism.

Monotheism = M
“M:” will stand for all monotheistic religion.
Types of “M”
Christianity = C
Islam = I
Judaism = J
EXAMPLE: MI: = the monotheistic religion of Islam

Polytheism = P
“P:” will stand for all polytheistic religion.
Types of “P”
Hinduism = H

I need help in this category…

FORMAT EXAMPLE: MC37: Catholicism, Scripture & Culture – CONTENT

Now for the content:

T1: By definition - The supernatural must exist.
REASONING:

Originally posted by American Heritage Dictionary+--> (American Heritage Dictionary)the•ism (th“¹z”…m) n. Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world. --the“ist n. --the•is“tic or the•is“ti•cal adj. --the•is“ti•cal•ly adv.[/b]

Originally posted by American Heritage [email protected]
su•per•nat•u•ral (s›”p…r-n²ch“…r-…l) adj. 1. Of or relating to existence outside the natural world. 2. Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces. 3. Of or relating to a deity. 4. Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous. 5. Of or relating to the miraculous. --su•per•nat•u•ral n. That which is supernatural.
M1: Scripture & Culture - God must be male and so, must have male genitalia
REASONING: The references to “he,” “his,” “him,” and “father,” in all monotheistic scripture and culture.

American Heritage Dictionary
male (m³l) adj. Abbr. m., M. 1.a. Of, relating to, or designating the sex that has organs to produce spermatozoa for fertilizing ova. b. Characteristic of or appropriate to this sex; masculine. c. Consisting of members of this sex.
MC1: Scripture – God must have changed his mind since the old testament.
REASONING: Changes in God’s policy from old to new testament.

MC2: Scripture & Culture - God must have fathered a son “Jesus,” who is both true man and true god, being simultaneously “part of” God and not.
REASONING: I need the chapters for this one…

MORE TO COME.

[codyvo]

P
Hinduism=H

That's all I've got, but I'm not very well educated on religion.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 01:46 PM
P
Hinduism=H
Thank you.


That's all I've got, but I'm not very well educated on religion.

That is what group efforts are for; right? ;) :hammer:

[tambourine_man]

be careful in your generalizations about religion... :)

hinduism, for example, isn't polytheistic. hindu philosophy, as extolled by the vedas and upanishads (specifically, and especially advaita vedanta philosophy), actually states that the many "gods" or "goddesses" (such as Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma) are in fact superficial manifestations of an ultimately infinite, impersonal, indiscriminate fundamental substance of life, Brahman, existing only to facilitate our ability to comprehend Brahman. Each individual's life substance, spirit, i suppose, is called Atman - that is, each person's Atman is merely a reflection of the greater Brahman - a little piece of the whole, in a way. as you can see...i have a hard time defining a religion even in so many words...

but if you must label it something, i suppose "pantheistic" would be most appropriate, though, as with all other religions, and especially in this case, there are many differing trends in the interpretation of original teachings and holy texts.

christian existentialism, sufism, hasidic judaism, shamanism, buddhism (and its many variants) etc. are a few more examples of religious trends that definitely cannot be defined so rigidly.

i suppose if, in your categorization, you are referring solely to the orthodox, conservative interpretations of religion and nothing else, then you can do so with a little less difficulty.

[redstar2000]

Scripture & Culture - God must be male and so, must have male genitalia
REASONING: The references to “he,” “his,” “him,” and “father,” in all monotheistic scripture and culture.

A Muslim has posted elsewhere in this subforum that "Allah" is without gender...the masculine pronouns do not appear in the Qu'ran.

Also, Hindu gods and goddesses appear to be four-armed humanoids.

And finally, your thread title, "Theism & Reality", is puzzling...as it gives the impression that some version of theism "might be real". If you'd like to create a clearer title, I can edit the thread title for you.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

[codyvo]

I agree, also I think that the only reason for the "he, him" sayings were because the english language does not have a unigender term and in their infinitive form english words take the masculin word.

[The Apathetic Atheist]

The Bible says that God created man in his image, so that must mean that God is male in the Christian perception of God.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 08:59 PM

Scripture & Culture - God must be male and so, must have male genitalia
REASONING: The references to “he,” “his,” “him,” and “father,” in all monotheistic scripture and culture.

A Muslim has posted elsewhere in this subforum that "Allah" is without gender...the masculine pronouns do not appear in the Qu'ran.
Alright; good to know.


Also, Hindu gods and goddesses appear to be four-armed humanoids.

Are you sure? Sources?


And finally, your thread title, "Theism & Reality", is puzzling...as it gives the impression that some version of theism "might be real". If you'd like to create a clearer title, I can edit the thread title for you.

That might be nice... I was attempting to give the impression of contrast; perhaps Theism meets Reality or Theism Vs Reality? I don't know... I just picked a title. If anyones has a better idea, do tell.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 07:11 PM
be careful in your generalizations about religion... :)
I'll do my best... I am sure people will correct me if I fuck up and maybe when I don't too;)


hinduism, for example, isn't polytheistic. hindu philosophy, as extolled by the vedas and upanishads (specifically, and especially advaita vedanta philosophy), actually states that the many "gods" or "goddesses" (such as Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma) are in fact superficial manifestations of an ultimately infinite, impersonal, indiscriminate fundamental substance of life, Brahman, existing only to facilitate our ability to comprehend Brahman. Each individual's life substance, spirit, i suppose, is called Atman - that is, each person's Atman is merely a reflection of the greater Brahman - a little piece of the whole, in a way. as you can see...i have a hard time defining a religion even in so many words...

Uh... so is there a polytheistic version?


but if you must label it something, i suppose "pantheistic" would be most appropriate, though, as with all other religions, and especially in this case, there are many differing trends in the interpretation of original teachings and holy texts.

How should I categorize pantheism?


pan•the•ism (p²n“th-¹z”…m) n. 1. A doctrine identifying the Deity with the universe and its phenomena. 2. Belief in and worship of all gods. --pan“the•ist n. --pan”the•is“tic or pan”the•is“ti•cal adj. --pan”the•is“ti•cal•ly adv.


christian existentialism, sufism, hasidic judaism, shamanism, buddhism (and its many variants) etc. are a few more examples of religious trends that definitely cannot be defined so rigidly.

Well crap! Now you are just making problems :P


i suppose if, in your categorization, you are referring solely to the orthodox, conservative interpretations of religion and nothing else, then you can do so with a little less difficulty.

Yes, I am trying to stick to the well defined.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by codyvo+May 31 2005, 09:10 PM--> (codyvo @ May 31 2005, 09:10 PM)I agree, also I think that the only reason for the "he, him" sayings were because the english language does not have a unigender term and in their infinitive form english words take the masculin word.[/b]
Possibly, but what about the cultural belief Judaism has held that men are the creators of life?


The Apathetic Atheist
The Bible says that God created man in his image, so that must mean that God is male in the Christian perception of God.

That does make sense but in the context, does it mean Adam or all humanity? This would apply to all monotheism I would think... perhaps not Islam.

[redstar2000]

The artistic renditions of Hindu gods and goddesses that I've seen seem to look like people except they have four or even eight arms. (!)

Also, note that the Greek, Roman, and Teutonic pantheons all look like humans.

On the other hand, ancient Egyptians "mixed and matched" -- some of their deities had human bodies with human heads, some had human bodies with animal heads, and some were all animal.

I think the Semitic gods (Marduk, et.al.) and goddesses (Ishtar, et.al.) all looked human.

Celtic? Buddhist? (Yes, some variants of Buddhism have gods and goddesses...and heavens and hells too.) Taoist?

And there are further difficulties with the use of gender-based pronouns in Genesis, etc. In several places, plural pronouns are used to describe "God"...and, as I recall, even plural nouns.

Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is One! may once have been a highly controversial statement.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/223.gif

PS: I will edit the title of this thread to "Theism vs. Reality"...but if you think of something you'd like better, pm me & I will take care of it.

[codyvo]

Originally posted by The Apathetic [email protected] 1 2005, 03:49 AM
The Bible says that God created man in his image, so that must mean that God is male in the Christian perception of God.
If you look up the word man, it can also refer to man-kind, or all humans, which I think is how it was intended.

[guerillablack]

Has anyone ever seriously read the whole passage and not just that infamous line or understand translation and transliterations?

[codyvo]

No, I haven't read that passage at all I just assumed a guy like god would be smart enough to not piss off a whole gender, by using a term like man - referring to males. So I made a logical assumption and said he meant it in a unigender way.

[Red Robe Majere]

lets say god created man in his image. (man as in male) so now we have one sex. which would die off execpt threw reincarnation. so he created woman so man (his image) wouldnt die off. so woulding that make Christianity sexist?

[codyvo]

Do you mean that if this is the correct interpertation of the bible, then god only created women so that more men could live on? Or maybe it is that god made women only to serve and please man?

Sounds like a regular womanizer to me. And if this so called god did make women to please us men, they're doing a shitty job.
:lol: