Is Christianity really Monotheistic?

[LoneMateria]

So lately I've been going through the skeptics annotated bible.  For those of you who never heard of it it has the whole bible, koran, and the book of mormon separated by books and chapters and everything that they find wrong is highlighted with a certain color and a brief explanation is given on the side.  Its atheism kickass!

Anyway so I was just looking though and I was in Exodus 23 and the explanation lead me to this page.  My buddy and I had a conversation a while back about whether the bible supports monotheism or not.  He said it did, but I didn't have this reference handy and he was able to write off my examples as "the trinity".  Anyway what do you guys think?

[Whitney]

Is someone with multiple personalities one person?  

[Reginus]

I've always equated the trinity with the three sides of a single triangle  

Edit: I read the link, and I am fairly sure that the passages are not litteraly referring to "other gods", but rather to idols of man.

[LoneMateria]

I've always equated the trinity with the three sides of a single triangle  

Edit: I read the link, and I am fairly sure that the passages are not litteraly referring to "other gods", but rather to idols of man.

I'd agree with you if the wording was different, but like in Exodus 23:32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.  the wording to me suggests polytheism.  Just like the wording in 1Chronicles 16:25 suggests polytheism to me.  I don't see how they refer to idols since the bible mentions those separately.  Just like in Jeremiah 46:25 when it says God will punish the Pharaohs with their gods.  To me it suggests that God will whip them all at once.  But still Polytheism.

The incoherent bible at its worst -_-

[Reginus]

I'd agree with you if the wording was different, but like in Exodus 23:32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.  the wording to me suggests polytheism.  Just like the wording in 1Chronicles 16:25 suggests polytheism to me.  I don't see how they refer to idols since the bible mentions those separately.  Just like in Jeremiah 46:25 when it says God will punish the Pharaohs with their gods.  To me it suggests that God will whip them all at once.  But still Polytheism.

The incoherent bible at its worst -_-

If you say to me "The god you believe in is ridiculous", you are not suggesting that the god I believe in actualy exists and is litteraly funny or stupid looking, but you are saying that my belief is ridiculous. From my point of view, the "gods" the bible refers to, are simply imaginary idols of the pharasees. Jeremiah 46:25 makes perfect sense to me in this context, as the idols will surely die with the Pharaohs.

.... actualy, on second thought, there's a chance that in some cases the bible is refering to the devil or demons.

[Will]

It's quite simple. Jesus was not talking to himself on the cross. Christianity is polytheistic.

[LoneMateria]

So ... lets see if I understand what you are saying.  That it doesn't matter what the bible actually says here, you are going to interpret them as idols regardless of the words?  Am I right?  Or are you saying that all the gods of the bible are idols including the main one and that you don't believe it exists just like Ra, Athena, Thor and so on?  By the way you are trying to do some fancy footwork there, maybe take a step back and see the simpler solution might be the right one.

Also i'm pretty sure they mention the devil and demons by name in the bible so that last statement doesn't sit well with me.  It would make no sense to mention the devil by name in one context and refer to him as someone else's god in another.

Awesome response Will.  Never thought of it like that. (Though I have a sneaky feeling some would argue ... pointlessly)

[Ultima22689]

So ... lets see if I understand what you are saying.  That it doesn't matter what the bible actually says here, you are going to interpret them as idols regardless of the words?  Am I right?  Or are you saying that all the gods of the bible are idols including the main one and that you don't believe it exists just like Ra, Athena, Thor and so on?  By the way you are trying to do some fancy footwork there, maybe take a step back and see the simpler solution might be the right one.

Also i'm pretty sure they mention the devil and demons by name in the bible so that last statement doesn't sit well with me.  It would make no sense to mention the devil by name in one context and refer to him as someone else's god in another.

Awesome response Will.  Never thought of it like that. (Though I have a sneaky feeling some would argue ... pointlessly)

Doesn't it feel futile sometimes when you realize logic is futile when you argue with theism? Superstition, the bane of logic.

[LoneMateria]

Doesn't it feel futile sometimes when you realize logic is futile when you argue with theism? Superstition, the bane of logic.

Against Reginus I don't feel logic if futile.  I honestly feel most people want to believe as many true things as possible and as few false things, Reginus included.  Hopefully by pointing out where his logic isn't sound it will cause him to revise his outlook on the subject.  Granted it feels futile arguing with a few people, my best friend, for example, is a YEC and believes in the infallibility of the bible (has actually read it) and is a very reasonable person otherwise.  He has these beliefs which were indoctronated (which I've finally gotten him to admit) to him as a child, but he refuses to let go.  I still argue with him and say stuff in the hopes of him thinking about it for himself one day and breaking free.  Whether he does or not is up to him, hopefully by having these debates I plant the seeds (so to speak) for knowledge to grow.  

Also I don't believe superstition is the bane of logic.  Logic and critical thinking is the cure to superstition.  I know when I go to a casino and sit down at a slot machine that the odds are stacked against me, no amount of rubbing my head, or tapping on the screen or sitting with my legs crossed, standing, or any of the other countless superstitions will help me win.  I try to have some fun and walk away with the same amount of cash I came with (more is better obviously).  I know that the people who made the slot machines made them to be fun, addicting, and a losing proposition.  Just like in Black Jack.  There is a perfect strategy to the game but even if you play the perfect strategy you will overall lose to the house.  No good luck charms will fix this.  The more you know the less superstition you need.  Eventually we won't need any.

[SSY]

As Reginus has pointed out, when saying something like "Don't worship other gods" there could be an ambiguity as to whether the god is real, as the god in question does not have to exist for people to worship it (ain't that the truth). The bible has been so tweaked, translated twisted over the years, this, in my oppinion is a plausible defence. If there was a passage along the lines "The other god pleaded with the LORD for his life" or " The FSM fled from the righteous anger of the LORD" then we would be in the money, but we don't see it, at least not in that list.

I also don't think referring to god as "us" or "we" is acceptable as a polytheistic argument either, due to aforementioned translation issues. I don't think there is quite enough evidence to say that the early bible writers believed in multiple gods definitively.

[LoneMateria]

As Reginus has pointed out, when saying something like "Don't worship other gods" there could be an ambiguity as to whether the god is real, as the god in question does not have to exist for people to worship it (ain't that the truth). The bible has been so tweaked, translated twisted over the years, this, in my oppinion is a plausible defence. If there was a passage along the lines "The other god pleaded with the LORD for his life" or " The FSM fled from the righteous anger of the LORD" then we would be in the money, but we don't see it, at least not in that list.

I also don't think referring to god as "us" or "we" is acceptable as a polytheistic argument either, due to aforementioned translation issues. I don't think there is quite enough evidence to say that the early bible writers believed in multiple gods definitively.

Soo ... for the first part are you just playing Christians advocate?  I understand the point you made where the god doesn't have to exist to be worshiped.  However I feel there is a step thats missed (especially by Christians) to say, "We have our god but every other reference to a god in the bible is just really idols".  Then again assertions are common in defending the bible.  But like in Deuteronomy 10:17 it says that God is the God of gods.  Does that suggest he is lead idol or that there are other gods (I may have a false dichotomy here)?  Exodus 22:28 don't revile the gods (plural).  Obviously I don't expect you to go down the list and explain how that could be considered an idol, but I don't see how these are considered Idols and I just chose 2 that were close to each other on the list.  But if this is a big interpretation game how can one interpretation be right and all the rest be wrong?  Anyway tangent >.<

My buddy used the "us" and "we" reference to mean the trinity.  I don't see it as a translation issue (especially considering Christianity came out when Paganism was big, saying my god is better then all your gods was probably common) I see this more as an interpretation issue.  People choose to interpret 1 god though it seems as if the bible (which they believe) says there are many gods.  I don't understand how people can write off or interpret away pieces they don't like of their own holy book.

[SSY]

Just to point out, I am arguing the position there is not evidence to clearly say the bible is polytheistic, especially when taken with all the other references to being only one god.

Maybe they are using god is a similar sense to how we use, we frequently say things like " How does God justify killing everyone?" "God seems very cruel" "Can God be both all powerful and all knowing", we, of course, don't believe, but we use for the sake of convenience.

[LoneMateria]

Just to point out, I am arguing the position there is not evidence to clearly say the bible is polytheistic, especially when taken with all the other references to being only one god.

Maybe they are using god is a similar sense to how we use, we frequently say things like " How does God justify killing everyone?" "God seems very cruel" "Can God be both all powerful and all knowing", we, of course, don't believe, but we use for the sake of convenience.

Okay, I was a little confused on your position.  But if you are going to argue that then i'm going to say there isn't enough evidence to say the bible is clearly monotheistic as well, especially with multiple references to other gods.

I don't agree with your second statement because its a point of interpretation.  It's one thing to say well maybe this story is metaphor and these laws are metaphor.  You run into the problem of how to separate the message from metaphor.  To me it becomes far more plausible (especially because these were written during polytheistic times) that instead of recognizing only one god and saying there is no more you say we worship only one god, and hes the best and strongest of the gods but there are many others.  Thats how I see that writing in there.  But to take it and spin it to say that its referring to idols puts the view at odds with what is actually said.  Also I fail to see how this escapes people who view the bible as the literal, infallible word of God.  If your god is the, "God of gods" then that should suggest there are others gods yours is just stronger.

From my personal perspective having the bible say there is one god or there are one million gods is pointless.  I, of course, don't believe in any of them.  I honestly want to use this on my buddy and pull him out of his comfort zone, if I can shift his attention from the common belief.  By using the words of the bible I hope to demonstrate its errancy in the most simplest of matters.  You know get him to think about it (thinking should get the ball rolling).

[SSY]

Just to point out, I am arguing the position there is not evidence to clearly say the bible is polytheistic, especially when taken with all the other references to being only one god.

Maybe they are using god is a similar sense to how we use, we frequently say things like " How does God justify killing everyone?" "God seems very cruel" "Can God be both all powerful and all knowing", we, of course, don't believe, but we use for the sake of convenience.

Okay, I was a little confused on your position.  But if you are going to argue that then i'm going to say there isn't enough evidence to say the bible is clearly monotheistic as well, especially with multiple references to other gods.

I don't agree with your second statement because its a point of interpretation.  It's one thing to say well maybe this story is metaphor and these laws are metaphor.  You run into the problem of how to separate the message from metaphor.  To me it becomes far more plausible (especially because these were written during polytheistic times) that instead of recognizing only one god and saying there is no more you say we worship only one god, and hes the best and strongest of the gods but there are many others.  Thats how I see that writing in there.  But to take it and spin it to say that its referring to idols puts the view at odds with what is actually said.  Also I fail to see how this escapes people who view the bible as the literal, infallible word of God.  If your god is the, "God of gods" then that should suggest there are others gods yours is just stronger.

From my personal perspective having the bible say there is one god or there are one million gods is pointless.  I, of course, don't believe in any of them.  I honestly want to use this on my buddy and pull him out of his comfort zone, if I can shift his attention from the common belief.  By using the words of the bible I hope to demonstrate its errancy in the most simplest of matters.  You know get him to think about it (thinking should get the ball rolling).

That's great, both our positions can exist mutually, everyone is right!.  

[LoneMateria]

That's great, both our positions can exist mutually, everyone is right!.  

Sure can!  I hope I can make a good case for my buddy next time I see him.  I'm sure he will make stuff up to why my examples aren't polytheism.  Thats why I was examining the wording so that i could find some examples that couldn't be hand waved away.