Yet people more often than not complicate matters when the solution is a simple one.

(November 29, 2021 at 11:32 pm)Foxaire Wrote: Yet people more often than not complicate matters when the solution is a simple one.

Indeedly doodly, but what on earth has that got to do with the topic under discussion? 

I just finished inferring that religious beliefs are a complex field. You have replied implying that is not the case  

I find religion to be uncomplicated in the way a physicist easily understands quantum mechanics.

(November 29, 2021 at 11:51 pm)Foxaire Wrote: I find religion to be uncomplicated in the way a physicist easily understands quantum mechanics.

“I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics.”

-- Richard Feynman

(November 29, 2021 at 11:51 pm)Foxaire Wrote: I find religion to be uncomplicated in the way a physicist easily understands quantum mechanics.

My goodness. Quantum physics may just as well be written in sanskrit to me.

I find religion complex in the way of a person with a degree in Social Anthropology.

Of course I'm sure it isn't always complex. It's just that so far that's how it has turned out to be with the  religions I've actually studied. They include aspects of Islam and Hinduism as well as some time studying Australian aborigine mythology and present day culture.. 

I think I'll stop here.

(November 30, 2021 at 12:33 am)Belacqua Wrote:

(November 29, 2021 at 11:51 pm)Foxaire Wrote: I find religion to be uncomplicated in the way a physicist easily understands quantum mechanics.

“I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics.”

-- Richard Feynman

And even the greatest theolgians, such as Thomas Aquinas, consider theology " like straw" compared to direct mystical encounters with the living god.

(November 30, 2021 at 12:40 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(November 30, 2021 at 12:33 am)Belacqua Wrote: “I think I can safely say that nobody really understands quantum mechanics.”

-- Richard Feynman

And even the greatest theolgians, such as Thomas Aquinas, consider theology " like straw" compared to direct mystical encounters with the living god.

Yeah, I think we have to be VERY careful what we put in the blank when we say "I understand _____." 

Usually we don't.

(November 29, 2021 at 7:48 pm)T.J. Wrote: I always found it a little interesting that, to my knowledge anyway, the only religions that cite to there being only one god is Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All the others to my knowledge cite there being multiple gods all with different purposes.

Last time I checked, Christianity also has multiple gods all with different purposes. Like Satan seem like a god ruling over hell. He's not so different from the ancient Greek god Hades, who is supposed to be running the underworld.

Christianity is not monotheism. Christianity is henotheism - meaning that only one deity among many should be worshiped because Christians still believe in a host of supernatural beings, particularly angels and the devil. They are beings created by the one all-powerful Creator - just as the Egyptian deities were the product of the one all powerful Egyptian Creator.

And when it comes to Hebrews depicted in the Bible, they never embraced a pure monotheism, nor was there a single universal religion. Many important biblical characters in post-Exodus times, for instance, had names ending in "Baal," who was a major Canaanite deity. Gideon, one of the most famous of the early Judges, also was known as Jerub-baal, and Saul, first King of Israel, had a son named Esh-baal and this son succeeded him on the throne.

(November 29, 2021 at 7:48 pm)T.J. Wrote: I always found it a little interesting that, to my knowledge anyway, the only religions that cite to there being only one god is Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All the others to my knowledge cite there being multiple gods all with different purposes. I wonder what came to the authors of the above mention religions to decide it made more sense for one god to exist instead of many?

Discuss.

Uncontested authority, plain and simple. That's the thrust of the ot. Why, according to post exilic compilers, they suffered. As it's the thrust of the nt - declaring a new king of men in the immanent holy war. In both cases, some of the stories were bolted together from sources that wouldn't have believed their narrative or theological contents - but a good story is a useful vehicle no matter who came up with it - as the manufacture of abrahamic religions demonstrates handily.

One god is too many!