Are Atheists using Intellectually Dishonest Arguments?

[vulcanlogician]

Let me know if I totally misunderstood your point.

You know, Steve, I actually think we see eye to eye here on the big picture. I could accuse you of lawyering. (Why doesn't the OT tell stories about Chinese people from the ancient world who opened their hearts and minds to Yahweh? I didn't know that Job wasn't a Jew, and that was interesting to learn. But neither was he an aboriginal Australian. Just like Zeus was concerned chiefly with people situated around the Mediterranean, Yahweh is concerned with ancient tribesman around the Middle East. You can find a few verses that say otherwise, but the rest of the Bible speaks to my point.) But I don't want to accuse you of lawyering. I want to ask: What if Yahweh is universal? What then?

If you are correct in your assumption that Yahweh is a universal God, then you must leave space in your imagination for a concept of Divine Logos or Cosmic Christ. These are terms coined by philosopher John Hick. According to Hick, there is one divine force but it is understood somewhat differently according to who perceives it. Although different peoples perceive the same divine force, they interpret it through the lens of their particular culture. According to Hick's reasoning, the Hindu Brahman, the Chinese Tao, and Yahweh are actually the same entity. This is problematic though if it is true. Most Christians would outright reject this. ("Their god is not MY God.") But if they do, aren't they demonstrating how "finite" their god really is? Hick's conception is really the only way of seeing God as a universal figure. Otherwise he is understood as finite... related to a particular culture to serve a particular purpose.