Monotheistic Cogitohazard Mindvirus

Religions which promote monotheism are an explicit attempt to create categories of phenomena which can't be studied. They do this by creating the concept of Universals/presuppositions in ones narrative of reality. It's basically a Cogitohazard as you're force to systematically accept certain phenomena as unquestionable. For example, Christianity is the Roman Empire's propaganda model/psyop following a mass purge of dozens of independent systems of spirituality which were based on a previous narrative of The Bible (which was also deliberately re-written with provably motivated intent throughout the first few centuries AD).

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >you're force to systematically accept certain phenomena as unquestionable
    There is nothing in the concept of monotheism that requires this.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I suppose you are referring to dogmas or to the idea of not having Dual or Trinitarian thinking or another.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      One god as the base.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's not unquestionable. The answer will be "yes".
        It is just as "unquestionable" to wonder if there is only one god in polytheism, or if there is any god in atheism.

        • 1 month ago
          Open Sesame

          i think he means "invisible"

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Doubtful. What do YOU mean "invisible"?

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            The Nicene Creed, the Father created all things, visible and invisible. Monotheism entails belief in the invisible world of the Kingdom of God, unquestionable because it's invisible

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The Nicene Creed
            IS NOT a required tenet in monotheism.
            Stop confusing a single religion for a concept.
            Nothing you said is required in the concept of monotheism.
            It is required to accept the Nicene Creed.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i just think the most charitable interpretation of "God wants us to accept the unquestionable" is that God will have us accept the invisible

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And I am telling you that concept of unquestioning acceptance is not required in the concept of monotheism.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            well you're right that faith must be rational

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Disagree. You have switched from "must be questionable" to "must be rational" and those are not the same thing.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            Abraham questioned the Will of God when he petitioned on behalf of Sodom. so monotheism calls us to Rational Faith!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Abraham
            >Stop confusing a single religion for a concept
            It is very telling that you seem incapable of talking about the concept of a single supreme being without bringing a specific religion into the mix.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            While Zoroaster was the origin of monotheism isn't it correct for us today to think of Abrahamic religion as synonymous with monotheism? For Zoroastrianism is pretty much dead

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >isn't it correct for us today to think of Abrahamic religion as synonymous with monotheism?
            No. There are far too many different understandings of the concept that have nothing to do with Zoroaster or Abrahamic faiths to make that claim.
            अहं सर्वस्य प्रभवो मत्त: सर्वं प्रवर्तते ।
            इति मत्वा भजन्ते मां बुधा भावसमन्विता: ॥ ८ ॥
            ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo
            mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate
            iti matvā bhajante māṁ
            budhā bhāva-samanvitāḥ
            >I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me. The wise who perfectly know this engage in My devotional service and worship Me with all their hearts.

            also our prophetic attunement to Abraham and what he did with his life in devotion to God is a clue to the nature of monotheism as a whole. why do you believe you have an intuitive grasp of the Supreme Being? because he cares about us? why not be a deist? if he cares about us then you're being idealistic, and ideally wouldn't he have visited Man in the form of Jesus Christ? isn't that the most optimistic state of affairs, who is the Living Word?

            It is a clue to how HE understood the concept.
            >why do you believe you have an intuitive grasp of the Supreme Being?
            I dont. That would be something unquestionable. And monotheism is questionable.
            oṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ
            pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate
            pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya
            pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate
            >The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.

            I shall no longer engage with your insistence on Abrahamism. You can either engage with the concept of monotheism as I present it, or you can show through your inability that you are purely talking about one religion and not with a concept of a single supreme person.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            why believe God is a person? Brahman isn't a person. also clarify for my sake what this debate is about. are you saying monotheism is "questionable?" that sounds like double-speak, charitably.

            is brahman not unquestionable in Vedic religion? for when you look within you see the Atman and his consubstantiality with the Creator. to doubt Brahman is to doubt the Self

            but i am also confused as to what your position is, with regards to faith in god, and the sense of "questionable" at issue!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >why believe God is a person? Brahman isn't a person.
            brahmaṇo hi pratiṣṭhāham
            amṛtasyāvyayasya ca
            śāśvatasya ca dharmasya
            sukhasyaikāntikasya ca
            >And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness.
            Brahman is the undifferentiated, impersonal effulgence of the Supreme Person.
            vadanti tat tattva-vidas
            tattvaṁ yaj jñānam advayam
            brahmeti paramātmeti
            bhagavān iti śabdyate
            >Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this nondual substance Brahman, Paramātmā or Bhagavān.
            To say the Absolute is impersonal is to limit the Absolute.
            >are you saying monotheism is "questionable?
            The claim was that monotheism requires unquestioning. This is not true.
            >is brahman not unquestionable in Vedic religion?
            Sure it is. The propounder of Samkhya philosophy denied Brahman. But you again confuse having an answer to the questions as being unquestionable.
            Just like the Pythagorean theorem - you can question it all day, every day. Doing so has led to hundreds of ways to prove it is correct.
            You can question monotheism, you can question Brahman. Doing so will lead you to the same answer.

            also i think to say that Abrahamic, what i shall call "prophecy," is merely the OPINION of ONE MAN is a disservice to your monotheism, for you ought to accept that Abraham was a prophet of your God

            >still cant get away from seeing everything through one religion

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i don't disagree with you much, but as per your last quotation of me, i think you are being uncharitable in your interpretation of what i am saying, and seeing thru a veil of hatred of the Three Abrahamic religions. i'm not saying Abraham is the SOLE interpreter of monotheism (though I believe he is the best, as Catholicism denies baptism in the Name of the "Hindu Trinity" (sic)), but that your disregard of Abraham, in your above claim that Abraham merely gave a random OPINION about God, is a disservice to YOUR monotheism. merry christmas

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >i'm not saying Abraham is the SOLE interpreter of monotheism
            You dont have to say it. Everything you have mentioned is only relevant and applicable to that specific religion.
            I am not disregarding him in any way other than to show that you cannot comprehend the concept of monotheism except through that lens.
            And this is why you make the incorrect claim that monotheism requires unquestioning.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i never claimed that monotheism requires unquestioning, the original poster was Anonymous but i use this trip. i said 1) abraham questioned God 2) he means unquestioning about the INVISIBLE (Anonymous must be "Scientific athiest!") and 3) God is always a question because faith entails rationality

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >i never claimed that monotheism requires unquestioning
            So you agree with me that monotheism as a concept has no requirement of unquestioning?
            Because that has been my point this entire time, and yet you have been arguing against me.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            yeah so i think the origin of our argument was i interpreted Anon's notion that God doesn't want us to *question* as the idea that we can't know the invisible

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            it's kind of subtle, hope you do understand: he says "God wants us to accept the unquestionable." Now there are two senses of unquestionable, the notion of "blind faith" (we both disagree with Anon if he means that God wants us to have "blind faith").

            but there's another sense of unquestionable, which i charitably interpret anon as meaning, which is that God wants us to accept things that can't be "questioned" using, e.g., scientific Rationalism.

            the kingdom of god is within you

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >the origin of our argument
            Was this:

            Doubtful. What do YOU mean "invisible"?

            >What do YOU mean "invisible"?

            The Nicene Creed, the Father created all things, visible and invisible. Monotheism entails belief in the invisible world of the Kingdom of God, unquestionable because it's invisible

            >Monotheism entails belief in the invisible world of the Kingdom of God, unquestionable because it's invisible
            You are now saying monotheism no longer entails the unquestionable.

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            yes we're on the same page. there was an ambiguity because the last quotation should be read in quotation marks, as if that's what Anon believed. So it's: Anon believes: "Monotheism entails belief in the Invisible, which cannot be questioned empirically" (in charity)

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And that anon is wrong.
            So why spend all this time defending them, only to now agree that they were wrong?

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i'm channeling St. Ignatius of Loyola:

            >Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I question that severely, and point out once again that you can only speak of the concept of monotheism through Christianity.
            Seriously go read some Madhvacrya.

            Monotheism sees God as a caring daddy who will do everything for you. Monotheists think that one God has an infinite number of functions, but for some reason they do not go to a proctologist to treat their teeth because there is such a thing as specialization.

            >Monotheism sees God as a caring daddy who will do everything for you.
            Incorrect.
            The five main forms of relationship with God are all having the soul serve the Supreme.
            In neutrality, as one's object of focus.
            In servitude, as one's Lord.
            In friendship, as one's greatest friend.
            In parenthood/guardianship, as one's child or ward.
            In romance, as one's lover.
            In all cases, the pure relationship is that of serving the Supreme.
            It is a perversion of this spiritual relationship that one expects the Supreme to serve them.
            This idea that the Supreme is your Father is ONLY in the temporary material existence.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's not that he can't. He's just has no intentions of actually validating his thesis. His thesis underscores a premise of shitting on Christianity, specifically, and exclusively; he's just a hook nosed israelite trynta do shit that israelites do

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i was told by Osiris and other spirits that i am krishna and it took much "abrahamic faith" to deny myself and take up this cross and preach the Word to you here

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's called schizophrenia

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            i think you're a cia agent pushing anti-spiritualism. but i know the osiris because i was resurrected by him when your government murdered me, and i saw a vision of Krishna in an Ancient Egyptian tomb. he was green. osiris sent me the vision and said to me, "We know who you are. We've seen this before."

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            also i think to say that Abrahamic, what i shall call "prophecy," is merely the OPINION of ONE MAN is a disservice to your monotheism, for you ought to accept that Abraham was a prophet of your God

          • 1 month ago
            Open Sesame

            also our prophetic attunement to Abraham and what he did with his life in devotion to God is a clue to the nature of monotheism as a whole. why do you believe you have an intuitive grasp of the Supreme Being? because he cares about us? why not be a deist? if he cares about us then you're being idealistic, and ideally wouldn't he have visited Man in the form of Jesus Christ? isn't that the most optimistic state of affairs, who is the Living Word?

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Christianity is the Roman Empire's propaganda model/psyop following a mass purge of dozens of independent systems of spirituality which were based on a previous narrative of The Bible (which was also deliberately re-written with provably motivated intent throughout the first few centuries AD).
    social engineering to unite the entire civilian population in the same narrative
    basically the politics of the last century.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Op can't into objective reality
    And is also a homosexual

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >For example: Christianity
    Show nose, and other examples, Chain.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    None of it is unquestionable except to Judaism and Islam. Because they don't know God in the first place. They only know that he is.
    Christ invites you to the Mystery of God, personally. If you want to reject his invitation or fall for memes, that's your own problem. But you won't be able to blame anyone but yourself in the end.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >assuming that there is one deity
      >assuming that deity is also the absolute
      >assuming the Christian narrative about this deity is the right one
      >assuming you must worship this deity
      >assuming that you can't gain powers to become godlike

  6. 1 month ago
    Open Sesame
  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Religions which promote monotheism are an explicit attempt to create categories of phenomena which can't be studied.
    All of the phenomena described in Hinduism and other forms of paganism can be studied though? What the hell are you smoking?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Monotheism sees God as a caring daddy who will do everything for you. Monotheists think that one God has an infinite number of functions, but for some reason they do not go to a proctologist to treat their teeth because there is such a thing as specialization.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This is interesting when yiu factor in that atheism uses Christianity and its pre suppositions as an easy punching bag

    Almost as thiugh the elite build up both sides to erode away at the spirituality and/or faith in tge people by making it seen like fairy tales on both ends, sick

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You might be one to talk with.
      One factoir I have found interesting in the different monotheistic models is what comes first in the description of that Supremacy (excepting the tautological, definitional aspects of "singular" and "personhood").
      What I mean is, once a person comes to the conclusion of monotheism, what are the first ways they describe it?
      Christianity has three basic ones, and usually in this order: all powerful, all knowing, all good.
      I offer a different start, coming from that synthesis vedantic tradition of understanding the Absolute to be both fully personal and fully impersonal - a juxtaposing resolution of paradox.
      The first description for the Supreme Person should be ALL-INCLUSIVE.
      As I like to put it
      God is fully A and not B,
      and God is fully B and not A,
      and God is both A and B,
      and God is neither A nor B.
      Is God all powerful? Yes. Is God powerless? Yes. Is God all knowing? Yes. Is God incapable of knowing? Yes. Is God the greatest good and the greatest evil and neutral? Yes.
      And there are many ways our brains can try to resolve these things, and there many ways we can question and research such things, but there will always be more just out of reach due to the infinite, all-inclusive nature of God.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >christianity
    >monotheistic
    dumb OP, dumb thread, dumb board, dumb site, dumb society, dumb era, dumb world
    get me outta here

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *