How do we know that there is only one god?

[FallenFromGrace]

I'm a Christian, I suppose you could say. I've been going through lots of doubts lately since I've started looking into it though. I have a friend who's part of the Norse Religion. He keeps trying to show me that there are many gods. Why can't there be multiple gods? Why only one? If you have any answers on this, it would be appreciated. Thanks.

[Jac3510]

There can only be one God by definition. If you just define "god" as a "super human spiritual being," then sure there could be multiple "gods." On that view, angels and demons could be called "gods." The OT had no problem calling false gods like Baal and Chemosh "gods," because that's how they defined the term--just a super human spiritual being.

But when you then start talking about "God" as the Bible defines Yahweh, then there can be only one. "God" here is understood to be the sovereign Lord over all and Creator of everything. He is omnipotent, omniscient, perfect, etc. There can only be one such being. The reason is simple enough. Suppose there were two Gods (properly defined). The problem is that they would be absolutely indistinguishable, and that which cannot be distinguished from something else is to be regarded as identical with it. Let me explain that a bit more with some examples.

Regarding the rule on indistinguishability entailing identity, think of yourself. Make a list of your characteristics, your "attributes" if you will. This is what I know about you:

1. FallenFromGrace is a Christian;
2. FallenFromGrace has a Norse friend;
3. FallenFromGrace has an interest in philosophical questions about God;
4. FallenFromGrace is having some doubts about his(?) Christianity.

etc.

Now, I don't know your mother's name or where you are in the birth order, so I'm going to make that up, so forgive me if I'm terribly wrong and make the necessary adjustments. Let's call your mother Grace, and let's say that you are her first born son. Now, let's consider the attributes of this person, "The first born son of Grace." We know about him:

1'. The first born son of Grace is a Christian;
2'. The first born son of Grace has a Norse friend;
3'. The first born son of Grace has an interest in philosophical questions about God;
4'. The first born son of Grace is having some doubts about his(?) Christianity.

There is obviously nothing to distinguish FallenFromGrace from the first born son of Grace. If this list was exhaustive of ALL of your attributes, then we would say that FallenFromGrace IS the first born so of Grace.

The rule is, in order to say X and Y are different, distinct beings, there must be something different and distinct about them. You must be able to say that this is true about X but it is not true about Y, and that is true about Y but not about X.

So, back to your question. The problem, you can't say that about these multiple Gods. Let's take "perfection" as an attribute. To be "perfect" means "to lack nothing." To perfect beings would have absolutely all "perfections" (in philosophical jargon)--neither of them would lack anything at all. But in that case, you could not say something was true of the first God but not of the second, because if you could do that, you would be necessarily saying that there was something the first or the second being did not have (so that you could affirm the distinction); but in that case, one (or both) would not be perfect by definition. Thus, they must be identical.

The same case can be made with regard to God being the First Cause. There can only be one First Cause, because if there were two First Causes, then either both are the First Cause of everything (in which case there is no way to distinguish them),or one is the First Cause of only some events and not others; but if one is only the First Cause of some events, then one is not the First Cause at all (by definition).

More could be said, especially when you start getting into properties like sovereignty, aseity, and divine simplicity, but I think this should be more than enough to get you started.

[PaulSacramento]

There can be only ONE creator God and yes, there are many beings that can and have been called gods.
But only one supreme God that created them as well.
Many fallen angels passed themselves off as gods and I am sure that in some cultures what we in the Judeo-christian ones see as "angels" and "demons" may have passed themselves off as gods or been mistake as such.
Makes sense when we look at the powers that are attributed to them in myths and powers attributed to "angels" ( both good and bad) in the bible.

[B. W.]

I'm a Christian, I suppose you could say. I've been going through lots of doubts lately since I've started looking into it though. I have a friend who's part of the Norse Religion. He keeps trying to show me that there are many gods. Why can't there be multiple gods? Why only one? If you have any answers on this, it would be appreciated. Thanks.

One - all the gods spend time fighting each other for dominance and control and that happens in Norse myth - therefore, since they do, heaven's bliss can never happen.

Think about it...

One God, Creator of all - then there can be heaven's bliss...

With many gods - one misses this...

Norse gods and the pagan pantheon involves manipulating gods to gets one way or desires - very selfish.

One true God would seek with true justice and equity to remove this human streak of selfishness because of its corrupting nature in all that it touches. He did so through the work of Jesus Christ so that a person is confronted with the reality of their need to surrender this selfishness because God is not mocked - what one sows - they reap. One creator God has his terms which are defined to us by his ever revealing nature and character of grace. However, keep despising this grace and he will grant a place where one reaps what they have shown.

There is no justice with Norse gods or the pagan pantheon of gods. Why - they fight each other and demand subservient works to get ones selfish gets...

What misery of service with no end ever in sight...

Think about it and the Lord will grant you fuller insight in how to respond to your friend through prayer and seeking Him - his ways to handle this...

Its free, doesn't cost a dime and is completely unselfish in that you are seeking to save your friend's very soul
-
-
-

[Philip]

Because the ONLY God Whom has shown massive historical, prophetic, miraculous evidence and credibility, the testimony demonstrated by millions of radically changed lives - THAT God, the Beginner, Creator and Author of History, has told us that He alone is God and that are no others!

And there simply is no other so-called god that has produced any evidence to credibly back with evidence those claiming such gods.

"And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none besides me. “Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other." (Isaiah 45:21-22)

[Thadeyus]

Um...just to point out something to Philip but,

We've also had many hundreds of years of worshipers of that certain gods worshipers going about and deliberately destroying any and all works of every and any other belief they can/could get their hands on. (Up to and including some in today's world)

Turning their holy buildings into rubble, or worse leaving nothing but a ash stain in the ground or converting them into their own paces of worship.

For most preceding religions there simply isn't enough left to even know what their rituals or decrees actually were.

I'm pretty sure none of the Greek mysteries survive to the modern day. We simply have no idea (Other than pretty much the names of their gods) as to what specifically they claimed or worshiped.

So...to say 'There is no proof" is pretty disingenuous when groups have gone around deliberately destroying said information.

Very much cheers to all.

[Philip]

We've also had many hundreds of years of worshipers of that certain gods worshipers going about and deliberately destroying any and all works of every and any other belief they can/could get their hands on. (Up to and including some in today's world) Turning their holy buildings into rubble, or worse leaving nothing but a ash stain in the ground or converting them into their own paces of worship.

Which is no indication of the Bible's God teachings found within Scripture being followed by such people - meaning, they are either not believers in Him or are in serious error and misunderstanding of what His teachings are for their conduct and treatment of others. However, and only in specific circumstances as directed, the Israelites were instructed by God to destroy various Canaanite armies and their cultic sites. But a clear understanding of such situational and time-specific directives will make one realize that such directives cannot be universally applied - say, as to Muslim mosques, various temples, the Crusades, etc.

I'm pretty sure none of the Greek mysteries survive to the modern day. We simply have no idea (Other than pretty much the names of their gods) as to what specifically they claimed or worshiped.

So, we're to believe that Greek gods followed long ago, who have been unable to protect and perpetuate their teachings and desired practices (so that they have survived and are still followed), of whom NONE of their followers even still exist - to assert that these are credible evidences of gods with god-like miraculous powers? Those so-called gods either never truly existed or clearly didn't have any power of sustaining what their supposed powers were - and would appear to be dead and forgotten. No, such is merely evidence of gods that only existed in the minds of those who made images of them with their own hands, or that just blindly followed them.

So...to say 'There is no proof" is pretty disingenuous when groups have gone around deliberately destroying said information.

Would mere mortals be able to completely destroy and eradicate the information and instructions important to a REAL god? How weak is that? Such "gods" couldn't even protect their own words or their own followers - with the results being neither that neither they, their followers, or their words are any longer remembered, known, followed or found. Sounds like pretty impotent gods. No prophecies or historical evidences are available to examine, no followers, no nothing. This is all laughable when compared to Christianity, the Bible, and what is historically known about Jesus and His contemporary followers ... not to mention the evidence we find in the lives of millions of joyful Christians today.

[Thadeyus]

I'm pretty sure none of the Greek mysteries survive to the modern day. We simply have no idea (Other than pretty much the names of their gods) as to what specifically they claimed or worshiped.

So, we're to believe that Greek gods followed long ago, who have been unable to protect and perpetuate their teachings and desired practices (so that they have survived and are still followed), of whom NONE of their followers even still exist - to assert that these are credible evidences of gods with god-like miraculous powers? Those so-called gods either never truly existed or clearly didn't have any power of sustaining what their supposed powers were - and would appear to be dead and forgotten. No, such is merely evidence of gods that only existed in the minds of those who made images of them with their own hands, or that just blindly followed them.

Well...you also have the now non-existant Celtic Christianity and the almost current extinction of Coptic Christianity in Egypt. While these are/were 'just' two 'sects' within the larger umbrella of Christian belief, one should perhaps watch for stones whilst in a glass house?

So...to say 'There is no proof" is pretty disingenuous when groups have gone around deliberately destroying said information.

Would mere mortals be able to completely destroy and eradicate the information and instructions important to a REAL god? How weak is that? Such "gods" couldn't even protect their own words or their own followers - with the results being neither that neither they, their followers, or their words are any longer remembered, known, followed or found. Sounds like pretty impotent gods. No prophecies or historical evidences are available to examine, no followers, no nothing. This is all laughable when compared to Christianity, the Bible, and what is historically known about Jesus and His contemporary followers ... not to mention the evidence we find in the lives of millions of joyful Christians today.

So...the Roman Catholic church's suppression of the many gospels and its instance that only following four of the possibly twelve? This seems to be 'Just the work of men' but, by your criteria, holds the most sway? So.....'bottoms on seats' is your defining measurement of worship, then? Interesting.

Very much cheers to you and yours.

[Philip]

Well...you also have the now non-existant Celtic Christianity and the almost current extinction of Coptic Christianity in Egypt. While these are/were 'just' two 'sects' within the larger umbrella of Christian belief, one should perhaps watch for stones whilst in a glass house?

So...the Roman Catholic church's suppression of the many gospels and its instance that only following four of the possibly twelve? This seems to be 'Just the work of men' but, by your criteria, holds the most sway? So.....'bottoms on seats' is your defining measurement of worship, then? Interesting.

Respectfully, you are seriously uninformed about how the Bible was formed and of the process involved. TRUE Christianity and God's teachings flow from what was in the original manuscript writings of the Bible, written down as inspired by God. And so God is the ultimate Author of Scripture and He miraculously guided its transmission. The early church, WAY before what became to be considered the Catholic Church was in place, had a very strict criteria to DISCOVER what books were to be considered God-given and what other so-called "gospels" were in direct contradictions to it. They had a rigorous process and criteria for this discovery process and also rightfully did not include what did not meet the criteria. But the CHURCH did not determine what should go in the Bible, but only affirmed what had already been given it.

Here's a bit about that process and an explanation of five foundational questions that were at the very heart of the discovery process - Part One: https://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/ ... 1W0402.pdf and Part Two: http://www.johnankerberg.org/Articles/_ ... 3W0402.pdf

And this on discovering/determining what was in the original manuscripts, and what was not: http://www.jashow.org/Articles/ATRI-Bib ... ticism.pdf

And here: http://www.lightsource.com/ministry/ank ... 46622.html

[Thadeyus]

Dear Philip,

We've strayed from the original poster's comments and question.

We've also rambled across a couple of different points within our replies to one another.

My initial point was that...With out the knowledge of said disappeared faiths beliefs. We have no way of knowing of where to even begin to look for any veracity of said beliefs and faiths. We have some possible caves for the Delphi oracle to match up against the relatively little we have remaining of the Greek faiths. We have the built over springs in England in relation to remains of their older, pre Roman heritage.

Saying that "Other beliefs are wrong...Because they weren't 'strong'/'successful' enough to survive into the present day" Is not really a valid/ (Am trying to think of a better descriptive word than 'valid'...And failing atm) /Supportive reply/comment.

What I am trying to say is that one can't really 'dismiss' other beliefs if there isn't even grounds for knowing what those beliefs were.

Your reply seemed to me a more "Survival of the fittest belief." ...Or "They who have the biggest congregation wins."

My reply to yourself (And I hence appologive to the original poster for changing track) is,

"Current Christianity is demonstrably different to that of the past. So...was ancient Christianity false?"

Very much cheers to all.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

I've read all your posts, Thadeyus. You know, you should pay attention to Philip when he says,

Respectfully, you are seriously uninformed about how the Bible was formed and of the process involved.

I thought of answering you myself but I'm not charitable enough to work with people like you.

If you really want to learn about Christianity, listen to what people like Philip have to say. If all you want to do is pontificate on how Christians are misinformed, continue on the path you are already following. (It is a Dead End that insures you will remain as ignorant as you presently are.)

FL

[domokunrox]

Jac has the most complete answer here, and its hard to add anymore to that.

Not that Philip needs someone reply to Thadeyus here, but I'm going to go ahead and point out a couple of things.

We've strayed from the original poster's comments and question.

Indeed you did.

We've also rambled across a couple of different points within our replies to one another.

Yes, but I would still listen to what Philip wrote to you because he is providing actual historical facts & information to you instead of the misinformation you believe or disinformation you are attempting to pass along.

My initial point was that...With out the knowledge of said disappeared faiths beliefs. We have no way of knowing of where to even begin to look for any veracity of said beliefs and faiths.

Your initial point is making an argument from ignorance (Thats a fallacy), and the kicker is that you assumed that polytheism is true and that the claims of Christian (Monotheism) is false which you've indirectly proposed. Thats begging the question (Another fallacy)

Saying that "Other beliefs are wrong...Because they weren't 'strong'/'successful' enough to survive into the present day" Is not really a valid/ (Am trying to think of a better descriptive word than 'valid'...And failing atm) /Supportive reply/comment.

Of course might does not make one right. If you read more carefully, you'd learn that Philip wasn't using that as his conclusion but rather that his faith has survived MANY conquests by very large civilizations while others did not.

What I am trying to say is that one can't really 'dismiss' other beliefs if there isn't even grounds for knowing what those beliefs were.

Argument from ignorance. We absolutely could dismiss polytheism if they contradict the claims of Christianity or simply by examining the monotheism of Christianity. Go back up and read Jac's post. Read it very carefully.

Your reply seemed to me a more "Survival of the fittest belief." ...Or "They who have the biggest congregation wins."

You're not understanding his point. If the truth can't even survive when a civilization falls and new ones rise through the ashes or rubble, then its pretty safe to say it doesn't much truth to it at all. For example, the greeks discovered the mathematical tables, yet their civilization crumbled and we're still using their findings today. Math was literally their religion at several points.

"Current Christianity is demonstrably different to that of the past. So...was ancient Christianity false?"

and our reply to you is that you are severely misinformed about early Christianity and what is Christianity today. You seem to think that pretty much anything that attempts to assimilate or add on to Christianity is valid Christianity or adds to their OWN credibility. We know what isn't Christianity because we examine the genuine in order to identity counterfeits.

I suggest you go to the theology section of the website and inquire about this topic, so you can be informed.

[Philip]

Thadeyus wrote:Your reply seemed to me a more "Survival of the fittest belief." ...Or "They who have the biggest congregation wins."

You're not understanding his point. If the truth can't even survive when a civilization falls and new ones rise through the ashes or rubble, then its pretty safe to say it doesn't much truth to it at all. For example, the greeks discovered the mathematical tables, yet their civilization crumbled and we're still using their findings today. Math was literally their religion at several points.

My point about Christianity surviving the centuries, warfare, etc. had more to do with the capabilities of our God Who sustained it, whose Word has lasted, miraculously protected until the present - representing, by FAR, the largest and oldest number of ancient manuscripts, and from around the world, His Church constantly adding to its numbers, His prophecies, many of them having been validated as true, were known until their accurate fulfillment - often many centuries after they were made. So if a God can supposedly create a universe but He can't protect His transmitted Word, His followers, His Church, and that His true followers aren't still around as a joy to the world as seekers of peace and good will as those of Christianity's God is - as, comparatively, evidence for any other so-called "god" is essentially non-existent. Many civilizations have SAID such gods were all powerful, the reason for the world's existence, etc. - and yet their followers have all disappeared, their religious texts all lost, their influence non-existent, evaporated in the dust of history - and so what does that say about any supposed evidence that such any such god or gods were truly a god to begin with? And yet the love inspired by the God of Christianity transformed the Roman empire, not by warfare, but with the love of Christ. And God's Church is still expanding. Compare that to Islam, mostly spread by the sword, conquest and threat of death (even still!).

Oh, and ever notice how every plague that God sent to free Israel from Egyptian bondage made a mockery of the supposed all-powerful Egyptian gods associated with the subject of the individual plagues? Their sun god mocked as Egypt experienced three days of total darkness, etc, as with the other plagues/their other gods. And don't even get me going about the supposed deity of pharaoh, who no doubt writhed and itched in tremendous agony with the boils covering his mortal butt, along with all other Egyptian mortals and beasts.

[tiopapo]

There is only one God because one suffices!
Socrates asked the Athenians why were they having so many 'Gods', they accused him of atheism, he quickly responded "wait a minute, I am not an atheist am only asking why do you have more than one God when one suffices?" ---1978 Webster's dic definition for God = "The greatest being that exists, creator and ruler of the universe" ...Well in Socrates terms, if there are two of them, which one is the "greatest"? Therefore the principle of simplicity applies; You don't really need more than one if one suffices! This is just an explanation of why there has to be only one necessarily instead of two or more. Polytheism is actually a contradiction of terms.

The other areas on this discussion have to do with the questions: "Does that one God exists?" For that the usual suspects can be the answer; the Cosmological, Necessary being, Moral etc.
Once the person can believe the God idea is logical then the question "What type of God is he/she necessarily?" "What essence most he posses".
Amongst most ideas os God when analyzing his attributes one is very common and logical, love. God is love is mostly accepted by all theologies in the world.And here is where Christianity is set apart form any other religion on earth. The issue is:

If there has to be only one God because only one suffices and if he created everything else and if that God is by definition love (he couldn't be not love, for example), then; Whom did that one God loved before he created the first thing (being) he did? Here only Christianity answers. God is a multiplicity of three persons. You see love is the nature of loving, an act towards outside of self, never toward inside. So there has to be someone else to love in order for any entity to have love to give, for love is giving.God most be more than one as in the Christian trinity concept, necessarily!

So you see from downward logical analyses from infinite we can get an idea of why there is one God, then what is his essence, three beings in infinite unison in love....is he the Christian God namely Jesus? Here again we can find a common sense with Jesus visit to mankind....! Back to Socrates....he also said that there most be an after life because he was sick and tired to see evil people dying without ever pain their evil in this life, and he says "I know there is Justice" which simply means -you have to pay-! Like patience means "you have to wait"!
If justice demands we pay our evil deeds, then if you don't pay it here, there is an after life to catch up to you; again according to Socrates!

Now if there is God, and by his essence only good can come , but we find that man is not good, rather evil this condition is against the nature and will of God, an offense of sorts. This condition of man has hurt the perfect will of God, and has caused an offense to him; what type of offense? Since God's essence is infinite, and when you offend someone you offend the total person, our offense to God is to his total essence and since his essence is infinite, our offense is infinite, though we are finite beings!
Well back to justice...Justice demands payment or correction. Mankind's offense against God is infinite;question, can we pay this offense? The answer should be "no" we can, why? Simply because we can't ever reach infinite no matter if we attempt to pay from now on to eternity! So, here is the beauty of Christianity!

God is so much love and loved humanity so much that he applies justice to himself in our behalf, John 3:16. That is loving mankind so much and knowing we couldn't ever pay for our evil since it is infinite and we are not, God himself in the person of Jesus Christ (an infinite being) came to pay for us wretched sinners. Since God is such a gentleman and has so much respect for his creation and one of his creation is free to choose, Jesus offered this applied justice as a choice man can make in accepting the gift of God to pay for our evil.

So, from the logic of why one God, to the necessary essence of that one God to the manifestation evidence to humanity in how that God looks like we can pretty much conclude Christianity is the truth! It is also logical to infer that if the individual does not exercise his divine free will to accept the only justice application to his evilness, then justice demands the individual to pay. Further it is logical as well to infer this payment to be forever given that the offense is infinite, what we understand as hell.

This is my way of explaining the question of God from my book "What I Wish Christian Would Tell You".
Tio Papo

[Metacrock]

We can use Occam's razor, a logical creedo which says "do not multiply entities beyond necessity." Occam said God is necessary. So one God is not multiplying beyond necessity. Yet one is all we need. More than one God is multiplying eneties beyond necessity. So we should not do that.