Why don't Monotheists see the fallacy of their faith?

Answer 1

it seems the question is too subtle for those who cannot see that the adoption of any one religion by implication denies all the others

Answer 2

perhaps they don't beleive these 8 different languages words for God all describe the same being:

DIO
DIOS
DEUS
DIEU
SHANGDI
GOTT
GOD
Allah

they are describing the body of Larry Todd S who has a cuts that appear like IIII I .

thus DIO read between the lines is IIII I .n u (O=.n u)
DIOS reads IIII I . S\\(S in times new roman font spells S\\(pronounced seal)
DEUS spells IIII I .= U S\\\(tnr font)
DIEU spells IIII I. [iL U
SHANGDI spells S\\ HAN CuT IIII I (G in tnr font spells CuT)
GOTT spells CuT nu T liT
GOD equal CuTOD (the TODD of the IIII I. fame)
Allah equals All ah(ah=lari mixed up and sealed together)

thus word for the diety of Italy, Spain, Latins(portugese), France, Romanized China, Germany, England, Arabia
all are words used to describe God, the cut up Todd also called Larry but spelled lari so the italians could pronounce it properly. It all makes sence if you accept the letter D was used to describe the IIII on his left Rist.

CHRISTIANI-T makes sense if you see the roman influence and the fact that God sums to H.

C H RIST I A NI liT(T=liT)
H=GOD
NI=IV I(sealed together ie IIII I)

thus One God described with many words, but still Only One as the bible stated. perhaps Jews and their allies can't stand that fact and thus invented Jehovah and Jesus and YHWH as their God, but being that NI RIST, i could care less about the Jews.

Can those race, italians, etc... and the nations they spawned all be wrong and the Jews right? no wonder i always read about the hardships of the Jews, they seem to resist the other nations words that describe God and substitute their own people for the Son a a true Goddess.

Answer 3

fallacy? I think you might not know what the word means. I am sure you meant to ask Why don't Monotheists see the fruitfulness of their faith? :-) I am SURE that is what you meant. Besides, monotheism is so much less cluttered than those who believe in many gods. sun god, moon god, star god, earth god, water god, mountain god, wind god, gosh you could get lost with all those last names if they weren't in alaphabetical order. :-)

Answer 4

For the same reason polytheists don't see the fallacy of their faith.

Answer 5

If Monotheists experience the Divine as singular, that is their perception. I will not say that their internal experience is invalid for THEM. So that does not mean their faith is fallacious, just subjective....

It is just not valid for others (like me)

Answer 6

Monotheists are only Muslims,

The Holy Qur'an cites the relationship among the sections of the universe as evidence on the unity of its Creator. It advises us to look at the order which exists in the universe, and the fact that such an order could not exist if there were more than One Creator. More than one administration for the universe is like more than one administration for one city, state, or country. It produces confusion and disorder.

"If there were in them (the heavens and the Earth) gods besides the Almighty God, they would have been in a state of disorder. Glory be to Him. He is above what they describe. " 21 :22

"Say: God is One on Whom all depend. He did not beget, nor was He begotten, and none is equal to Him." 112:1-4

"And they say the Beneficent has taken to Himself a son. Certainly you make an abominable assertion. The heavens may almost burst, and the Earth cleave asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces, that they ascribe a son to the Beneficent. And it is not worthy of the Beneficent that He should take to Himself a son." 19:88-92

Islam denies Trinity because parenthood of God to any living or non-living being is inconceivable in bodily terms and degrading to the concept of God. He is neither limited nor a body, and He encompasses the whole universe. He does not have a mate in order to have a child as any other living being does.

His spiritual parenthood to any soul or spirit is also inconceivable if it means other than being the Creator of that soul or spirit. There is no conceivable relation between God and any other being other than the relation between the Creator and His creature. Otherwise, the other being will be independent from God, and he will be His partner.

Now, if the ascribed son is united with God, the case will be as if I state that my son and I are one. If such a statement were true, I would be the father of myself, because I am my own son. And my son would be the son of himself, because he is I. Thus, God would be the father of Himself, and His son would be the son of himself.

"Say: God is One on Whom all depend. He did not beget, nor was He begotten, and none is equal to Him." 112:1-4

"And they say the Beneficent has taken to Himself a son. Certainly you make an abominable assertion. The heavens may almost burst, and the Earth cleave asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces, that they ascribe a son to the Beneficent. And it is not worthy of the Beneficent that He should take to Himself a son." 19:88-92

God is not, and cannot be, the father of any living or non-living being if fatherhood is used for its true meaning. If the word is used in its figurative sense, to mean that God is as compassionate to His living creature as a father, then He will not only be the father of one person but the father of all mankind. And this is what can be understood from the Christian prayer, "Our father, Thou art in Heaven. . .

But even this figurative usage of the word is repugnant to Islam because it is misleading and confusing to the people. Muslims, therefore, do not use it.

Answer 7

Pass.

Answer 8

Julia, I didn't know that the internet was allowed in the psychiatric ward

Answer 9

Tunnel-vision.

Answer 10

Fallacy? This sounds interesting. Though I know there is no way of showing their belief true, since their premises are poor, but there argument could still be valid. Please explain.