I’m not Buddhist, but if one accepts the premise of souls and reincarnation, then it makes sense, at least as long as both aren’t alive at the same time.
I’ve always head the trinity thing being compared with a single tree that has three branches or three trunks.
I think the most common analogy is a three-leaf clover.
Julie
I agree with the O.P. - I’ve heard it said that Christianity is in actuality an end-run around the prohibitions against multiple-god worship and idol worship. Isn’t the basic idea of Judaism that God has no name? Worshipping Jesus and displaying statues of him seem to me to contradict these basic tenets. I know there are arguments as to why this isn’t so, but to me they smack of sophistry. Just my opinion, of course.
Umm… there is a reason it’s called the Mystery of the Trinity. And, the Unitarians, for one, don’t accept that.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Romano-Protestantism is NOT the sum total of Christianity. Protestantism can be and often is very strongly dualist, especially the hardcore fundamentalist forms that greatly emphasize how much power the Devil has. However, this sort of dualism is not the only form of Christianity that exists.
My own Church, the “Eastern” Orthodox, always makes it plain that Satan has no power other than a glib tongue and an ability to alter appearance. He is just another created being–like you and like me.
Plus the fact that he is more-or-less immortal, right? That makes him at least a demi-god in my book.
He is no more immortal than any human’s soul. We lose contact between our souls and bodies, which is what is known as “death”–but our souls go on, without any sort of “spirit death” automatically built in–until the Final Judgement, which will also see the end of the Devil.
So, the Devil is no more “immortal” than you or I. He has no physical body.
But, unlike the disembodied human soul, he can appear on earth, change form and interact with people, and he has been doing this for thousands of years. Yet you maintain he is just like you and I?
Is it possible that many of these “identities” (Satan, Holy-ghost, etc.) stem from earlier gods and myths? As stated earlier by inkleberry and Jonathan Chance, The Israelites (and their God) were well aware of other gods, and even worshiped a few, (longish paper) just not before God.
Early Hebrews probably picked up their early religion* from the Caananites who had a whole bunch o’ gods to choose from (they’d put the Romans to shame).
In some hypotheses, Al (El), the Caananite creator of heaven and earth, is adopted by early Israelites as their “God”. Al, by the way, was not their chief god. Baal, Al’s son with his wife Asherah, got that job (to the dismay of all the gods it seems, but this is another story).
*According to The Encyclopedia of World History, sixth edition, edited by Peter N. Stearns (original editor, William L. Langer) the course of the monotheistic worship of Yahweh is problematic. And although they (Stearns et. al.) are careful to point out that there is still much debate over the issue of exactly how early on monotheism developed in the Hebrew religion, there is a 9th century Hebrew inscription that suggests Yahweh had a consort named… (drum roll please) Asherah.
As to how widespread this belief was then (or lasted to) is unknown, (by me, anyway).
Dan Brown book to follow…
Nah, he’s just an angel who made an evil choice. What part of that is “semantic weaseling”?
Hmm. You seem to be saying that anything which is superhuman is, in some sense, a god. Are you?
If you are, then, given that Judaism and Islam also accommodate the idea of angels, do you think there are any truly monotheistic religions?
I’m not sure why angels and Satan represent a challange to Christianity’s supposed monotheism.
They are all created by God (who is Himself uncreated), they are all unworthy of worship, and their supernatural abilities (while admittedly greater than a human’s) are infinitely les sthan God’s, and ultimately utterly dependent on God’s will to function. Why God would let the Devil and his crew have power is the focus of much theological debate that I don’t pretend to understand, but the conclusion is that Satan only exists and has any abilities at all becuase God wants him to. Much theology throws out some Satanic folklore since it has old Scratch doing things (like changing one thing to another) that only God can do.
It’s a universe with only a single unmoved mover, I don’t see why the existance of other, lesser, supernatural beings makes it polytheistic. The distance in power between them and God is greater (infinitely greater) than the distance between myself and them. What’s the cut off point when an entity no longer becomes a “god”. Does a magician count? A ghost (as in the shade of a dead human)? A werewolf? What about a particularly wise and powerful normal human?
The Trinity, OTOH, is trickier. Same goes for the Catholic treatment of Mary. I won’t try to explain away those, as I don’t subscribe to or fully understand those concepts myself.
Many creation myths for polytheistic religions have a creator god and other, lesser, created gods, so Satan being created does not make him any less of a god. As for saints, the patron saint concept looks just like the many minor Roman gods in charge of particular items. If you were a pagan, sure something awful was going to happen if you did not placate the god of harvests, say, wouldn’t it be useful to have a saint to do the same thing?
Early Christianity would not have spread so quickly if it had been radically different from what was there already, so they took in some of the pagan concepts. That also explains the Jesus as god thing, which is so unJewish as to be absurd. How could you convince someone to worship your human prophet when even emperors were divine. They had to make Jesus divine also to be competitive.
Jesus was considered divine by Christians long before they were a recognized religion in the Empire capable of converting many new followers. It was not a doctrine created to “impress” the wider Roman culture, but a natural outgrowth of Christology evident in the late First Century.
The Christian Satan is pretty much the Zorastrian Ahriman, the evil anti-God. If Satan is not comparable in power to God then it can’t be said that he’s a rival to God in any meaningful sense, since God could simply will him out of existence at any moment. It’s also specious to say that Satan “made an evil choice” since an omnscient Creator would have to know what choice Satan would make before he created him. So the fact that Christianity perceives Satan as a foe to God means that he occupies the same mythogical niche as Ahriman in Persian mythology. If Satan can do anything that is not God’s will then Satan is equal to God, or at least equal enough that God apparently can’t stop him or destroy him (and if Satan is doing God’s will, then how can he be evil?)
I think one invisble, immortal, magic pixie in the sky is pretty much the same as another. Wheteher they are “created” or “uncreated” really isn’t a criterion for “godhood” in broader mythological terms. Greco-Roman and Hindu mythologies are filled with created Gods.
In terms of worship, Judaism and Islam are closer to true monotheism since they haven’t deified any humans or contrived any awkward “trinities” to justify it. I think, in mythological terms that the “Shaitan” of Islam is a deity for all practical purposes (Aldebaran, if you read this, please don’t clobber me. I know that this is not an Islamic view). Devils or evil anti-gods have precursers in religion and they serve the same function in modern religions, they’ve just been reclassified to preserve a sharper distinction for the primacy of the “creator” god.
Angels are lesser deities but they are deities as much as the muses or the nymphs of Greek mythology.
In every way that it matters (he is purely created, he cannot create ex nihil, he is capable of having his existence ended), he is essentially like us. Those powers are mere window dressing. He is still no god and still not worthy of worship.
Angels are not deities at all. Were they deities, they should be worshipped. One is not to worship angels because they are not deities. They are merely created beings. Ontologically, they are fundamentally identical with human beings, all of whom are fundamentally different from God. Latria (worship) is due only to God and to God alone. Angels don’t rate it.
All the lesser gods of the Greek and Roman pantheon fit that description also, yet no one can argue that they are monotheistic. Your argument against godhood for angels (including Satan, Lucifer, et al) seems to hinge on whether or not the beings under consideration are equivalent to God in order for polytheism to exist. But if you look at other polytheistic religions, you will find a hierachy with many levels of power, from Zeus all the way down to minor demigods like Pan. Just because these lesser gods (angels and saints, in Christian theology) are not omnipotent does not mean that they are not gods in the same way as polytheistic religions. Greek sheperds appealed to Pan in time of need; Christian shepards regard the Archangel Raphael in much the same way.
Is it possible for us to agree on a definition first? What attributes distinguish a supernatural being from a god?
The Christianity-is-monotheistic folks here seem to be relying on the created-vs.-creator aspect of a being; the Christianity-is-polytheistic folks point to Greek gods, some of whom were born and, thus, created.
So, for the purposes of discussion: what makes a being a “god”?
If a supernatural being is the object of prayers of supplication (such as the Virgin Mary or patron saints), then polytheism exists. IMHO.
Someone may have already answered this but what exactly is the holy spirit supposed to be?