Mailvox: some Christians don’t understand either

cZja doesn’t get it:

My point is that your argument assumes a distinction that the athiest doesn’t make or acknowledge. And that’s why I think it’s a weak argument.

And thus your point is wrong, because my critique merely demonstrates how that particular atheist witticism is both silly and Biblically ignorant. As the atheist rejects the supernatural, the reference to “one less god” clearly indicates a belief in any supernatural being that is worshipped by men. It says nothing about the characteristics of that particular being. Meanwhile, Christians believe in many supernatural beings, no few of whom are worshipped by pagans. Therefore, the critique can hardly be described as weak given how it eviscerates that particular criticism and reveals the critic to be uneducated on the matter.

The atheist doesn’t make the distinction between God the Creator and Zeus, Moloch or Satan. To him, they are all “gods”. Therefore, it is patently false that the Christian does not believe in more than one god, unlesss that Christian also denies that Satan exists or that there are those who worship him, in which case that Christian would be as Biblically ignorant as the godless wit himself. Which can, of course, be the case.

Now, I do agree that as an argument against atheism, my “argument” is very, very weak. This is mostly because it isn’t one.

Harry cites a bunch of verses from Isaiah:

Isaiah 43:10–…before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.

Isaiah 44:6–…I am the first, and I am the last, and beside me there is no God….

Repeating those verses that state there is one God and ignoring the many, many references to lesser gods not only fails to prove a case for monotheistic Christianity, it makes one look dishonest at best.

Renee puts her trust in the majority for once:

Most Christians will tell you that there is only one god. Some of them don’t even believe in the devil. If they don’t believe in Zeus, and they know why they don’t believe in Zeus, then it is probably for the same reasons I don’t believe in God.

Are you sure they are not telling you that there is only one God? I’ve noticed that those who are taking exception to my point are very free with confusing the concept of god and God. But the atheist quote refers only to gods, and as I have demonstrated, the Bible refers to many sorts of gods who are not God, from false gods made by man to the mighty gods of the assembly to the evil god of this world.

If there were no other supernatural powers, if there were no other gods, then there would be no need for God to command that there be no other gods before Him. Jesus Christ’s temptation in the desert would mean nothing, for without a god of this world, there was nothing with which to tempt him nor would that god’s desire for Jesus to worship him make any sense. Finally, how would sin and death hold any claim on humanity, why would Jesus Christ’s death be necessary, if they did not grant some god a hold on fallen man?

Finally, if we have an Advocate, who is part of the Triune God, what can the Accuser be if not another god?

UPDATE: Brody risks muddying the water in an attempt to clarify:

This is always the topic I tend to comment on, because I am really trying to comprehend what it is I could be missing. I think the atheist quote in believing in one less god than you do is not as well explained as you would have liked. But its basic gist is that you do not believe in Allah, or Buddha, or Wiccan Witch of the West.

That gist is incorrect. The atheist’s witticism expressly posits a notion that the Christian believes in only one more supernatural being than the atheist, due, I suspect, to the atheist’s reliance on the term “monotheism” instead of an actual knowledge of Christian theology.

I certainly believe in Buddha. I see no reason to doubt that he was a historical man. I do not, however, worship him. In like manner, I believe in the god Lucifer and the god Moloch; I do not worship them either.