Proving all (other) religions wrong.

If there is only one god and that god designed us with the inborne tendency to believe in him then why do people believe in thousands of different often mutually exclusive god concepts? Doesn't it stand to reason that most gods are man made fictions? And if most gods are an made fictions doesn't that display a tendency in humans to make up gods to e,plain the unexplainable? Even if your god is somehow the only real one you would still have to be very obtuse not to recognize this tendency and if we display this tendency then we have this tendency wherever it came from.

Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.

Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the LORD'S hand double for all her sins.

The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:

And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field:

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: because the spirit of the LORD bloweth upon it: surely the people is grass.

The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God!

Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.

He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young.

Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?

Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him?

With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding?

Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing.

And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering.

All nations before him are as nothing; and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity.

To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him?

The workman melteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and casteth silver chains.

He that is so impoverished that he hath no oblation chooseth a tree that will not rot; he seeketh unto him a cunning workman to prepare a graven image, that shall not be moved.

Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?

It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

That bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity.

Yea, they shall not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown: yea, their stock shall not take root in the earth: and he shall also blow upon them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall take them away as stubble.

To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One.

Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.

Why sayest thou, O Jacob, and speakest, O Israel, My way is hid from the LORD, and my judgment is passed over from my God?

Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.

He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.

Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall:

But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.

As far as a tendency to create fictional gods, I don't deny that, and don't blame anyone for employing the idea that we can include the God of the Bible. 

Excellent then we can start discusding other religions (which is the point of this thread after all). 

Let's start with the chimp. A chimpanzee may put on the same display when faced with a thunderstorm that he dies when faced with a rival. It does not then seem illogical to think it possibke that he is imagining a great chimpanzee in the sky outing on a fearsome display. 

Now we are going to ask ourselves us that less rational for a primitive tribesman to imagining a great man in the sky (GMITS)who is respinsible for a whole host of events? (since being more sophisticated than a chimp he is able to connect the GMITS to more sophisticated events such as drought, disease and famine)

After all the primitive tribesmen cannot disprove the GMITS.

Now picture the passage of the centuries. Science and politics change what the GMITS means to us. We now have a naturalistic explanation for many if the events that were once attributed to the GMITS are now just things that happen when certain forces interact with each other. But there are still some things we don't know. Like how the universe began. So the GMITS could still be responsible for that. Of course that makes him the great man outside the universe (GMOSTU).

At this point in our thought exercise GMOSTU is a stand in for any imaginary being not the real god(s) if there is such a thing. All of which begs the question is it less rational to believe in a GMOSTU on the grounds that it cannot be disproved than it is to believe in actual god(s) on the grounds that they cannot be disproved?

In other words what is the difference from my point of view between Yahweh or Zeus or the flying spaghetti monster or even all of them acting together yo create the universe? Can you prove that your god did not work alongside a flying spaghetti monster to create the universe? Maybe with Baacus serving drinks to get those creative juices flowing.

In short what makes you right and poly wrong? Her beliefs seem more logically consistent to me since she does not distinguish between one unprovable being or another bit merely accepts many beings with equal (that is to say only testamonial) evidence.

First off, there's really not much difference between you and I in this manner, except you believe in one less God than I do.

My belief is based on my experience(s). I don't know what her, or anyone else's experiences are. If my experiences are somehow invalid, then I'm the one, or one of the one's that are wrong. I don't see any reason at all to think my experience(s) is (are) invalid. And the reasons given to my at times as to how they might be invalid don't add up. They're similar to explaining the floating phenomena in space as having sucking too much helium from a balloon to get that squeaky voice.

Have you tried looking at the inverse of "I don't see any reason at all the think my experience(s) are invalid," because what follows unspoken in there is that you do, somehow, feel that her experiences ARE invalid. You don't allow for the possibility of her gods being real for some reason. Or do you? Wouldn't doing so violate the tenets of your own faith?

I think I see your point.  Specifically, "fear of the unknown" does not in and of itself = god(s).

However, I believe "an abundance of caution" might contribute to a susceptibility for people to fall victim to the "Pascal's wager" scam.

Christians have come into belief for various reasons

I think I see your point.  Specifically, "fear of the unknown" does not in and of itself = god(s).

However, I believe "an abundance of caution" might contribute to a susceptibility for people to fall victim to the "Pascal's wager" scam.

I think it could too. But from my experience, Christians have come into belief for various reasons. For myself, it wasn't fear. Or....I didn't become a believer (Christian) due to a fear of hell.

I find your characterization of your experiences as 'spiritual' and 'proof of the veracity of the entire Christian bible mythology' to be invalid: spiritual has very little in the way of usable definition, and there's absolutely no connective tissue that says, for example, you had a dream about Jesus that the whole bible is then real, since books can contain both true things and false things. I don't doubt you had some profound experience, it's the conclusion you reach and the method you use to get there that I find invalid. 

Her experiences lead her to believe in a totally different set of rules and characters than you do. Your mythology says she's going to hell for doing so. Are her experiences therefore invalid? THis can be generic to any belief system that isn't yours, any believer that isn't of your faith. If the primitive aborigine has an experience that leads him to be SURE Jesus isn't real, would you consider his experience invalid? One of your experiences, yours or his, would have to be. 

The vast, vast, vast majority of them are tied to geography and family tradition. 

The African continent, the same one that was colonized and brutalized by Christian-majority powers?

Do south Korean and Chinese christians make up the 'vast vast vast' majority of Christians? or do people born in heavily Christian areas like the Americas?

You mean if you saw a talking donkey you'd become a Christian?

Ok, so you don't think my experiences are valid. Do you think Poly's might be? How about that aborigine"s?

Well Paul's donkey didn't actually talk. I don't know if that's significant to your point though. I thought I'd just clarify that. Or did I misread your statement?

The gods are clear. Some people don't want to work with or worship them so why bother.