Polytheism refers to any philosophy which claims that there are multiple supreme creators of the universe.
Keywords: Polytheism, Philosophy, Multiple, Gods, Irrational, False, Contradictory, Creation, Deductive, Argument From Reason.
Polytheistic claims are false .
Humans assume that all contradictions are false. Any worldview that does not allow for this assumption to be rationally justified is deductively false.
Premise 1: If anyone is not the author of every aspect of creation, then his authority is insufficient to rationally guarantee the behavior of creation.
Premise 2: Under polytheism, no one is the author of every aspect of creation.
Conclusion: Therefore, under polytheism, no one has the authority to rationally guarantee the behavior of creation.
Humans assume that creation is non-contradictory. Under polytheism, there can ultimately be no reason to hold to this assumption, making it an irrational assumption.
This Argument from Reason therefore demonstrates that polytheism is deductively false.
In Printed Form
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.
"Can non-Christian views be internally consistent?"
Non-Christian worldviews cannot be internally consistent. While the above statement is true, proving it is a different matter. However, its truth follows from the basics of the Christian faith. Since, in Christian theology, the Christian God is understood to be necessary, any deviation from that which is necessary would be impossible, entailing a logical contradiction.
"Why does God change His mind so much? (Gen 6:7; Exd 32:14; Jdg 2:18; 1 Sam 15:35; Jhn 3:10 etc)"
Below are the verses cited in the question. John 3:10 doesn't seem to fit the question, so I assume it was a typo. Nonetheless, the other verses should more than suffice to make the point the questioner intended. Genesis 6:7 The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.
"If there is a God, but there is no evidence to be found for his existence except subjective experiences, is it not reasonable to assume that if he does exist, he does not want us to know about it?"
The conclusion is not reasonable. First, the premise is very poorly worded. Second, in the only way that the premise could be considered true, the conclusion is not reasonably based on it. First, the premise is poorly worded in that it seems to suggest that evidence is the only way to justifiably be convinced of something. But note that rational thought cannot exist without reason behind it.
"If God doesn't change over time, can He know tensed facts? If not, how is He omniscient?"
A tensed fact is a fact that is true in relation to present experience, but has no universal or permanent truth value. "Yesterday was July 26th", "today is Wednesday", or "I got a new job last month" are all tensed facts. Some people believe that God must know tensed facts to be omniscient. William Lane Craig formulates a hypothetical argument that God is not timeless as follows: 1. A temporal world exists. 2. God is omniscient. 3.