An Argument for Polytheism

[Rational Agnostic]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

 

[Nimos]

(Going to ignore all the obvious questions )

And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

But that general rule doesn't really apply to God, at least one would have to specify what they can do and what they can't. Besides that, if the creation of the Universe is merely the start of a process, that when set in motion just run it cause. So the God might only have created the big bang and then just allowed the Universe to evolve on it own. And afterwards he adds all the "details"

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur?

There could be many reasons, maybe the texts are wrong, being misunderstood etc. So all loving and all good is only in relationship to God. Which as far as I can see, is the only way one could justify it. Which would obviously put believers in a strange position as they suddenly weren't all that important as they thought. But at least that could be an explanation

So yeah I would say that your argument here is better

Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions.

How would you do that? Just the same as how monotheist think they can?

 

[George-ananda]

I am a pantheist (non-dual Hinduism; God and creation are not-two) and believe there is a legitimate place for polytheist thinking too. When formless Brahman/God creates a universe with forms a seemingly infinite number of entities can emerge. Those on the highest planes can be likened to gods.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna (speaking as the Universal Absolute) says:

The Thousand gods are just my Thousand Faces

 

[Yazata]

I've always kind of liked polytheism. (That doesn't mean that I believe that it's true.)

In polytheistic schemes, different gods often serve as personifications of different principles. So (to steal the illustration) there's the sane Apollo with his cool reason and order, and there's the wild Dionysios (every adolescent's favorite) with his passion and his orgies.

Just looking at the world, it often seems to me that there are different not-always-consistent principles active in it.

The classic example of that is monotheism's problem of evil.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

As I always say, I treat religious knowledge in the same way as I treat historical or scientific knowledge. It all comes down to the evidence — our knowledge is based on our experience, the experience of others, or deductions from experience.

That mean that we need to look at religious experiences, and they are very diverse. As Hubert says, if you aren't a polytheist, you have to dismiss the majority of experiences. And let's remember just how many of us there are — about 30% of the world's population. That's not bad after centuries of Christian and Muslim persecution.

 

[Maximus]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

Such absurd, sophomoric arguments here...one does not even know where to begin.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Such absurd, sophomoric arguments here...one does not even know where to begin.

Except with a post criticizing the OP instead of addressing specific points?

 

[Heyo]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

Adding to that:
- Polytheists usually don't proselytize.
- Religious tolerance is practically built in. Polytheists already have many gods and so they have no problem with people believing in one additional god.

 

[Harel13]

If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

The idea of an all-powerful one God is that He doesn't need assistance. Humans are finite and need to work together. Not so God. Moreover, you seem to be pointed out a flaw in polytheism: That polytheistic gods are flawed like humans and therefore there are multiple so that they can all help each other out.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Moreover, you seem to be pointed out a flaw in polytheism: That polytheistic gods are flawed like humans and therefore there are multiple so that they can all help each other out.

You're looking at it wrong. The gods are the pillars of reality and their multiplicity is a result of the diversity of forces that exist in nature and reality. There is not one power at play in the cosmos, but many, as can be plainly observed. This is why polytheism does not require special revelation, as the Abrahamic religions do.

 

[Erebus]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

Point 1 is perhaps the weaker argument here for a few reasons. Firstly, if we assume an omnimax creator then by definition they wouldn't need assistance. Secondly, if we assume one creator who isn't omnipotent/omniscient, it would go a long way to explaining some of the flaws in the world (I believe this was one of the arguments put forward by certain Gnostic sects). Finally it's not all that relevant to modern polytheists who, in my experience, tend not to believe in the sort of creation espoused by Young Earth Creationists and the like. Even hard polytheists typically view their pantheon's creation stories as allegorical.

Your other two points are much stronger in my opinion. The second one is something I've brought up myself on several occasions when the problem of evil is being discussed. It's just one example of how ridiculously easy it is to avoid the problem of evil entirely ... so long as you don't insist that your god be perfect in every way.
Polytheism is perhaps an especially good example of how the problem of evil is in no way applicable to theism in general. Every pantheon that I'm aware of has gods associated with the negative aspects of life. I particularly like the Greek pantheon in this respect. You have Limos - goddess of famine, Oizys - goddess of misery, Thanatos - god of death. Then of course you have my personal favourite, Erebus - god of darkness.

Point 3 isn't one I'd considered before. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that divine experience must be hallucination or delusion to an atheist as those are relatively severe terms. They could hold that a theist is simply mistaken. Alternatively, they may hold that what a theist calls a god isn't actually a god (such as with pantheism). That said, if an atheist does hold that all experiences of the divine must be either delusion or hallucination, they're making a pretty strong claim as you say. Polytheists are typically more flexible on the matter, particularly when compared with some forms of Abrahamic monotheism. Polytheists generally accept the validity of gods they don't personally worship.

 

[Harel13]

The gods are the pillars of reality and their multiplicity is a result of the diversity of forces that exist in nature and reality.

Don't most polytheistic creation myths say that in the beginning there was some form of nothingness, out of which grew a something (like an egg or a primordial father-god or whatever), and from that came the rest of the gods? In short, it sounds like even polytheists believe (at least in the past) that: out of one, many.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Don't most polytheistic creation myths say that in the beginning there was some form of nothingness, out of which grew a something (like an egg or a primordial father-god or whatever), and from that came the rest of the gods? In short, it sounds like even polytheists believe (at least in the past) that: out of one, many.

That's a common motif in European mythology. Usually there's a concept of primordial chaos out of which the cosmos begins to be formed and then the gods are born from that and then fashion the chaos into order.

 

[wandering peacefully]

That said, if an atheist does hold that all experiences of the divine must be either delusion or hallucination, they're making a pretty strong claim as you say.

Not at all. Most understand that brains are magnificent machines and the ability to imagine is endless. It's not thinking various experiences are delusional. It is absolutely proven altered states occur and can be created. It is what one decides to make of that state atheists differ on. Most believe the experience is real but that it originates in the brain not from other demensions or beings.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Such absurd, sophomoric arguments here...one does not even know where to begin.

And responding to the arguments with an off-topic, snarky one-liner intended to stroke one's own ego instead of responding to the arguments is *not* sophmoric? Hmmm....

 

[PearlSeeker]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

One Creator doesn't mean there are no co-creators. Fractal structure... We are also sort of co-creators. The Mastermind wanted free will, cooperation, variation.

 

[Jainarayan]

That's a common motif in European mythology. Usually there's a concept of primordial chaos out of which the cosmos begins to be formed and then the gods are born from that and then fashion the chaos into order.

Not unlike the energy conversion to matter at the time of the Big Bang, and the ordering of the newly created matter.

 

[1213]

... If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. ....

But there is always one leader. In Biblical point of view there has been many gods, but there is only one true God.

God presides in the great assembly. He judges among the gods.
Psalms 82:1

I said, "You are gods, All of you are sons of the Most High. Nevertheless you shall die like men, And fall like one of the rulers."
Psalms 82:6-7

 

[GoodbyeDave]

But there is always one leader. In Biblical point of view there has been many gods, but there is only one true God.

The trouble with that is that argument citing the Bible is only a viable tactic if you believe in it!

 

[amatuerscholar]

I'm going to play devil's advocate for polytheism here. Sometimes it's fun to keep an open mind and argue for something that you don't necessarily believe in. Atheists and monotheists are welcome to debate.

(1) If the universe was designed, it makes sense that it would have been designed by a group of designers rather than a single designer. If we look at any sophisticated piece of architecture or feat of engineering designed by humans, it is rare to find any that have been designed by a single person. Nearly every great work of design is designed by teams of intelligent builders rather than a single builder. And, furthermore, a general rule is that as the size and sophistication of the building/machine increases, so do the number of designers. If something as large and sophisticated as the universe was in fact designed, it is much more logical to conclude that it had many designers, rather than a single one.

There is a fundamental problem here. You're assuming a god and humans are similar. You're putting human constraints on something that isn't human. If we look at the idea of the Abrahamic God, we get a God that is all-powerful, something no human is. If a human was all powerful, it would reason they could design and create anything that a group of humans could.

(2) Monotheists believe that a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful god exists. But this presents a serious philosophical problem. Why do natural disasters occur? Why do debilitating diseases like cancer or heart disease exist? If a single, all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful deity existed, these things should not occur. However, if many gods exist, some good and some evil, and some of them are competing against each other, then the fact that the universe contains some good things and some evil things could be easily explained as the result of conflicting divine forces.

You're looking at Abrahamic faiths here, and really the classical view of God, which is rejected by many today. The problem you're looking at is theodicy. Why does evil exist when we have an all loving God? This is a question that takes books to cover. But a basic idea that we can get at is that God is limited. God had limited God's self in order to maintain a relationship with humans, and to allow humans to be what they really are. God also allows chaos as chaos is needed to create, and creation is an ongoing process.

(3) Atheists must reject all experiences of the divine as being delusions or hallucinations. Polytheists can accept some religious experiences as legitimate and reject others as delusions. It is a very strong claim to assert that all of the millions of people who have had extremely vivid religious experiences were all delusional. It is also a very strong claim to assert that the only true religious experiences were those experienced by people who worship Yahweh/Allah/Jesus. A polytheist does not have to reject any religious experience as being a delusion, whereas an atheist does, and a monotheist must reject all experiences not pertaining to their own deity.

Atheists don't have to do such. Some may, while others simply say they don't know. Which is alright. As for the second part, panenthism, the idea that God is within all, and more than all really solves that. One can also assume that an intelligent being would know that different people need different things and thus appears to different people in different ways.