New Theory? Facetism.

[Selver]

Over the past couple years, I've had this theory about our current religions that Ive recently started calling "Facetism". Please try to bear with me, if it sounds like a load of bull at the end, feel free to say so.

It can be said that without communication or cultural diffusion, people seperated by large distances have developed similar ideas, concepts, and even legends. Among our religions, some basic common teachings can be found, and some more specific teachings can be found similar amoung a lesser number of religions. If we believe for a moment that one god truly did create the world and we take into account human behavior, perhaps it can be theorized that the deities of our current religions are, in truth, just facets of a one true higher deity, that we as unenlightened human beings are incapable of comprehending. For now, we'll call him "Alpha".

If we believe the story of the Tower of Babel from the Bible, the various cultures we have today are derivatives of a number of groups of people that were created when the people of the Shinda plain were scattered across the world while trying to create the Tower of Babel. The Shindarians were all direct descendants of Noah, the man chosen by God to build the Ark and preserve life on Earth. We can theorize that at this point, humanity was enlightened enough to recognize Alpha as the one true god. Facetism has a split in it's philosopy with three sub-theories, each with less divine intervention than the next.

The first, the story of the Tower of Babel never actually occurred. While the few individuals who appeared in each culture over time attempted to spread the true identity of Alpha, human nature corrupted these identities and teachings one way or another to end with the religions that we still continue to amend and manipulate to this day.

The second, as the Shindarians became seperated from the others, taking human nature into account, over time they would have come to their own conclusions about the natural and religious world and would have eventually come to varying beliefs about who Alpha was, and if he really was the only deity.

The third, religion was a large part of life during the early periods of civilization. The Chinese and Egyptians both believed their rulers were somehow divine. Several thousand years later, we are still able to see how much of a barrier differing religions can be. Genesis 11:7 reads: "(the Lord said) Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech". With the major impact that religion had on daily lives and even foreign relations during that time, it could be theorized that perhaps Alpha not only mixed up their language, but also their ideas on who their true deities were.

Both sub-theories end in the same conclusion. One way or another, human behavior led to the creation of the various religions, which could possibly be traced back to one deity who transcends all religions.

I did some research and wasnt able to find anything similar to this theory other than perhaps Pantheism, except that Facetism seperates God and Nature.
Im really hoping this doesnt sound like a load of illogical nonsense.

 

[Selver]

Im really hoping that the lack of any response to this just means it really gave people some food for thought.
No one has any opinions on this at all?

 

[Quintessence]

As a polytheist, I fundamentally disagree with the one-god premise of your argument.

I don't disagree with the notion that people will come up with different maps to describe the same territory. That this happens is self-evident. However, to think that the Pagan gods or all the world's religions originated from some sort of monotheistic god-concept is simply wrong from a historical and factual standpoint.

 

[Selver]

As a polytheist, I fundamentally disagree with the one-god premise of your argument.

I don't disagree with the notion that people will come up with different maps to describe the same territory. That this happens is self-evident. However, to think that the Pagan gods or all the world's religions originated from some sort of monotheistic god-concept is simply wrong from a historical and factual standpoint.

You're right. From the point of view of a polytheist, this entire theory really has no place at all.
Actually, I dont think the story of the Tower of Babel even takes place in the events of your belief system, does it?

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

There's a little bit of logic to this, inasfar as all religions being fundamentally the same. This is something I believe strongly in. Trying to figure out from a Biblical perspective, that's stretching it a bit further than I would care to, but if it's what works for you, then that's cool. Now, I wouldn't say that there is "one true god", who just happens to be worshiped under a different name by various religions. I would rather say that there is "one divine essence", because, as Quintessence pointed out, some people are polytheists, and this description would fit better with their paradigm. This also works more for Buddhists, who don't believe in an all-mighty creator god at all, or pantheists, panentheists, etc. But, you're on the right track. I can see if your religion is Judaism or Christianity, trying to apply it to those specific texts and teachings.

 

[Selver]

There's a little bit of logic to this, inasfar as all religions being fundamentally the same. This is something I believe strongly in. Trying to figure out from a Biblical perspective, that's stretching it a bit further than I would care to, but if it's what works for you, then that's cool. Now, I wouldn't say that there is "one true god", who just happens to be worshiped under a different name by various religions. I would rather say that there is "one divine essence", because, as Quintessence pointed out, some people are polytheists, and this description would fit better with their paradigm. This also works more for Buddhists, who don't believe in an all-mighty creator god at all, or pantheists, panentheists, etc. But, you're on the right track. I can see if your religion is Judaism or Christianity, trying to apply it to those specific texts and teachings.

A "divine essence" could certainly be used here. The solidity of this theory was not so much as in the fact that it has a "god" but in the idea that existing religions are nothing more than derivatives.

Like I said, this is a thought Ive had for a while, so Im trying to gather others' thoughts on it and add some integrity to it's cause.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

A "divine essence" could certainly be used here. The solidity of this theory was not so much as in the fact that it has a "god" but in the idea that existing religions are nothing more than derivatives.

Like I said, this is a thought Ive had for a while, so Im trying to gather others' thoughts on it and add some integrity to it's cause.

I believe that all religions are equal and valid, and they each, although following different paths, lead to the same goal. The Perennial Philosophers taught that each religion has two aspects, an exoteric, which is the rituals, the dogma, etc., and an esoteric, which is the inner spirituality, which might be termed the mystical. The exoteric aspect changes from religion to religion, sometimes drastically, while the esoteric, other than language and symbolism used, doesn't change. This is what I believe. This would also suggest to me a common source, and, I believe, that source can be traced back to it's foundation. In my view, this source can be found in what is today called Hinduism, as the world's oldest still practiced religion, and, I believe, the world's first religion. All other religions, in some form or another, stem from Hinduism. As religion spread, each took on, in their exoteric aspect, different forms based on time period, culture, language, etc., but the inner, esoteric aspect, didn't change; the shell changed, but the heart remained the same. Today, we have many religions, and I believe this to be a good thing, as each person can choose whatever religion best fits his/her temperments, characteristics, likes and dislikes, etc. This, of course, is my own personal view.

 

[Selver]

I believe that all religions are equal and valid, and they each, although following different paths, lead to the same goal. The Perennial Philosophers taught that each religion has two aspects, an exoteric, which is the rituals, the dogma, etc., and an esoteric, which is the inner spirituality, which might be termed the mystical. The exoteric aspect changes from religion to religion, sometimes drastically, while the esoteric, other than language and symbolism used, doesn't change. This is what I believe. This would also suggest to me a common source, and, I believe, that source can be traced back to it's foundation. In my view, this source can be found in what is today called Hinduism, as the world's oldest still practiced religion, and, I believe, the world's first religion. All other religions, in some form or another, stem from Hinduism. As religion spread, each took on, in their exoteric aspect, different forms based on time period, culture, language, etc., but the inner, esoteric aspect, didn't change; the shell changed, but the heart remained the same. Today, we have many religions, and I believe this to be a good thing, as each person can choose whatever religion best fits his/her temperments, characteristics, likes and dislikes, etc. This, of course, is my own personal view.

So then it seems our beliefs arent that far off. While my theory starts off monotheistic and explains the branching into polytheistic, yours is the opposite.
Not that I disagree, I really dont have a set religion at this time. It's just interesting to ponder.

So what it seems is that my theory is basically an off-version of Perennialism, correct?

 

[Quintessence]

You're right. From the point of view of a polytheist, this entire theory really has no place at all.
Actually, I dont think the story of the Tower of Babel even takes place in the events of your belief system, does it?

*laughs* Not really, but I like reading all sorts of world mythos. What that particular story reminds me of is human hubris, of which my own culture is an outstanding example of.

There's a little bit of logic to this, inasfar as all religions being fundamentally the same. This is something I believe strongly in.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but I have to ask: how are all religious fundamentally the same? Doesn't this risk overlooking the very relevant differences among various religious? I'm pretty sure the fundamental orientation of my path is quite different from several others. Some religions obsess on salvation, for example, but salvation is virtually a non-concept in Neopaganism.

 

[Selver]

I really appreciate the constructive criticism you all have provided so far.
It's more than I can say for some of the other forums Ive tried to get advice from. LOL.

 

[dyanaprajna2011]

I know this is slightly off-topic, but I have to ask: how are all religious fundamentally the same?

By their inner heart, the true spirituality of each religion is basically the same.

Doesn't this risk overlooking the very relevant differences among various religious?

That depends on how important those differences are to a particular individual. Are they important? Yes. But are they important enough to separate people based on religion? No.

I'm pretty sure the fundamental orientation of my path is quite different from several others. Some religions obsess on salvation, for example, but salvation is virtually a non-concept in Neopaganism.

This depends on one's viewpoint of their own religion. Take Christianity for instance, a religion that obsesses over salvation. The exoteric aspect of Christianity focuses on salvation, but if you've ever studied anything about Christian mysticism, salvation is less important. Union with god becomes the focal point, and many Christian mystics would assert that the way or ways to accomplish this are not exclusive to Christianity.

It all comes down to that separation between the exoteric and esoteric aspects of each religion. The Perennial Philosophers understood this very important detail about religion. It's the exoteric aspect that's different between the various religions, the esoteric, however, is basically the same throughout.

 

[Quintessence]

Very much depends on point of view.

The more esoteric branches of various religions are eerily similar at times. I'm not sure if I would say that discounts the relevance of exoteric differences, but it's a good observation.

 

[Vultar]

The UBB believes that there is a root connectivity between all religions but this is not due to an Alpha, but due to spirits which communicate with people from time to time. This is why you get some similar ideas yet still get a few differences as information is imparted upon different people by different spirits (not all of which desire to give correct information). However, people are still subjected to the same sort of communication and weird occurances to come up with a similar way of seeing many things.

 

[Reptillian]

Reminds me a little bit of Baha'i.