• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

There are no polytheists in the West.

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal


my point with the OP before it was edited was to say that "polytheism" in the West is, generally speaking, simply rationalism and relevatism with some "pagan" trimmings. It bears little resemblance to the polytheism of the ancient world when practitioners truly believed that their gods determined every aspect of their lives. I tried to put a humorous and lighthearted touch in the OP and it came off the wrong way. My apologees. Let's try to continue the discussion however
 
Last edited:

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
hehehe....seriously though.

No. This is laughable. It can't be serious.

I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods.

Well, you are certainly free to believe what you like... the KKK doesn't believe black people are people. Go figure.

What is a "god"?

That's open to debate, I assure you.

First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world.

You are speaking for humanity itself now?

It's who your HOPE is in.

Oh, just for me this time?

Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for.

I assure you, Christianity has everyone else beat when it comes to waving 'magic wands' for god.

For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else.

As opposed to your god which functions as...?

They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy.

Kind of like picking Jesus due to the peace and love he teaches?

As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say.

This is unlike Jesus, how?

As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye".

I take this to mean your god infringes upon what you really deep down want to do with your life all the time and you stick with him anyway? Please explain the sense in that decision.

That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more.

I've heard many an atheist level this claim at all believers. It has a slight amount of merit when applied to faith as a whole. It sounds ridiculous coming from a Christian.

The ancients were true polytheists in the sense that all their hope was in their gods to deliver them in battle, send rain for the crops, etc.

Win the Super Bowl, cure their child of cancer, approve their home loan, inspire their nonsensical threads...

At best, the "gods" of such people are their pals, not their true superiors

Heaven forbid someone follow a god they actually like... What a stupid idea, eh?
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
They're all a bunch of rationalists and relativists dressed up in fancy robes



hehehe....seriously though. I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods. What is a "god"? First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world. It's who your HOPE is in. Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for. For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else. They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy. As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say. As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye". That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more. The ancients were true polytheists in the sense that all their hope was in their gods to deliver them in battle, send rain for the crops, etc. At best, the "gods" of such people are their pals, not their true superiors

Did you know african religions there are even rituals to humilliate the gods who didn´t serve you well?

As Doom said, what "god" is is open to discussion.

I definetely trust first and foremost in myself, but that is because that is the only thing I know for sure. Even if I believed in your three Gods, I would still need to trust myself to know which is the best interpretation of what they wanted. Now you may say "the bible", but I would have to a) trust you on that claim and b) trust my own judgement of that claim being trustable.

So no matter what God I claim to worship, if I don´t trust myself, there is no hope.

I say there must be really good reasons why "know yourself" was at the opening of that greek temple (which I shamefully forgoten which is :D )

Greeks that were angry at X or Y god existed and in plenty. To choose which deities to worship is our holy right.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
Also I find this relevant:


"We're getting ready to perform worship of Lord Indra," Nanda said.

"Lord Indra?"

"Yes, son. Indra is the king of the demigods and he brings the rain. We have to make sure that we thank him every year for helping us."

"But why do we have to thank him? Isn't it his duty to make the rain? After all, he is a servant of the Almighty and that is the job the Almighty gave him."

Nanda looked at Krishna with wide eyes. "Shhhh! You mustn't say things like that, Krishna. Lord Indra's wrath can be terrible."

"Are you frightened of him, Father?"

"Of course! Everyone is frightened of him. With one move he could destroy all Vraj."

Several of the village people murmured agreements as they worked near Krishna and Nanda.

Krishna looked around at them. "But surely someone with such a terrible temper is not worthy of worship. It's not good to be angry."

Nanda reached out and covered Krishna's mouth. "We have to be very careful when talking about Indra. He will punish us all."

Krishna moved his father's hand away. "But that's not right. No god should be worshipped out of fear. If Indra was truly praise-worthy then he wouldn't punish people for not worshipping him. It is the divine right of all to pray but it is not the duty of the gods to compel worship."

"Krishna, what do you propose we do?" one of the other village men asked. He was leaning on his staff. "Do we stop worshipping Indra just because you say so? This is our ancestral custom."

"But why? If Indra brings the rain then that is his duty, not his mercy. And if he is a tyrant and expects worship from us then that is not admirable.Only those who are kind and worthy deserve worship."

A crowd was growing around them as people came to hear what Krishna was saying.

"And who is worthy then, my darling?" Yashoda asked. She was walking towards them from the barn, carrying a pot of fresh milk.

"We are cowherds, Mother. Our lives are tied to the cows. They give us milk and butter that nourishes us. They plough the land that grows our grain and give rich fertiliser that keeps the land lush. So worship the cows, Mother."

Krishna continued. "And the cows cannot live without the forests, where they graze. So worship the forests of Vraj. And worship the river Yamuna who waters the trees with her nectar, keeping the forests green and bountiful. And worship Mount Govardhan, who brings rain by catching the clouds, filling all our ponds and wells and lakes. So many fruits and herbs grow from his gracious soil that are vital to our good health."

Krishna looked around at the people who were listening in silence. "Mount Govardhan does all this for us but have you ever heard him demand worship in return? Does he punish anyone for not worshipping him? Or are the cows vengeful or angry? Or Yamuna? Do the forests threaten us with violence if we don't repay them for their service? No. They are not selfish or petty. They are generous and pure hearted and they love us. That is why they take care of us."

The crowd was larger still, all of the villagers gazing at Krishna in wonderment that he was so passionate about this subject.

"Don't be afraid of Indra's anger," Krishna told them. "One who is worthy of worship never gets angry."

"But how do we worship the cows and Mount Govardhan?" Another lady asked. She was holding a pot of water on her head and had paused in her way across the courtyard to hear Krishna's speech.

"We already worship the cows, sister," Krishna said. "We return the love they give us by caring for them and ensuring they're always protected. The forests and Yamuna are worshipped by keeping them clean and clear of pollutants. Mount Govardhan can be worshipped through offering. If we give a little of our bounty back to him then that is a form of thanks. It will re-nourish the land that gives us so much."

We all know that the OT God said many times that he was a jelous God. Abarahamic values favour to worship this deity out of love BUT if that doesn´t work, there is also another alternative which is invariably presented to us: to worship him out of fear.

To "Fear God", a phrase still used today as if it was a virtue.

so many abrahamically oriented worshippers (WARNING: I didn´t say all) say you cannot be an atheist, or a not-my-religion-ist and be in God´s grace at the same time. As if Love itself wasn´t worship. Isn´t God supposed to BE love? then how can a person that is loving not be accepting God? Worshipping him by the mere use of their divinely given faculties?

Why is it so important that those who don´t believe or that believed a deity different than yours (and lets say), the one that actually is real , be tortured inhell for ever? How can there be wisdom in it? Why would God want to eternally torture those who got the wrong name for him? the wrong form/lack-of-form ? The wrong rituals for worship? Body gestures for worship? The wrong divine fact of wheter 2000 years ago a woman was a virgin or not? wheter a specific man was telling the truth or not about a divine revelation?

So many religions say the same things to be divine, we know the golden rule has sprung from so many places and cultures that is not in some silly texts, but hardwired in our souls.

Balaram, Krishna's elder brother, raised his massive fist. "Then we will fight him! We have you on our side. We have your divine discus weapon. We will win every time!"

"Not all opponents are worthy of my discus, Elder Brother," Krishna said. "And even then it is not easy to kill Jarasanth. He is too powerful and has too many allies. It will be a long time before we can apply enough pressure to break through his defenses."

"We'll still win," Balaram insisted.

"And how many of our men's lives are we willing to lose in the meantime?" Krishna asked. "How many of our women are we willing to make widows? All because Jarasanth wants to kill me?"

One of the generals shook his grey head. "It's not that simple-"

"Yes, it is," Krishna said. "Hasn't our motherland suffered enough? Mathura's people have been oppressed for far too many years. It is not right that they must fend off Jarasanth as well."

"The people are proud to fight for you, Krishna," a courtier in blue robes said. "You are their saviour. For you, they are willing to die."

"But I want them to live," Krishna said. "I want them to prosper, in peace. Which isn't possible here in Mathura."

"So you propose to run away?" Balaram snapped. "Like a coward?"

Krishna's father Vasudev was grave. "The world will call you 'Ranchod', son. 'He who runs from battle'. Are you willing to allow your name to be slurred?"

Krishna shook his head. "For my motherland I killed my uncle Kansa. If by my moving to a new land I can bring our people peace and prosperity then I am willing to do it. I am willing to do whatever is necessary for Mathura. I am even willing to take the name 'Ranchod'."

The court appeared dumbfounded by this announcement.

"After all," Krishna said, looking upon them all, "I am known by many names. Through time people will call me by many other names. And always, no matter what name they call me by, if I feel I am being called with love then I will answer."

Who cares the name?

God should be deeper than that. God should be love. And if he is not, the he is not worthy of worship. To be by his side eternally while millions of people with good actions and wrong names suffer, can never be called salvation.

as you see, in hinduism it is not unheard to choose the gods you wish to regularly pray to.

I´d say Krishna beats your god of the armies any day of the week, any week of the year.
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
I take this to mean your god infringes upon what you really deep down want to do with your life all the time and you stick with him anyway? Please explain the sense in that decision.

Of course the Christian life requires denying certain urges. Denying the urge to lose faith God because it seems like he's taking a nap and you're hurting. Denying the urge to dwell in unforgiveness of someone that hasn't shown one ounce of repentence. Denying the urge to pursue a more financially profitable end in life when you feel like he's called you to serve him in some capacity. Denying the urge to take quit practicing abstinence until the time is right. These are all things the Christian must deny himself of. Is there a part of me that deep down would like to embrace these urges? Yes of course. But the Christian puts his HOPE in Jesus. He puts his hope in Jesus to deliver him from trials when the time is right. He seeks the power of God to allow his heart to forgive those who deserve none. He puts his faith not in financial success to satisfy him but in doing his duty for his Lord. He puts his faith in his God to satisfy all his God given thirsts when the time is right and through proper means.


edit: for the purposes of this conversation we're going to have to go with the biblical definition of what a "god" is which is what people's hope and trust is in. We'll go with the true biblical definition of worship which is demonstrating that trust through action
 
Last edited:

Me Myself

Back to my username
Of course the Christian life requires denying certain urges. Denying the urge to lose faith God because it seems like he's taking a nap and you're hurting. Denying the urge to dwell in unforgiveness of someone that hasn't shown one ounce of repentence. Denying the urge to pursue a more financially profitable end in life when you feel like he's called you to serve him in some capacity. Denying the urge to take quit practicing abstinence until the time is right. These are all things the Christian must deny himself of. Is there a part of me that deep down would like to embrace these urges? Yes of course. But the Christian puts his HOPE in Jesus. He puts his hope in Jesus to deliver him from trials when the time is right. He seeks the power of God to allow his heart to forgive those who deserve none. He puts his faith not in financial success to satisfy him but in doing his duty for his Lord. He puts his faith in his God to satisfy all his God given thirsts when the time is right and through proper means.

Everyone diserves forgiveness.

If you feel denying this urges is best for you and others, by all means do so. We all have the responsability to do what we feel is best for us and our human brothers and sisters. If we find that our current dogma no longer seems to be guiding us to do the best for all of us, then it is our moral responsability to change it. Because you keep on following your dogma, I´ll believe you have not find this from it.

I went away from any dogma that taught hell long ago, because I don´t find a God that promotes eternal hell to be worthy of worship. I don´t believe God is so emotional impaired. You venerate God in three forms, I venerate him in many more.

Just because we don´t venerate your gods or because we change gods as we see fit, it doesn´t mean we change them because it was "easier". I changed religion because of moral reasons, and I worship the gods I worship today because I find them to be morally superior to me, so I worship them most of all so they pass me their virtues with love.

Also, I like to not limit my worship. I see many beings with high virtues, and I worship them if I feel so. Worship is a mixture of many feelings, ultimately it is to find the divine in those that you worship. In that sense, I also worship myself, and also all my brothers and sisters. The same way that Christ saw the divine in all of us when he said that that which we do to each other we do to him.

He understood.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
edit: for the purposes of this conversation we're going to have to go with the biblical definition of what a "god" is which is what people's hope and trust is in. We'll go with the true biblical definition of worship which is demonstrating that trust through action

By biblical, you of course mean yours :p

I do not follow such definitions. I find them as a poor man´s definitions of both God and worship.

God is greater than hope, because hope is for the future and God is now and ever. Worship is better than what can be seen through evident action, because is the inner most sacred form of recognition.

I find your definitions very below the bar for me. In your OP you make bold and very inaccurate claims about """99%""" of western polytheists, now you base those claims on very low definitions of very sacred words.

If your relationship with God is merely based on hope, then there is no space for appreciation of the now. A relationship not based in the now, is a relationship hasn´t even born yet.
 

Breathe

Hostis humani generis
hehehe....seriously though. I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods.
Why not?

What is a "god"?
Depends on the person's interpretation.

First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world. It's who your HOPE is in. Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for.
Well, it can be.

For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else. They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy. As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say. As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye". That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more.
I disagree; that's worshipping a god that they like. One doesn't have to worship a god whom they find abhorrent after all, if there is no need to do so.

The ancients were true polytheists in the sense that all their hope was in their gods to deliver them in battle, send rain for the crops, etc. At best, the "gods" of such people are their pals, not their true superiors
...and...?
 

mycorrhiza

Well-Known Member
I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods.

Why? I'm pretty sure that a majority of all neo-pagans actually believe in their Gods, or the supreme Universe/Nature as God manifested and described through the archetypes of the Gods. Why wouldn't they? I know several people who believe in spirits, and I wouldn't say that there is much difference between believing in one supernatural thing and believing in another. Is there any reasons why, for example, Wiccans wouldn't believe in the God and Godess?

What is a "god"? First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world. It's who your HOPE is in. Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for.
That is your definition. Mine is quite different from that: Whatever is worthy of the utmost reverance, awe and veneration OR a supernatural powerful being. You have never needed to put your hope in a God to believe in it. There's misotheism, after all!

For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else. They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy. As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say. As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye". That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more.
And this is different from Christianity in which way? People adapt their beliefs to fit their goals all the time. Just look at the prosperity theology or liberal Christianity that has a different view on sins. There's a reason that there isn't just one denomination.



I'm sorry, but this thread is very disrespectful.
 

Orias

Left Hand Path
They're all a bunch of rationalists and relativists dressed up in fancy robes


hehehe....seriously though. I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods. What is a "god"? First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world. It's who your HOPE is in. Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for. For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else. They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy. As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say. As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye". That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more. The ancients were true polytheists in the sense that all their hope was in their gods to deliver them in battle, send rain for the crops, etc. At best, the "gods" of such people are their pals, not their true superiors

You mind as well change it to there is no polytheists anywhere, because everything you just said applies to every man and his God.

But this may be one of the only rational perspectives you will see, this can be observed in your choice to say nonsensical things and my choice to correct your assertion.

Its not the wisest idea to go by the "No True Scottsman" fancy, as its simply not true.
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
Of course the Christian life requires denying certain urges.

Of course? Of course...

Denying the urge to lose faith God because it seems like he's taking a nap and you're hurting.

So what you want to do with your life deep down is lose faith?

Denying the urge to dwell in unforgiveness of someone that hasn't shown one ounce of repentence.

So what you want to do with your life deep down is dwell in unforgiveness?

Denying the urge to pursue a more financially profitable end in life when you feel like he's called you to serve him in some capacity.

So what you want to do with your life deep down is pursue a more financially profitable end?

Denying the urge to take quit practicing abstinence until the time is right.

So what you want to do with your life deep down is to quit practicing abstinence?

These are all things the Christian must deny himself of. Is there a part of me that deep down would like to embrace these urges? Yes of course.

No, no. What you said was that deep down what YOU want to do with YOUR life. That was the accusation you made to pagans. That is the thread you must follow, not some washed down version now that we're talking about you and your faith. Stick to your story, at least.

But the Christian puts his HOPE in Jesus. He puts his hope in Jesus to deliver him from trials when the time is right. He seeks the power of God to allow his heart to forgive those who deserve none. He puts his faith not in financial success to satisfy him but in doing his duty for his Lord. He puts his faith in his God to satisfy all his God given thirsts when the time is right and through proper means.

So god will some day satisfy your urges, will he? Some day he'll let you lose faith, hate sinners, act like a rich fat-cat and bang everything that walks? Those were the urges you were talking about, right? Are you feeling dizzy? Why don't you go have a nice long nap.

edit: for the purposes of this conversation we're going to have to go with the biblical definition of what a "god" is which is what people's hope and trust is in. We'll go with the true biblical definition of worship which is demonstrating that trust through action

Ah so, what you would like me to do is assume that your OP is gospel truth. Thanks I think I'll keep it in the realm of debate. I'll assume that when you say god you are talking about the god in the Bible. I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt and refrain from disputing that this being actually exists. Its not really important to this debate. What IS important is that I afford the same exact privilege to every single human being on this planet. That means that your god is just as real as pagan gods. I think I did a pretty fair job of showing that you are guilty of everything that you accused them of. If they are wrong, you are as well plus the added bonus wrongness of hypocrisy.

Congratulations. Jesus has one more sin to forgive you for.
 

Orias

Left Hand Path
Now lets just hope he reads. And by read I mean understand and not subtly ask you to repeat yourself.

I'll be damned if I have to read another eye sore, to come to a consensus that Christians are hypocrites. I already know that!!!! :banghead3
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
They're all a bunch of rationalists and relativists dressed up in fancy robes

http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDeta...live+and&imgSize=26372&hostName=realtruth.org

hehehe....seriously though. I really don't believe 98% of the people in the West who claim to practice this neo-pagan/polytheistic thing truly treat their "gods" as actual gods. What is a "god"? First and foremost, it's what people trust most in this world. It's who your HOPE is in. Not who you recite chants to or who you wave magic wands for. For the people in the West, from what I can see, their polytheistic "gods" function more like advisors than anything else. They pick the "gods" they'll "worship" based on who's teachings strike their fancy. As long as their "god" tells them what they want to hear they're more than willing to say "praise you" or whatever they say. As soon as they start infringing on what people really deep down want to do with their lives it "bye-bye". That's worship/trust of the one's self, nothing more. The ancients were true polytheists in the sense that all their hope was in their gods to deliver them in battle, send rain for the crops, etc. At best, the "gods" of such people are their pals, not their true superiors

I think my irony meter just topped out at 110%
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I would say that the West is remarkably polytheistic if you include Trinitarian Christianity as a type of polytheism, which I generally would.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
I would say that the West is remarkably polytheistic if you include Trinitarian Christianity as a type of polytheism, which I generally would.

Exactly. I mean if you don´t want to count the trinity as polytheism, then you cannot count a lot of hinduistic views as polytheism, because in both the trinity concept and the brahman concept, all the deities are the same deity, but also the individual deities.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
edit: for the purposes of this conversation we're going to have to go with the biblical definition of what a "god" is ...

OK

Psalm 82
1 God (elohim) stands in the divine assembly; He judges among the gods (elohim).
2 How long will you judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid [them] out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They (the elohim) know not, neither will they (the elohim) understand; they (the elohim) walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, you [are] gods (elohim); and all of you [are] the sons of the most High (bene 'elyon).
7 But you shall die like Adam, and fall like one of the Shining Ones.
8 Arise, O God (elohim), judge the earth: for you shall inherit all nations.


Elohim can be a singular (god), plural (gods) or proper (God) depending on verbs and adjectives.
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
Why would there be a commandment to have no other gods before him if there where no other gods? Just saying?
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
No, no. What you said was that deep down what YOU want to do with YOUR life. That was the accusation you made to pagans. That is the thread you must follow, not some washed down version now that we're talking about you and your faith. Stick to your story, at least.



.

It would be most accurate to say that there are warring desires inside me. Though the desire that has won out so far is the one to keep the faith and do what I think I'm called to do.
 
Top