Why would monotheism be a good thing, let alone a necessary one?

[LuisDantas]

All religions could be a justification for political authoritarianism though.

I think you are either unaware of or underplaying the affinity between monotheism and repressive thought, Augustus.

How often in history have we met witness of it?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Maybe it is that you're not understanding what polytheism is. I gathered this assumption because of this.

The Catholic church and Buddha have some very different theology. How do you tell which one is right?

There are no gods in Buddhism. There are devas, Bodhisattvas, and different other Buddhas, but not one are worshiped. They are in the same boat as us.

Polytheism is the belief of different gods not different religions. Each god doesn't represent a religion. Gods would exist to a pagan regardless of the religion. That's like limiting the creator to Christianity.

My main objection to polytheism is that their is only one true God. He has all the truth I need.

I don't understand that. That's like going into college, knowing you only need one class to graduate but telling others who need multiple classes they are wrong all because of where they are in their degree compared to you.

How do you see one truth when there are so many variety of people that to say everyone is under one boat would be limiting them, their personalities, who they are, just to reflect and serve a god to which they would have no personal relationship with?

The long posts I did were not to say you're wrong. I like to explain things so I can understand them better. If we were in person, and I'm explaining my beliefs, I wouldn't do so in staccato sentences. I'd actually give you a full explanation and answer questions if you are interested. Just online people don't have the patience.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

5

All god's are false Gods. If you want to get your theology from that which is not a God, be my guest. Igt is not my language, it is the language of the one true God. What is unattractive to you is attractive to me, so why should I accept another language? Especially one that usually contradicts the Bible. BTW Buddha was not a god.

The beauty of polytheism is that everyone believes in different gods (those who do) and that is yours included. As such, you don't have to believe what a polytheist believes. However, unlike polytheism, monotheism doesn't advocate equality and seeing other beliefs as valid in themselves. It's a power language "be my guest" rather than "I understand what you believe" type of thing.

I never said The Buddha was god. Buddhism is no where near monotheism and should not be under the monotheism/one-god believers umbrella. That's pure politics not religion and definitely, if you don't like religion, spirituality.

 

[Augustus]

I think you are either unaware of or underplaying the affinity between monotheism and repressive thought, Augustus.

How often in history have we met witness of it?

As I mentioned, I was querying what you meant by the term authoritarian.

Overall it is less religiously tolerant I agree. Politically authoritarian in a general sense though is not so straightforward.

In terms of 'repressive thought' in general, the secular totalitarianisms top the tree.

In terms of standard authoritarianism, was my man Augustus less authoritarian than a Constantine or a Theodosius? Were Egyptian 'God Kings' less authoritarian then medieval Divine Right monarchs?

 

[omega2xx]

One set of rules that apply to every little thing that can ever be conceived can be hard to wade through, though. Having well organized, well written, PERTINENT information that is easily accessible is much better. I'm also confused by your political analogy, as we also have Vice Presidents, the Courts, Congress, the Senate, State and Local governments, etc ... and that's not counting private companies, grassroots citizen initiatives, and foreign involvement. To say we must rely on one person to rule an entire country is absurd and false.


I do too, in a very general sense, though I concede my religion hails from a polytheistic tradition in all stages of its life. So I guess I'm more henotheistic than I am monotheistic nowadays.


Badly written rules force many people to crave a single authority figure?


I occasionally play Monopoly (online, as I can't remember what I did with my Grandpa's set from the 50s). I know of at least two ways to play and as kids my brother and I would make up stuff anyway because being a greedy jerk didn't seem moral.


Basic human psych ... no, ALL of psychology notes that if you want to teach consequences, you don't wait eons after people die to teach them what the problem was. You nip that crap in the bud right then.


This is the heaven where there was a riot and a third of the angels rebelled and became demons? THAT heaven?


A traffic accident can occur due to many causes: road layout/quality, weather, sobriety of drivers, signaling functionality, etc. As winter is coming on (and I moved north of the Mason Dixon and I was depressed apparently people drive just as stupid here as they did down in the Deep South, where I'm from ... not as bad, but still bad), we are getting more and more pileups that cannot be traced to just one cause.


I think it acknowledges an interdependence that is sorely lacking from strict monotheism.

"No man is an island", after all, and even an island must deal with its' various lifeforms both on and off the surface, weather, geological rumblings, etc.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Pascal helped invent calculators, people! No need to bother thinking up stupid things like computers and the internet! Pascal rescued us all from ignorance as it is!

Yes, Pascal: super genius, who, according to wiki, signed away most of his family inheritance and died at an early age. But that's okay, he made a super smart wager ... I mean, he still died a horrible death that today we could've probably fixed anyway, but hey ... smart guy all around.


I think the world is waiting for the One True to come up with this silver bullet that will fix everything. Is it prohibitively expensive or something?


Do you believe God can make up His own mind? I think another flaw in that wager is that it ignores God's part in all this.


Where do you think the name El or Yahweh comes from? Who worshiped THEM before Judaism was invented?


Diversity acknowledges reality. Think of a cat. Now think of the cat as part of a food chain. Now think of the cat in terms of the thousands of different connections this cat has to all elements of its internal and external environments, including you. NOW think of how all those other elements (including you) connect to each other. It may still be more simplistic than the kind of reality God sees, but to focus JUST on the cat is far too limiting to be useful in describing reality.


How do you know the bible is telling you the truth if I can find El and Yahweh in the Epic of Baal?


Children should not be worshiping parents and only an idiotic boss should be treating "servants" like slaves instead of valued employees.


Yes. Egypt always had its problems, but the fur REALLY flew when one pharaoh decided one god was all that was needed.


If the conquest of Canaan happened, Christianity and Islam got their ideas from Momma Religion...


Do you live your life like a pious ancient Middle Eastern Hebrew?


Like, the MAJORITY of the bible is trying to kill off the "other".


Why? What if we're just something God left on the stove and forgot about when He went to the movies?


God promised us a savior and still plans on nuking the entire planet some time in the future, per many denominations.


LOL, what?


Judge the tree by its fruit. I just am having a hard time figuring out why this is so hard: if Religion A claims that God says if we do Option 1 we will see 10 years of peace and Religion B says that if we do Option 2 we will see 10 years of peace ... is it REALLY that hard to see which one gets closest? Even if neither of them do, I would still think the one that got even one step closer to the goal is the superior choice (at least with regard to that one topic) than the other, right?

Your post was way to long for my ADD no to kick in. I hope your HA HA HA was because you recognize sarcasm.

I will address you last comment.

Different religions have different definitions for fruit.

The problem is not that one says use option 1 and the other religion says use option 2. The problem comes when one says abortion is a sin and another says it is not. Same with homosexuality. There is a very wide gulf between conservative Christianity and liberal Christianity.

So of the above example I gave, which church is telling the truth and how do you know it is the truth?

 

[Quintessence]

I'm not sure how much this relates to what you wanted to discuss in this thread, @LuisDantas , but I've heard it remarked that "true" monotheism is so intellectually and practically difficult to maintain that in order for it to persist it must constantly guard itself against what is a more default way of humans understanding the world around them. I don't know how much truth there is to that notion, but I think we can say that any "purist" mentality has to be constantly vigilant against what it perceives as corruption of itself and that monotheism in particular demands a level of purism that polytheism doesn't seem to.

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm not sure how much this relates to what you wanted to discuss in this thread, @LuisDantas , but I've heard it remarked that "true" monotheism is so intellectually and practically difficult to maintain that in order for it to persist it must constantly guard itself against what is a more default way of humans understanding the world around them. I don't know how much truth there is to that notion, but I think we can say that any "purist" mentality has to be constantly vigilant against what it perceives as corruption of itself and that monotheism in particular demands a level of purism that polytheism doesn't seem to.

First I hear of that, Quint.

I have heard that it is fairly easy for people to "temporarily" acquire beliefs they don't usually hold when they are immersed in the proper social environment; anthropologists have given witness to that.

I suppose some people may see that as an actual problem as opposed to just an interesting phenomenon.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Maybe it is that you're not understanding what polytheism is. I gathered this assumption because of this.

There are no gods in Buddhism. There are devas, Bodhisattvas, and different other Buddhas, but not one are worshiped. They are in the same boat as us.

Polytheism is the belief of different gods not different religions. Each god doesn't represent a religion. Gods would exist to a pagan regardless of the religion. That's like limiting the creator to Christianity.



I don't understand that. That's like going into college, knowing you only need one class to graduate but telling others who need multiple classes they are wrong all because of where they are in their degree compared to you.

How do you see one truth when there are so many variety of people that to say everyone is under one boat would be limiting them, their personalities, who they are, just to reflect and serve a god to which they would have no personal relationship with?

The long posts I did were not to say you're wrong. I like to explain things so I can understand them better. If we were in person, and I'm explaining my beliefs, I wouldn't do so in staccato sentences. I'd actually give you a full explanation and answer questions if you are interested. Just online people don't have the patience.

You don't understand it simply because you don't believe it. If we find the true God and He gives us truth, why would we need to look for other gods? We don't because we don't need to. As a matter of fact other "gods" might lead us away from the God who has given us the truth, therefore we stay away from the idea that there are "other" gods.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You don't understand it simply because you don't believe it. If we find the true God and He gives us truth, why would we need to look for other gods? We don't because we don't need to. As a matter of fact other "gods" might lead us away from the God who has given us the truth, therefore we stay away from the idea that there are "other" gods.

But multiple gods give you and lets you see life in its diversity and apprciate everyone who is unique without saying they are wrong.

Its beautiful to have more than one "truth" work together like a puzzle. You cant solve a puzzle with one piece no more than you can obtain a degree with only one class.

How can gods lead you away from one god? Your god is one of many gods that exist to a pagan. With that said, many pagans do give one-god believers their own space because they believe in diversity.

One-god beliefs dont have that. One truth for all is literally a political stance, communism, and oppressive.

I dont know how you cant see that.

 

[Reggie Miller]

But multiple gods give you and lets you see life in its diversity and apprciate everyone who is unique without saying they are wrong.

Its beautiful to have more than one "truth" work together like a puzzle. You cant solve a puzzle with one piece no more than you can obtain a degree with only one class.

How can gods lead you away from one god? Your god is one of many gods that exist to a pagan. With that said, many pagans do give one-god believers their own space because they believe in diversity.

One-god beliefs dont have that. One truth for all is literally a political stance, communism, and oppressive.

I dont know how you cant see that.

Well, my God is the only true God. I find love and forgiveness, mercy and righteousness in Him alone. I don't need any other "god" so why should I go looking for one?

No man can serve two masters. He will prefer one over the other and so the other gets the short end of the stick. That's not honoring the other master, that is dishonoring him.

 

[von bek]

Well, my God is the only true God. I find love and forgiveness, mercy and righteousness in Him alone. I don't need any other "god" so why should I go looking for one?

No man can serve two masters. He will prefer one over the other and so the other gets the short end of the stick. That's not honoring the other master, that is dishonoring him.

Speaking for myself, I do not quite see the relationship between my gods and I as one of master/servant. Many I may address as Lady or Lord as a term of respect. I certainly see myself on a lower level than them; however, the relationship is more like approaching a powerful friend whom is willing to help out. Each god and goddess has dominion over certain aspects of nature and culture. When I am going to take a trip, I call upon Hermes, god of travelers, for a safe journey. I also call upon Hermes for success when communicating with others as He is also the god os speech and writing. When I am ill, I call upon shining Apollo, the god of healing to drive sickness from my body. Calling upon Apollo for physical healing does no offense to Hermes, as they govern different aspects of the cosmos.

Now, there are some relationships that I do willingly place myself in a subservient position to, mainly Artemis. Even Her I still regard as one who is friendly and protective of me. It is complex, but She is the divinity whom I have pledged myself to. I both fear Her savagery and am thankful for Her compassion. One day, I will inherit a nice bit of land in the country with woods and a creek. It is where I grew up and was first called by the Olympian gods. Artemis, Hermes, Athena, Apollo, Demeter, and Dionysos are the gods whom I devote most of my worship to. There is no question of me honoring some while dishonoring others as each meets specific needs in my life. This is why I reiterate that Pagansim is about celebrating this life, not worrying about what happens afterwards. I will either enter the realm of Hades after death, or may be rescued into a different fate completely by one of the gods. Perhaps I will be reborn into another body, here on Earth or in another realm. I will not worry and simply trust that the gods will honor me as I honor them...

 

[1robin]

Do you live your life like a pious ancient Middle Eastern Hebrew?

First let me state that it is very hard to debate a person who resurfaces every two weeks. I have no problem with a person occasionally being pulled away from a debate but you do it over and over. I have to strip out the part of your posts addressed to others then I have to review the posts of mine you quoted, and then I have to reacquaint myself with the contexts my posts were made in. But be that as it may I will reply to your claims here.

1. The bible does not demand that I live my life like a Hebrew. Did you miss all those commands Christ gave to the Hebrews explaining that their practices were imperfect and that OT laws were nailed to the cross along with Christ and done away with?
2. You also need to clarify which Hebrews from what times you wrongfully require me to live like.
3. I am actually commanded to live more like a pious 1st century Greek than any other cultural group but in reality I am to live as the bible commands not as any single nationality from any arbitrary time frame.
4. I said nothing about any particular law. I said that for any objective moral truth, value, or duty to exist God must exist. You are responding to an ontological claim by making an epistemological response. That never has nor will it ever work.

Like, the MAJORITY of the bible is trying to kill off the "other".

Yet again your response has nothing to do with what you responded to. Not tom mention that what you stated is incoherent. A majority of what is trying to kill half of what? Regardless, I said nothing about anyone in the Bible killing anyone else. The Bible is primarily historical biographies and it simply records history whether good, bad, or indifferent. What I actually said was that only if God exists is there a sufficient foundation to justify claims of racial equality.

Why? What if we're just something God left on the stove and forgot about when He went to the movies?

What? For the third time your response had nothing to do with what you responded to. I was not talking about whatever random concept of God you coughed up. The God I am talking about comes within the context that the bible emphatically spells out in no uncertain terms. I am referring to Yahweh not Thor, Apollo, Ashur, Gaia, or the god your pulling out of thin air.

God promised us a savior and still plans on nuking the entire planet some time in the future, per many denominations.

Well this response you made might be distantly related to my claim. Regardless it is no less wrong. I, nor the bible claim that the reason Christ came into our world was to make it perfect in spite of our having ruined it, to save us from dying, or to answer to you concerning your desires. He came to save those that would believe from the second death (spiritual and eternal death). He also does not nuke anything, in the Bible (the only eschatology I am discussing) it describes what is probably a war primarily the Islamic world which goes up against Israel and her allies. It is us who actually nukes ourselves. It looks as if Israel is losing but at that instant God intervenes and destroys her and her allies enemies.

Your really are biting off more than you want to chew concerning biblical eschatology. You have a better chance of debating the simplistic issue of objective morality.

LOL, what?

This is basic stuff. I assume you will agree than humans dominate and kill off almost all of our fellows creatures which share the planet with us, for food, transportation, and clothing, etc..... Now if God dos not exist then there was no deity which gave us dominion over the creatures we kill. So to do so anyway is a form of unjustifiable specie-ism which would be worse than racism ever was. However if God exists and granted us sovereignty over the other creatures which belong to him then we are being perfectly moral and just to kill other forms of life. This is just a single example among thousands where secularists attempt to smuggle in foundations that only exist if God does, while simultaneously denying that God exists.

 

[Aštra’el]

That polytheists must pick one god to worship which is wrong. The clue is in the term 'polytheist'!

The term "polytheist" describes one whose pantheon includes many gods. A polytheist might worship one or many of these gods. Monolatrism (aka monolotry) is one such form of polytheism that involves the exclusive worship of one, single god. It would appear that most definitions of henotheism may fit this criteria as well.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I dont hear love and forgiveness in that type of mindset and talk. That sounds one sided powr language that is absent in many polytheistic worldviews. Hence why a rainbow is beautiful just as one shade of purple. Your god doesnt see Ands but political in nature.

How can you have that mindset? It sounds it helps you more than the person you are expressing love to.

Well, my God is the only true God. I find love and forgiveness, mercy and righteousness in Him alone. I don't need any other "god" so why should I go looking for one?

You do not need to.

I just find more than one god fosters better love because you have many different guides and personalities as such earth is not just one.

No man can serve two masters. He will prefer one over the other and so the other gets the short end of the stick. That's not honoring the other master, that is dishonoring him.

Another thing I like about polytheism is that there Is no master. There doesnt need to be one master or many. Thats all politics.

One god is oppressive.

More than one equality and diversity

One god love is based on servatude

Many gods love based on unity and family

One god means power

Many gods means democracy.

One god means for god only

Many gods mean for the people

I cant see anything positive in one god

 

[Sonofason]

A traffic accident can occur due to many causes: road layout/quality, weather, sobriety of drivers, signaling functionality, etc. As winter is coming on (and I moved north of the Mason Dixon and I was depressed apparently people drive just as stupid here as they did down in the Deep South, where I'm from ... not as bad, but still bad), we are getting more and more pileups that cannot be traced to just one cause.

Okay, you're making a good point, I suppose. I agree there can be multiple contributing factors, and I suppose you can say that each of those factors is its own cause. If he didn't get out of bed that morning, he would not have had the accident...so I suppose we could even say that getting out of bed causes all accidents. Or, every cause can be traced back to what, multiple causes, or one single cause?

If the universe once existed as a singularity, and nothing else existed, what could possible be the cause of a big bang? If nothing else exists in the universe except one thing, what could possibly cause that thing to change?

 

[arthra]

I think it is a particularly strong appeal among the Bahais and Ahmadiyya Mulsims, but by no means limited to them.

One of the reasons I think we Baha'is find "montheism" attractive is that in our inter-faith gatherings where Christians, Jews and Muslims as well lately in our area as Sikhs and some Hindus find a common ground and we can share our faith and find unanimity in our prayers with each other. The oneness of humanity is also close to the recognition that God is one and that there is general agreement.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

The problem is not that one says use option 1 and the other religion says use option 2. The problem comes when one says abortion is a sin and another says it is not. Same with homosexuality. There is a very wide gulf between conservative Christianity and liberal Christianity.

But we can delve into why something is being called a sin, though. Abortion is not a sin in the bible and is actually required or at least encouraged for nothing more than a jealous paranoid husband. Homosexuality is considered an abomination, but so is going to Long John Silvers. One wonders about Hebrew priorities.

I would say there is a difference between spiteful legalists and compassionate "spirit of the law" types in Christianity, not necessarily conservative and liberal. Frankly, you strike me as the type of person in the Good Samaritan parable who would run from a bleeding man because the bible clearly says you shouldn't touch someone unclean. You don't seem to grasp when breaking a stupid rule is necessary for the greater good or that one should just admit a rule is stupid. Jesus did this quite often, such as when he ate without washing hands (ok, he missed the point, but I get the message anyway) or did his work on the Sabbath. Too many Christians would join the Pharisees (at least as they are portrayed in the gospels, which is likely an unfair representation to the historical group) in condemning Jesus for breaking rather stupid taboos. Jesus didn't mind hanging out with the very same people you would chomp at the bit to condemn. I go with Jesus on this one. Sorry. I try my best to err on the side of love as much as possible. Let God work out with those involved what should've been done instead.

First let me state that it is very hard to debate a person who resurfaces every two weeks.

I've been sick and I work nights. So sue me. I get back online when I have the damned time.

Now if God dos not exist then there was no deity which gave us dominion over the creatures we kill.

We are biologically omnivores. The only things we cannot eat are things that are inedible. Any other details are culturally derived only.

And we shouldn't be so damned haughty to believe we have dominion over anything. The world is a mess. Do you accept your part in it? If you have dominion, that means you are directly responsible for the crap that happens in the world. We are also not the top of the food chain. Without artificial weapons, we are basically just lunch meat for many animals and all lifeforms end up getting eaten by the decomposers anyway, who are the TRUE masters, if you think about it. Buying food at the grocery store doesn't make you some global dominating bada--. We are at most scavengers, not predators. Nature LOVES to show us what happens when we think too highly of our skills in dominating her, such as monoculturing that then results in rampant epidemics of food-borne diseases.

 

[LuisDantas]

One of the reasons I think we Baha'is find "montheism" attractive is that in our inter-faith gatherings where Christians, Jews and Muslims as well lately in our area as Sikhs and some Hindus find a common ground and we can share our faith and find unanimity in our prayers with each other.

I know.

For about 20 years now I am sorry for that. You could be so magnificient had you learned better. And you are so darned close to doing just that...

The oneness of humanity is also close to the recognition that God is one and that there is general agreement.

I just fail to see why anyone would say such a thing.

Sure, it looks good on paper, but then we stumble upon the monotheism part.

 

[Reggie Miller]

I dont hear love and forgiveness in that type of mindset and talk. That sounds one sided powr language that is absent in many polytheistic worldviews. Hence why a rainbow is beautiful just as one shade of purple. Your god doesnt see Ands but political in nature.

How can you have that mindset? It sounds it helps you more than the person you are expressing love to.



You do not need to.

I just find more than one god fosters better love because you have many different guides and personalities as such earth is not just one.



Another thing I like about polytheism is that there Is no master. There doesnt need to be one master or many. Thats all politics.

One god is oppressive.

More than one equality and diversity

One god love is based on servatude

Many gods love based on unity and family

One god means power

Many gods means democracy.

One god means for god only

Many gods mean for the people

I cant see anything positive in one god

Sir, without Christ your master is sin. Test yourself if you don't think so. Can you go one day without so much as one evil thought? No, you can't. Your master is sin.

 

[Desert Snake]

The term "polytheist" describes one whose pantheon includes many gods. A polytheist might worship one or many of these gods. Monolatrism (aka monolotry) is one such form of polytheism that involves the exclusive worship of one, single god. It would appear that most definitions of henotheism may fit this criteria as well.

polytheism actually implies the worship of more than one god. usually a few, at least.

monolatrist, means you only worship one deity, but think that there are other deities