It is a pre-requisite for participation in sciforums that one read the mind and know the intentions of the OP, lest sci be overrun by the not-so-moderate Islamists and frothing Anti-Semites (the other kind, that is). Is that right?
christianity is a polytheism
- Thread starter scifes
- Start date
It is a pre-requisite for participation in sciforums that one read the mind and know the intentions of the OP, lest sci be overrun by the not-so-moderate Islamists and frothing Anti-Semites (the other kind, that is). Is that right?
I'm not sure if this is ironic or serious or if you think I am suggesting something like this or not?
I mean that's the way of things on the internet. But could you give this another shot so I know what you're saying to me?
Sorry. I certainly don't think that you think this, but it does seem to be a facet of moderation.
Consider the number of threads which have been cesspooled and/or locked: perhaps the motivations of the OP were in fact disingenuine; nevertheless, the questions posed are often valid. In this particular instance, the question of the OP is a good one--but even if he did have an agenda, is it fair to dismiss the question?
Edit: IOW it was more directed at Geoff, but I used your words to highlight the presumptions that were being made.
Last edited:
No need to apolagize. I agree, good point. I could see if the thread was constantly saying Christians are evil because they are polytheists and here is the proof, it would be more relevent. But here people seem to genuinely wonder if it is polytheistic.
Exactly. And as I remarked previously, this thread is also unusually free of the "theist bashing" I've come to expect.
I wondered if that was the case.
You get into similar areas of controversy around Buddhism and theism. The fact is that many, I mean millions, of Buddhists are theists of various types.
And Hindus are often Monotheists since they see the various Gods and Goddesses as manifestations of one god. But then others see them as manifestations of two Gods, one female, one male. Other Hindus sound to me very much like Buddists, I found this to be true of people who devote their lives to the religion, live in ashrams and or have gurus. The SELF starts to sound a hell of a lot like The Buddha.
I don't think there is a simply way to give a single correct answer on these issues.
It's like asking if Democrats are pro-gun or protectionist.
Well, from scifes' perspective, Christianity-as-polytheism would be more reprehensible, and easier to dismiss. Hence the thread OP.
The doctrine that the Bible is the word of God. A bible where god is plural.
The doctrine that Jesus felt abandoned by God.
Also a religion is not simply doctrines, it is practices, beliefs, relationships. I see polytheistic qualities in those areas.
I know what the official views of the church are. As I said, one does not have to take official views as correct.
Infidels/People-of-the-Book aside, I do find it interesting that many are wont to dismiss polytheists as inferior--along the lines of the evolution of thought, that is. And, as you point out, erroneous beliefs pertaining to the "body-count factor." Many Chinese, and Buddhists throughout the world, would find all this rather amusing.
I took this as more generally dismissive of the subject being raised. My bold below. this may not have been a fair reading, but it seemed like the bringing it up in general was being criticized.
Well, yes. It's done for unfair motives, from the perspective of the poster, IMHO. But, say on, if one must.
I don't consider polytheism lower down on some scale. If I look at the behavior of polytheists vs. monotheists (those who say they are each of these), I would have to say I would prefer polytheists as neighbors. But my goal is not to convince Christians that they are really polytheists so I would be happier with them as neighbors. I do, however, think that something complicated is trying to be made simple.
And I think that tends to have pernicious consequences.
I think the Torah far more ambivalent in this respect than the NT--at least with the NT, one can make semi-convincing rationalizations for a multi-faceted singular god. But while polytheistic Christianity does some more prevalent amongst the poor and lesser-educated, I'm not convinced that this is necessarily due to either simple ignorance or a lack of understanding/consideration of the doctrinal explanations.
Well, again, south american parishoners.
Bible Belt believers in the near omnipresence of Satan.
And a great deal of other behavior and religious relationships that indicate polytheistic tendencies.
A person can say 'I believe violence against women is evil.' But if I find that person beating his much smaller girlfriend, I will doubt his official belief.
Sorry. That's a negative example.
A positive one.
If someone says they like only vanilla ice cream and I see them ordering chocolate ice cream on occasion, I will call into question their official statement of taste.
Well, let's think for a moment who Jesus thought had a better chance of getting into heaven.
I did mention the education issue earlier, also.
Further, given that the Bible itself offers up at the very least some serious ambiguity, I see no reason to assume the less well educated are incorrect. A religion is not a text. It is a set of processes.
Intellectuals often explain away and try to make things consistant. Something less well educated sometimes end up being more flexible about.
Hmm. But that may be suggestive of the pre-conscious/instinctive valuation vs. the considered.
Edit. As per #97: and perhaps the devaluation of the pre-conscious/instinctive.
?? How exactly is a belief in the existence of Satan equivalent to polytheism? I think you're confusing polytheism with the idea about a "heavenly order" or its incarnadine opposite, the Satanic host. An angel or demon need not be a god.
True, but for many Baptists and the like, Satan is every bit as omniscient and omnipotent and I think the hierarchy is all but forgotten.