Polytheism vs Monotheism

Cellar_Door said:
An individual either believes something or they don't; you can't force polytheism on modern society because you think it is less restricting. If you are a true monotheist, then you believe that you are praying/observing important dates/fasting/wearing a headscarf because it is what God intends for you to do. Religion loses the little purpose it has if it is customised to fit the follower.
Click to expand...
I disagree completely.
First of all, people believe something because they are taught to believe it or coerced into it - narly universally.
Secondly, of course religion is custom fit to the follower - why do you think there are over 30,000 different Christian sects? Why do you think so many people use teh same book to justify VASTLY different beliefs?
 
Michael said:
Not so much polytheism -vs- monotheism BUT I was thinking of the polytheists in the Roman Empire. If one were to go to the large multicultural cities, say like, Alexandria. There you would find Temples to various Gods. All working to serve YOU. You didn't serve them, not really, they served you. They tried to get your patronage. This means people go about their daily lives, working and economically prospering without much worrying about the Gods. When they do go to a Temple, it's usually because they want a blessing. They pay their bit, get some magic water, and say their prayer off they go.

Compare this with monotheism. Where YOU serve the God. All day long ... you observe your penance, you only eat what the God says is OK to eat, you worry and pray (in some cases this too is mandatory), and you hope the God likes you well enough and doesn't send you to hell ... in essence YOU'RE the slave to the God. You're a mental slave to the priests of this God.



Think about the different roles these two different religous classes are gong to occupy in society - it's two very different situations. In one they are a servant in the other they are your master.

And, this is what we see in theocratic societies. Even today.



Anyway, it was just a thought I had. It seems to me, that this is another example of where polytheism fits in better with society.



Michael II
Click to expand...

hence the problem with polytheism (or even materialistic renditions of monotheistic traditions) is what sort of value can a master have if they are completely at the whim of death, old age and disease ...?

:shrug:
 
lightgigantic said:
hence the problem with polytheism (or even materialistic renditions of monotheistic traditions) is what sort of value can a master have if they are completely at the whim of death, old age and disease ...?

:shrug:
Click to expand...
I don't get your post. Japanese are polytheists, please reexplain using Japanese Shinto faith as an example.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
It appears to me that having imperfect Gods leads to having more thoroughly corrupt followers, especially if those followers are zealous. I do agree with your distinction, however. The guilt from being less than what God wants can be quite taxing at times. I'm not sure what you mean by self-imprisonment. I wasn't aware that that was demanded, then again, I am not a scholar of world religion by any means.
Click to expand...

Monogods are quite imperfect as well. And do not lack corrupt followers.
 
StrangerInAStrangeLa said:
Monogods are quite imperfect as well. And do not lack corrupt followers.
Click to expand...

Monogods? Is that a new word? God is perfect. He defines perfection. Thus, anything he chooses to do is perfect because he decides it is. As far as corrupt followers, they are just evidence of our need to be forgiven, and that Christ's sacrifice was not in vain.
 
Michael said:
I don't get your post. Japanese are polytheists, please reexplain using Japanese Shinto faith as an example.
Click to expand...
the only master in polytheism is the time factor, since neither the demigod nor demigod worshiper are beyond issues of birth, death, old age and disease (ok maybe a few demigods are beyond issues of old age) .
 
In a multicultural society, polytheism trains people to accept different beliefs whereas monotheism instills intolerance.
 
oneness? ok, but, we're not talking about the religious scholar, we've talking about joe average citizen. you know, the people who do the actual work .. supporting the monasteries.
 
Michael said:
oneness?
Click to expand...
... implying that monotheistic truth can be expressed in various ways .. so the issue of debate is not so much who has the monopoly on it, but who is closer to it and who is further from it .... so the whole business of joining a mosque to burn town a church or joining a church to burn down a mosque is not high on the agenda

ok, but, we're not talking about the religious scholar, we've talking about joe average citizen. you know, the people who do the actual work .. supporting the monasteries.
Click to expand...
generally the average joe absorbs the mood of their respective religious leader - even historically, this whole issue of intolerance and monotheism was introduced by certain personalities - like for instance it was St Augustine (religious scholar) who really got into persecuting people of other faiths which probably wouldn't have amounted to much until a few average joes got on board too.
When you are talking of monotheism breeding intolerance, you are simply talking about certain persons who have dominated (or corrupted?) certain academic circles for disseminating knowledge.
 
Roman society is quite a bad example, especially in big cities. Roman world was much of a mixture of everything, of capitalism ante-litteram, most romans weren't probably really religious, and this is why with the time religious charges became less and less important - such as the Pontifex Maximus.
Also, late roman society was the one that completely forgot about paganism in a few generation to become 100% christian, which is a proof of how little they really cared about their own old gods.
Anyways, gods were not serf of people by any mean. Yeah, ther was no penitence, no obliged prayers, but do not think that a sailer in the middle of the huge sea would laugh at Poseidon-Neptune, and say "take this fish, you scum, and drive my ship at full speed".
I am heathen, and I can tell you , it is not about who serves who, but about respect and being "almost peers"
 
lightgigantic said:
generally the average joe absorbs the mood of their respective religious leader - even historically, this whole issue of intolerance and monotheism was introduced by certain personalities - like for instance it was St Augustine (religious scholar) who really got into persecuting people of other faiths which probably wouldn't have amounted to much until a few average joes got on board too.
Click to expand...
Then it's probably a good thing when joe average is not very religious. I think polythiems, over monotheism, may put joe average the majority, in a good position to not be manipulated by a St. Augustine because there are so many differing beliefs.

It's harder to have a pope in polythism. Especially when gods from other lands come into the mix.

Atopos said:
Roman society is quite a bad example, especially in big cities. Roman world was much of a mixture of everything, of capitalism ante-litteram, most romans weren't probably really religious, and this is why with the time religious charges became less and less important - such as the Pontifex Maximus.
Click to expand...
Welcome to Sciforums Atopos.

Potifex Maximus was what I was thinking about in the above post.


I remember reading an interesting letters from Hadrian's wall where the man says: I asked the gods for something, they gave me nothing, so I will not build an alter to them.

I like this line of thinking :)
 
"Terah was a manufacturer of idols and had them for sale. One day when Terah was absent and Abraham was left to take charge of the shop, an old, yet vigorous, man came in to buy an idol. Abraham handed him the one on top, and he gave him the price asked. "How old art thou?" Abraham asked. "Seventy years," was the answer. "Thou fool," continued Abraham, "how canst thou adore a god so much younger than thou? Thou wert born seventy years ago and this god was made yesterday." The buyer threw away his idol and received his money back. The other sons of Terah complained to their father that Abraham did not know how to sell the idols, and so Abraham was told to attend to the idols as priest. One day a woman brought a meal-offering for the idols, and, as they would not eat, he exclaimed: "A mouth have they but speak not, eyes but see not, ears but hear not, hands but handle not. May their makers be like them, and all who trust in them", and he broke them to pieces and burned them. Abraham was brought before Nimrod, who said: "Knowest thou not that I am god and ruler of the world? Why hast thou destroyed my images?" Then Abraham said: "If thou art god and ruler of the world, why dost thou not cause the sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If thou art god and ruler of the world, tell me all that I have now at heart, and what I shall do in the future." Nimrod was dumfounded, and Abraham continued: 'Thou art the son of Cush, a mortal like him. Thou couldst not save thy father from death, nor wilt thou thyself escape it.'"


Kadark
 
Kadark said:
"Terah was a manufacturer of idols and had them for sale. One day when Terah was absent and Abraham was left to take charge of the shop, an old, yet vigorous, man came in to buy an idol. Abraham handed him the one on top, and he gave him the price asked. "How old art thou?" Abraham asked. "Seventy years," was the answer. "Thou fool," continued Abraham, "how canst thou adore a god so much younger than thou? Thou wert born seventy years ago and this god was made yesterday." The buyer threw away his idol and received his money back. The other sons of Terah complained to their father that Abraham did not know how to sell the idols, and so Abraham was told to attend to the idols as priest. One day a woman brought a meal-offering for the idols, and, as they would not eat, he exclaimed: "A mouth have they but speak not, eyes but see not, ears but hear not, hands but handle not. May their makers be like them, and all who trust in them", and he broke them to pieces and burned them. Abraham was brought before Nimrod, who said: "Knowest thou not that I am god and ruler of the world? Why hast thou destroyed my images?" Then Abraham said: "If thou art god and ruler of the world, why dost thou not cause the sun to rise in the west and set in the east? If thou art god and ruler of the world, tell me all that I have now at heart, and what I shall do in the future." Nimrod was dumfounded, and Abraham continued: 'Thou art the son of Cush, a mortal like him. Thou couldst not save thy father from death, nor wilt thou thyself escape it.'"


Kadark
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Interesting! Where did that come from?
 
It's from The Jewish Encyclopedia and here's the rest which you will find is even more illuminating!

Nimrod said: "Worship the fire!" "Why not water that quenches the fire?" asked Abraham. "Very well, worship the water!" "Why not the clouds which swallow the water?" "So be it; worship the clouds!" Then Abraham said: "Rather let me adore the wind which blows the clouds about!" "So be it; pray to the wind!" "But," said Abraham, "man can stand up against the wind or shield himself behind the walls of his house." "Then adore me!" said Nimrod. Thereupon Nimrod (Amraphel; see Pesiḳ. R. § 33, 'Er. 53a) ordered Abraham to be cast into a furnace. He had a pile of wood five yards in circumference set on fire, and Abraham was cast into it. But God Himself went down from heaven to rescue him. Wherefore the Lord appeared to him later, saying: "I am the Lord who brought thee out of the fire of the Chaldeans" (Ur Kasdim, Gen. xv. 7). The legend betrays Persian influence (compare the Zoroaster legend in Windischmann, "Zoroastrische Studien," pp. 307-313). Regarding the cave in which Abraham dwelt, see ib. p. 113; compare also B. B. 10a. The dialogue with Nimrod, pointing from fire, water, the cloud, wind, and man to God, has its parallel in Hindu legend (see Benfey, "Pantschatantra," i. 376).

Abraham is thereupon commissioned by God to propagate His truth throughout the world, and he wins many souls for Him: while he wins the men, Sarah, his wife, converts the women. In this manner "they made souls in Haran" (Gen. xii. 5, Heb.). He awakens the heathen from slumber and brings them under the wings of God. He is the father of the proselytes (Gen. R. xliii; Mek., Mishpaṭim, § 18).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top