Similarities of monotheistic religions .....

[Sputnik]

We all know them ( or some of them ).............lets us compare the similarities of monotheistic religions (apart from having one god ) :m:

And how did they become monotheistic ?

 

[Zephyr]

A little off topic, but I've been told that Hinduism considers all the Hindu gods as facets of one God. How different is this from the monotheistic idea of a God served by other heavenly powers (e.g. angels)?

One thing seems to be that the angels aren't supposed to be worshipped, while the Hindu deities might be. However the idea of an Avatar as a representative of God on earth seems quite similar to the God-made-flesh idea of Jesus. The idea of the Trinity is a bit like (a limited version) of God's having multiple aspects . . .

 

[Avatar]

Maybe the only alive monotheistic religion is Islam.

 

[S.A.M.]

Judaism is also monotheistic

 

[IceAgeCivilizations]

"Let US make man in OUR image."

 

[Zephyr]

What about Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Baha'ism?

 

[The Devil Inside]

"Let US make man in OUR image."

hmmm..thats shaky ground there.
it can mean that.

generally in jewish thought however, this is not g-d speaking. it is widely considered to be the five forces of creation set forth by the g-d saying this (elohim).

islam continues this traditional thought, whereas christians clothe g-d in flesh.
an interesting dichotomy, to say the least.

 

[The Devil Inside]

What about Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Baha'ism?

zoroastrianism speaks of ahriman as a god.

christianity is hard to lump in one group, really....classical evangelist christianity (what i am assuming you are referring to) has a triune god.

 

[The Devil Inside]

please do not preach here. this forum is for impartial discussion only.

 

[Grantywanty]

We all know them ( or some of them ).............lets us compare the similarities of monotheistic religions (

They are all sexist in mythology and also directly.
(more or less synonymously) They are patriarchal.
Their God tells (or has told them) them to make war on others.
They have angels.
They talk about Abraham.
Nature tends to be on the opposite end from the holy.
Nature is for us.
They all ahve trouble accepting sex (but not violence, oops, I said that already)
Believers refer to texts and authoratative males to find the 'truth'.
Believers find the idea that the writers of these texts had personal, gender and cultural axes to grind, blind spots and biases, so frightening they deny it completely.
Two of the monotheisms have had flings where they kill non-monotheists and monotheists (both of other monotheisms and even in other sects, groups, denominations within their own.)
They have a tendency to guilt trip people.
They have a tendency to blame body and desire for the world's problems.
They tend to use metaphors based on service (class domination) sacrifice and surrender (war). ((odd choices for loving gods))
Some shared tendency to getting rewards after death.
Monotheistic beliefs and texts make it easy for powerful people to justify aggressive actions.
Monothiestic leaders tend to have secret agreements with the rich and powerful.
Monotheistic leaders tend to exact strict adherence to religious principles on the poor and weak and 'others', but manage to explain away the sins of the powerful. (Latin America has examples countering adn supporting this tendency)
Light is good, dark is bad.
UP is good, down is bad.
Swords are used by divine intermediaries.
A husband cannot rape his wife in the monotheisms (not that he shouldn't but whatever he did was not rape, despite the lack of consent and any attendant violence), though this has been changing.
Wives adn children are property.
Anyone whose actions or words encroach on areas that the 'priests' consider their own are potential subjects of violence. (today this is carried out more indirectly and with less overt violence)
Part of all their philosophies can be seen as Grit your teeth and bear it. The rich and powerful are exempt from this.
They coopt traditions and dates used by pagan groups despite THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.
God is trancendant and not immanent.
God is perfect and never does anythign wrong.
God is often a petty tyrant while also being the God of love.
Bending over is often a part of ritual honoring of God. One must make oneself low. (remember, down is bad)


They are killing us.

 

[Sputnik]

We all know them ( or some of them ).............lets us compare the similarities of monotheistic religions (

They are all sexist in mythology and also directly.
(more or less synonymously) They are patriarchal.
Their God tells (or has told them) them to make war on others.
They have angels.
They talk about Abraham.
Nature tends to be on the opposite end from the holy.
Nature is for us.
They all ahve trouble accepting sex (but not violence, oops, I said that already)
Believers refer to texts and authoratative males to find the 'truth'.
Believers find the idea that the writers of these texts had personal, gender and cultural axes to grind, blind spots and biases, so frightening they deny it completely.
Two of the monotheisms have had flings where they kill non-monotheists and monotheists (both of other monotheisms and even in other sects, groups, denominations within their own.)
They have a tendency to guilt trip people.
They have a tendency to blame body and desire for the world's problems.
They tend to use metaphors based on service (class domination) sacrifice and surrender (war). ((odd choices for loving gods))
Some shared tendency to getting rewards after death.
Monotheistic beliefs and texts make it easy for powerful people to justify aggressive actions.
Monothiestic leaders tend to have secret agreements with the rich and powerful.
Monotheistic leaders tend to exact strict adherence to religious principles on the poor and weak and 'others', but manage to explain away the sins of the powerful. (Latin America has examples countering adn supporting this tendency)
Light is good, dark is bad.
UP is good, down is bad.
Swords are used by divine intermediaries.
A husband cannot rape his wife in the monotheisms (not that he shouldn't but whatever he did was not rape, despite the lack of consent and any attendant violence), though this has been changing.
Wives adn children are property.
Anyone whose actions or words encroach on areas that the 'priests' consider their own are potential subjects of violence. (today this is carried out more indirectly and with less overt violence)
Part of all their philosophies can be seen as Grit your teeth and bear it. The rich and powerful are exempt from this.
They coopt traditions and dates used by pagan groups despite THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.
God is trancendant and not immanent.
God is perfect and never does anythign wrong.
God is often a petty tyrant while also being the God of love.
Bending over is often a part of ritual honoring of God. One must make oneself low. (remember, down is bad)


They are killing us.

I do see your point , but you actually ends up with beeing emotionally - and almost preaches atheism ........... NOT allowed here , only in the religion forum !!

 

[The Devil Inside]

We all know them ( or some of them ).............lets us compare the similarities of monotheistic religions (

They are all sexist in mythology and also directly.
(more or less synonymously) They are patriarchal.
Their God tells (or has told them) them to make war on others.
They have angels.
They talk about Abraham.
Nature tends to be on the opposite end from the holy.
Nature is for us.
They all ahve trouble accepting sex (but not violence, oops, I said that already)
Believers refer to texts and authoratative males to find the 'truth'.
Believers find the idea that the writers of these texts had personal, gender and cultural axes to grind, blind spots and biases, so frightening they deny it completely.
Two of the monotheisms have had flings where they kill non-monotheists and monotheists (both of other monotheisms and even in other sects, groups, denominations within their own.)
They have a tendency to guilt trip people.
They have a tendency to blame body and desire for the world's problems.
They tend to use metaphors based on service (class domination) sacrifice and surrender (war). ((odd choices for loving gods))
Some shared tendency to getting rewards after death.
Monotheistic beliefs and texts make it easy for powerful people to justify aggressive actions.
Monothiestic leaders tend to have secret agreements with the rich and powerful.
Monotheistic leaders tend to exact strict adherence to religious principles on the poor and weak and 'others', but manage to explain away the sins of the powerful. (Latin America has examples countering adn supporting this tendency)
Light is good, dark is bad.
UP is good, down is bad.
Swords are used by divine intermediaries.
A husband cannot rape his wife in the monotheisms (not that he shouldn't but whatever he did was not rape, despite the lack of consent and any attendant violence), though this has been changing.
Wives adn children are property.
Anyone whose actions or words encroach on areas that the 'priests' consider their own are potential subjects of violence. (today this is carried out more indirectly and with less overt violence)
Part of all their philosophies can be seen as Grit your teeth and bear it. The rich and powerful are exempt from this.
They coopt traditions and dates used by pagan groups despite THOU SHALT NOT STEAL.
God is trancendant and not immanent.
God is perfect and never does anythign wrong.
God is often a petty tyrant while also being the God of love.
Bending over is often a part of ritual honoring of God. One must make oneself low. (remember, down is bad)


They are killing us.

please do not preach here. this subforum is for objective conversation of religions.

subversive agendas will not be tolerated.

 

[Avatar]

What they said. Atheistic preaching is unwelcome here.

 

[Grantywanty]

I do see your point , but you actually ends up with beeing emotionally - and almost preaches atheism ........... NOT allowed here , only in the religion forum !!

I am not an athiest, so I think it is very unlikely that I am preaching or almost preaching athiesm.

 

[Grantywanty]

What they said. Atheistic preaching is unwelcome here.

I am not an athiest. I guess most people would call me a pagan. I think I actually, intelligently, and in quite a diverse range of ways, answered the question and pointed out common features of the monotheisms. Sure, there were a couple of charged comments, but I don't think most of my post is preaching. I think most of what I said there is factual, quite a bit of it simply neutral and would not be disagreed with by members of the monotheisms. Other parts they might dispute, but most non-monotheists would agree with. for example the mythological treatment of women.

 

[Sputnik]

I am not an athiest, so I think it is very unlikely that I am preaching or almost preaching athiesm.

Propaganda against religion (" they are killing us ") is also forbidden ..............
Do NOT let your emotions influence your posts to be biased in an emotionally , propagandist or preaching way .......... this is science forum ...
Thank you !!!

 

[Grantywanty]

subversive agendas will not be tolerated.

I happy not to post comments like the last one in my post. But I went and checked the guidelines:

Atheistic and/or theistic persuasions about religion, i.e. discussion whether or not there is a God is not allowed here. For such discussion, you have Religion forum in Philosophy category.

I am not an athiest. I did not discuss whether there is a God or not.

Preaching
1 Example: Any allude on religious books with main purpose to prove that there is only X {insert number} true religion(s).
2 All quotations and citations from religious books that have no connection with discussion, or which are inserted to distract discussion
3 Statements: There is only one (or 754) God(s) that should be followed; According to {writer} in {chapter, book} there is only true religion; Etc.

I did not do 1, 2 or 3. (I added numbers to the guidelines here, but changed nothing else.)

Propaganda
(I’ve copied this from JamesR revision of rules in Religion section)


“ For the purposes of this forum, "propaganda" is defined as material copied verbatim from other web sites, books or articles, which demonstrates clear bias for or against a particular religious belief or religious group. It does not include articles which examine an issue objectively, without a particular religious or political bias.

Obviously I did not do this.

Original material posted by sciforums members will not be regarded as propaganda, provided that any arguments made for or against a particular view are supported by evidence and appropriate references to source material. ”

Here we find the only possible problem area. What you guys are upset about is not that I didn't include supporting evidence?

Do you really want me to find quotes in the OT and the KOran that seem to put women in a bad light? For example.

I realize that my post was negative, but there were also neutral comparisons made and I compared the three main monotheisms in a pretty wide range of ways. I also think that quite a few of the negatives, say the relationship with nature, is not something that would be disputed by monotheists. Nature is for our use, given to us by God. That it seems negative (to me or to you) says something about our viewpoints but does not make it propaganda for me to list it. Similarly my comments about bodies and desire. I don't think this is controversial to monotheists. I listed and most of my post was not a rant. I was truly trying hard to answer the first posters question.

I will eliminate my editorial comments in the future, but truly, I think much of my post is not controversial. Would monotheists deny the injunctions to war in their holy texts?

Certainly I did not go and find reference in the holy texts for my assertions. But that is also true of the other shorter posts here. Those posters simply stated facts or opinions.

Anyway. You won't meet any resistance from me, I'll adhere to the guidelines or perhaps avoid the Comp REl forum. I do think you need to revise the guidelines. I would have been far less cranky if someone had used one of my ideas as a starting off point for a discussion, something nice and non-controversial like DARK/LIGHT and added that I should tone down the editorial nature of my posts.

I think it is rather oddly telling that a number of people (writing in a Comparative REligion thread, no less) assumed I was an atheist. There are other religions than the monotheisms out there.

Perhaps I'll start a thread - a non-propagandist one - on that topic.

 

[Plazma Inferno!]

Obviously I did not do this.

“ For the purposes of this forum, "propaganda" is defined as material copied verbatim from other web sites, books or articles, which demonstrates clear bias for or against a particular religious belief or religious group. It does not include articles which examine an issue objectively, without a particular religious or political bias.

Although it was not material copied from other web sites, it's still demonstrating bias and hatred against certain religion, i.e. monotheism.

Anyway, I made some small update of guidelines, thanks to you Grantywanty.

This forum is still baby who's learning first steps.

Fortunately, I'm patient parent.

 

[Grantywanty]

My list revised.

So let me take a non-polemic retake of my list.

We all know them ( or some of them ).............lets us compare the similarities of monotheistic religions (

God is male. This distinguishes the monotheisms from many pagan and indigenous religions where there is a female Goddess, often Mother Earth, but not restricted to that.
They are patriarchal. (I hope that is a neutral enough word.) Males are seen as rulers of the house and the main interpreters of God and holy texts. This is often true in other religions, but there have been exceptions, some like Gimbutas saying that Matriarchal religions were more the norm before the rise of the monotheisms. Also some pagan or indig. religions allow more intermediary roles for women (between Goddess and humans, for example, as a Priest has this role between God and humans.)
They have angels.
The main three include the story of Abraham.
Humans are given dominion over nature.
Sexual desire is seen as problematic.
They tend to use metaphors based on service (with its origins in class relations) sacrifice and surrender (a war metaphor).
There is an afterlife, often seen as above the earth.
Light is good, dark is bad.
Up is good, down is bad.
Swords are used by divine intermediaries.
God is trancendant and not immanent. This distinguishes the monotheisms from many other religions that have immanent deities or dieties that are both I and T.
God is perfect. This distinguishes the monotheisms from many other religions where gods adn goddesses engage in all sorts of questionable activities, make mistakes, etc. Also many other religions include holy beings who are more neutral (or say confusing with trickster figures) in terms of morality, awareness, and intent.
Bowing down is often a component in rituels. I think this distinguishes the monotheisms from many other religions.
Theology is practiced in the monotheisms much more than in other religions. This is partly, I would guess, due to the text nature of the religions (they have 'bibles' to be interpreted.) But perhaps there is more to it. Many experts, not all of them priests, imams or rabbis discuss, argue over, publish, research and use a lot of deductive reasoning in relation to ideas of morality, metaphysics and so on.
They have an architectural center for worship. One way to see how this distinguishes them from other religions is that prayer and religious learning often take place in a cultural artifact, something that is not nature.
I believe all three have injunctions against magical practices.
Monotheistic rituals have a tendency towards controlled expression. As opposed to the ecstatic and physicall wild nature of many pagan and indig. rituals. There are exceptions to this, of course, but the strong tendency is there.
The monotheistic texts make predictions about the future. (I think this is true for all of them)
I believe they also all share an idea of Hell.

I hope that fits the guidelines, even the new ones.

 

[river-wind]

Archeologically the move from poly to mono theism appears to be tightly aligned with the move from a female godhead as the mother of life to the male god as the owner/creator of it.

The transition as far as Europe is concerned occured largely in Egypt, as the royal family's split faith betwen Amen-Ra the official king of the gods, and Aten, the sun disk inwhich Ra resided. As Amenhetep IV took power, this divide between personal and public became a political one, and resulted int he moving of the capital south to Amarna from Thebes, where Amen-Ra's hold was strongest.

The ongoing movement in the country from the purely polytheist to monotheist under Ra due largely to political motivations moved officially to worship of the sun-disk itself (Aten) during this time, right around 1800 BC. Much of the standard formalization of Egyptian society was temporarily altered during this time - the art changed for the first time in generations, the political balance shifted; after the powerful and long-lasting reign of Amenhetep III, IV's rule was almost a revolt against his father's legacy.

Since the majority religions in the area from europe to the ME are Abrahamic, with Zorastrian and others following behind, this history is critical to most monotheist religions in power ATM. Other mono-theist religions exist around the world, but from my reading this shift within Egypt seems to be the key to the ones we talk about commonly today.

edit: I should point out, I'm not claiming direct lineage from Egyptian to Abrahamic; time-wise, it seems that this cultural and political shift in Egypt had a very strong influence on the Old-testamant Isrealites who lived pretty close by.