Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

  1. #1

    Default Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    I have two aims in this thread. Firstly, to challenge those who argue that monotheism emerged as part of an evolutionary process, whereby animism or shamanism developed into polytheism, which in turn later evolved into monotheism. Secondly, I want to show that the opposite is in fact true - that religions typically degenerate from monotheistic origins into ever growing polytheistic pantheons, and that in the earliest stages of recorded history, it is evident that monotheism was the norm right across the globe.

    Of course, I am coming at this from a specifically Christian perspective, and thus, I believe that monotheism is natural to mankind, according to the scripture, where it speaks of humankind's decline from an original monotheism into polytheism and idolatry:

    18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. (Romans 1: 18-25)
    In this passage, Paul says that all people know of the one true God by nature, and only came to worship false gods through a process of degeneration and idol worship. Furthermore, from my Christian perspective, I believe that it makes sense than in the earliest times all peoples across the world would have worshipped one God, because they were dispersed from Babel where they had all worshipped one God, and such was the earliest practice as recorded in the Bible, through Noah and back to Adam.

    I say this just so people know where I am coming from, and not as an argument in and of itself. My argument below is based on many societies and religions, which show that from the earliest recorded times, mankind worshipped one God, and that religions have over time degenerated from these roots. Hopefully, the evidence will speak for itself.

    Sumeria:
    The cradle of civilization seems an appropriate place to start, and indeed, this is the land of the Babel story, whether you view it literally or not. Although well known for their large pantheon, that is in fact something that developed relatively late in the period of Sumerian civilization, and was borrowed heavily from by the later Babylonians and various powers of the region. Indeed, the earliest records we have show just two Sumerian gods, from which the rest of the pantheon was spawned. The text below sums up the findings of Assyriologist Stephen Langdon on the development of the Sumerian pantheon:

    The Sumerian religion in its latest development before the people disappeared as an entity swallowed up by the later Babylonians, seemed to have involved about 5000 gods. The inscriptions of circa 3000 B.C. or perhaps a millennium earlier show only 750. The 300 tablets or so known from Jamdet Nasr in 1928 when Langdon published these texts, contained only. three gods; the sky god Enlil, the earth god Enki, and the sun god Babbar. The 575 tablets from Uruk translated in 1936, which Langdon dated about 4000 B.C. but are now believed to be more accurately dated 3500 B.C., contain the names of only two deities: the sky god An and the mother goddess Innina.
    So, having had two gods in 3500-4000 BC, they had 750 gods around 3000-2000 BC, and around 5,000 gods by the time that the civilization has entered its twilight years. Our understanding of Sumerian religion hasn't developed hugely since Langdon's time, but what has been discovered has tended to corroborate his findings. For example, the Sumerian pantheon clearly developed from the two earliest documented gods. In accordance with Langdon's observation that An was one of these earliest two gods, it is now noted that the "majority of Sumerian deities belonged to a classification called the Anunna", which means the "offspring of An". With somewhat modified versions of Langdon's dates, modern research observed the same pattern, noting that from four primary deities recorded in Sumerian literature of around 3000 BC, by 2000 BC there are thought to have been around 3,600. So with all this in mind, ancient Sumeria clearly shows a pattern where a pantheon grew exponentially to include thousands of gods, and all this from just two shown in the earliest findings.

    Egypt:
    Along with the Sumerians, the civilization of ancient Egypt was amongst the first of mankind. And although they are well known for their polytheistic beliefs, like the Sumerians, their earliest history paints a different picture. Ra provides an excellent example of early Egyptian monotheism, which would later degenerate into polytheism. Ra was regarded as "the first being and the originator of the Ennead" - the lesser gods such as Osiris, Set, Isis and the like. In contrast to these lesser gods, Ra was regarded as the creator God, who was himself uncreated, and who created all the lesser gods and man. In this sense, he is very similar to An as the creator God of the Sumerian pantheon. While worship of Ra as the uncreated creator God was prevalent at his temple at Heliopolis, it is interesting to note that the peoples of other cities each regarded their own patron deity as the uncreated creator, for example with the followers of Ptah arguing that Ptah was the uncreated creator who had in fact created Ra. It can be seen then that while local peoples each worshipped one God whom they regarded as supremely powerful and the creator of all things, when they came into contact with other peoples, they viewed their gods as rivals, rather than recognizing them as a somewhat anthropomorphised and thus corrupted version of the God they worshipped. It is from this process that local monotheistic gods came to be merged into national, polytheistic pantheons. Indeed, worship surrounding Ra points that even as the Egyptian pantheon developed, he retained an elevated status, to the point where he is hard to distinguish from an Abrahamic concept of monotheism. As one prayer in the Book of the Dead reads:

    "A Hymn To Amen-Ra ... president of all the gods ... Lord of the heavens ... Lord of Truth ... maker of men; creator of beasts ... Ra, whose word is truth, the Governor of the world, the mighty one of valour, the chiefs who made the world as he made himself”…” He heareth the prayer of the oppressed one, he is kind of heart to him that calleth upon him, he delivereth the timid man from the oppressor ... He is the Lord of knowledge, and Wisdom is the utterance of his mouth”
    Furthermore, it should be noted that the worship of only one God as an all-powerful, uncreated creator far precedes the later development of Egyptian polytheism. Ra's temple complex at Heliopolis is one of the oldest in Egypt. As modern scholars have noted, such worship declined as increasing importance was given to the deification of kings, whose funerary monuments came to be given more importance than the old temples, and the pantheon continued to grow as deified humans and gods of conquered peoples were added to it. It is also interesting that such developments led to the abandoning of public worship in favour of festive rituals by a priestly class - again showing that degeneration of religion spoken of by Paul in Romans. Likewise, sporadic experiments in outright monotheism, such as Atenism, challenge the evolutionary theory of religion.

    Hinduism:
    Although it has survived until the modern day, Hinduism is, much like the religions of Sumeria or Egypt, a very ancient religion. And although it has come to have perhaps the most vibrant and colourful of any pantheon, much as with the earliest examples of Sumeria and Egypt, it can be demonstrated that even polytheistic Hinduism developed from monotheistic roots. For example, one of the most ancient texts in Hinduism, the Rig Veda, states that:

    "In the beginning, who was born the Lord the sole Lord of all that is who made the earth, and formed the sky, who giveth life Who giveth strength, whose bidding gods revere the only God."
    Although being very much anti-Christian himself, this led to philologist and Orientalist Max Müller noting that "There is a monotheism that precedes the polytheism of the Veda; and even in the invocation of the innumerable gods the remembrance of a God one and infinite, breaks through the mist of idolatrous phraseology like the blue sky that is hidden by passing clouds." Indeed, the Rig Veda potrays all gods are merely being manifestations of different aspects of the one true God's character, observing that they call him by the names of their many gods:

    "They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān.
    To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan".
    It seems that from this corruption of having personified aspects of God's character, they later came to view these minor gods as having been created by the one God, with the Atharva Veda proclaiming that "Great indeed are the devas who have sprung out of Brahman". And it is from this position as shown in the very ancient Vedas, that Hinduism eventually degenerated into full-blown polytheism, with an ever-expanding pantheon fuelled by the multitudes of Roman, Persian and Hellenic gods introduced by Aryan immigration.

    China:
    Some people might be surprised at this example, since China is generally regarded as having a more philosophical than a religious tradition. Still, as with the cases examined so far, a look at the earliest chapters of Chinese history tells a very different story. The ancient Chinese worshipped a supreme sky deity called Shangdi or Shang Ti, to whom yearly sacrifices were made, and who was regarded as transcending all creation, and being too distant for humans to worship. In the Oracle Bone Script, which contains the earliest known form of Chinese, Shang Ti alone is mentioned as a God, and details a communication between the King and Shang Ti which is conducted through a priest. This indicates that the idea of the Celestial Bureaucracy developed later, and with it the idea that Shang Ti was too distant to be reached, and required minor gods as intermediaries. It is also worth noting that the symbol of God in these ancient scripts is free from the corruption of anthromorphism, which later developed with the concept of Tian. Thus, from having worshipped one true God, the Chinese came to be alienated from him as they corrupted him with mortal forms, to the point where he became so distant to them they created a pantheon to act as intermediaries. Nonetheless, the monotheistic tradition continued in China, with the prominent philosopher Mozi stating belief in an all-powerful creator and sustainer God:

    "Moreover, I know Heaven loves men dearly not without reason. Heaven ordered the sun, the moon, and the stars to enlighten and guide them. Heaven ordained the four seasons, Spring, Autumn, Winter, and Summer, to regulate them. Heaven sent down snow, frost, rain, and dew to grow the five grains and flax and silk that so the people could use and enjoy them. Heaven established the hills and rivers, ravines and valleys, and arranged many things to minister to man's good or bring him evil. He appointed the dukes and lords to reward the virtuous and punish the wicked, and to gather metal and wood, birds and beasts, and to engage in cultivating the five grains and flax and silk to provide for the people's food and clothing. This has been so from antiquity to the present." (tr. Mei 1929:145)
    Although China is better known today by its Confucian and Daoist traditions, these were in fact innovations that replaced an older, monotheistic system of worship, as Mozi's ideology of Mohism was in fact only superceded by these during the Han Dynasty, as noted in the introductory paragraph. Thus, as with Sumeria, Egypt and India, China only came to lose its monotheistic traditions to polytheism and philosophy by a process of degeneration.

    Tengrism:
    This religion of the Eurasian nomads again shows a decline from original monotheistic principles into polytheism and ancestor worship. Interestingly, the original God Tengri was regarded as a sky father, just as with Sumerian 'An' or Chinese 'Shang Ti'. As is noted in the wikipedia article, despite being originally monotheistic, an 'Earth Mother' was introduced as a contemporary to the Sky Father as part of a duality, from which a pantheon was gradually formed. The same passage also notes that in the Sino-Tibetan and Turco-Mongol traditions, the concept of the Sky Father as an omnipotent God has been eroded by ancestor worship, with increasing powers given to the latter at the expense of the former. Indeed, despite having become a largely polytheistic religion in practice (though the Sky Father's superiority is still maintained), the history of Tengrism shows that it was only monotheistic in nature. Thus, Möngke Khan of the Mongolian Empire stated that “We believe that there is only one God, by whom we live and by whom we die, and for whom we have an upright heart". The fact that such monotheism was embraced by the Eurasian nomads shows that monotheism was not merely a philosophical advance of advanced socities, as some postulate.

    Modern Primitive Peoples:
    Contrary to the evolutionary origins of religion, a wealth of evidence indicates that many of the most primitive peoples hold to native, monotheistic beliefs, and this challenges the notion that we developed from animism, to polytheism, and eventually monotheism as society and philosophy developed. Indeed, some of the purest monotheistic beliefs can be observed amongst the most primitive peoples. The Cherokee worship an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent 'Great Spirit' who is said to be the "maker of all things". Interestingly, as with the Sumerians, Chinese and Eurasian nomads, the Zulus worship a supreme sky father called 'Umvelinqangi', meaning 'he who was in the very beginning'. The Malagasy believe in an uncreated creator called Zanahary, with their only other worship being diverted to their ancestor's spirits. The Himba of Namibia believe in a single, omnipotent God called Mukuru, again with their ancestors working as intermediaries. Likewise, the Igbo of Nigeria worship Chukwu, an "infinitely powerful, undefinable, supreme deity". So it is clear from these examples across the globe, that monotheism (even if the occasional superstitious trapping) is common even amongst primitive peoples.

    **************************************** To sum up ****************************************

    Rather than emerging only as a development from more original forms of animism and polytheism, monotheism is clearly the natural religion to mankind, being the original form observed by all those ancient peoples of whom we have record; and lost through a complex mixture of social, demographic, and philosophical trends, working in tandem with fallen nature, whereby mankind corrupts that which is good and pure, according to what the scripture says in Romans 1.

    Far from monotheism emerging from polytheism, the reverse is evidently true, and happened by a number of observed trends. As have been noted, these include the incorporation of singular local gods into a national, polytheistic pantheon as in ancient Egypt, or of the gods of conquered peoples as in Sumeria. Another example would be the building of pantheons through trade or immigration with foreigners and their gods, as India. Also, you have the elevation of ancestors or kings to gods, the most extreme example of this being the Egyptian Pharaohs. Then you have the anthropomorphisation of gods, resulting in attributing to them families of wives and children from which pantheons are born, as in Sumeria and Tengrism. Or the creation of a pantheon to fill a gap felt through man's alienation from a distant God, as with ancient China. On top of this, gods have been imagined as personifications of particular aspects of a single God as with Brahman in Hinduism, eventually becoming regarded as gods in and of themselves.

    So, in conclusion, humankind was originally monotheistic, and polytheism and all forms of idolatry only emerged through a degeneration of this original state.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    I would agree that religions tend to evolve into polytheism. And I do mean evolve: people fashion their beliefs according to what suits them the best, and if that implies polytheism, then that is what they'll adopt.

    Where I feel that you will probably disagree with me, however, is that Christianity is a very good example of this. Christianity is an offshoot from Judaism, from where it borrows its foundation. I am not talking about the Trinity, because that is functionally one entity. What I am talking about is the introduction of the devil as an antagonist, a de facto evil god, and polar opposite of the good god. Of course Christian theology - and indeed Christians themselves - would scoff at the notion of the devil being considered to be a deity, but as Christians throughout history have often attributed god-like powers to the devil, he is a god in all but name. Of course, throughout Christian history there have also been preachers speaking out against giving the devil god-like powers, claiming it to be a heretical practice with pagan roots, and using scripture to point out that the devil only has those powers which God allows him, and that the devil is at all times slave to God's command. Many so-called witches were saved from the fires by such clergymen.

    That is not the only trouble with Christianity's status as a monotheistic religion, however. In both the Orthodox and Catholic churches, saints are venerated. Christians will protest that saints are not gods, and only has powers through God, but that does not change the fact that Catholics and Orthodox Christians use these saints, in practice, just like a follower of a polytheistic religion would use his gods: different ones for different occasions. In this sense it is little different from the schools of Hinduism which considers all the different gods to be mere aspects of the one true God. And on this point I know that many zealous Protestants would eagerly agree, as I have heard this particular argument presented by Protestants as well - while at the same time being blind as to how they view the devil.

    My point, then, is that while Christianity technically is a monotheistic religion if you consider only the theory of theology, for most of its existence it has nevertheless been practiced by most of its followers as a polytheistic religion. Though they would never admit to that. It does go to show, however, that perhaps most of the time, just one god isn't enough. And so my conclusion would be the opposite of yours, that polytheism - rather than monotheism - is natural to mankind.
    Last edited by Kissaki; March 30, 2014 at 01:36 PM.

  3. #3
    Aeneas Veneratio's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen (Denmark)
    Posts
    4,703

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    @Sumeria: Two gods are polytheism, not monotheism.

    Judaism was originally polytheistic, it became monotheistic due to the Jews' favoritism of one of their gods during their time in Babylon. That god was/is Yahweh, the Divine Warrior god and leader of the heavenly armies against the enemies of Israel.
    R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse

  4. #4
    pacifism's Avatar see the day
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    purple mountains majesty
    Posts
    1,958
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post
    Judaism was originally polytheistic, it became monotheistic due to the Jews' favoritism of one of their gods during their time in Babylon. That god was/is Yahweh, the Divine Warrior god and leader of the heavenly armies against the enemies of Israel.
    Actually, YHWH, is probably unique to Ancient Israel and Judah. I can’t help but to notice the sudden change of font (from size 11 Calibri to size 11 Arial) right after “was/is” in your post where you describe YHWH. I am curious to why this is so and could probably guess, but it is no matter.
    Read the latest TWC Content and check out the Wiki!
    ---
    Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement

  5. #5

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Regarding Sumeria, I'm skeptical of Langdon's conclusion since he was hardly working with the complete corpus of Sumerian literature in the 1920s and 30s. Even today, only about 100,000 of the one and two million cuneiform tablets have been translated and published. It seems like someone had to mine older scholarship to come up with supporting data, was there really no scholarship from the last 70 years that supported this view? He was after all dating tablets to several hundred years before we now know the writing system was invented.

    It also seems odd if there were really so few deities at that time, that deity names had to be preceded by a deity determinative sign in order to be recognized as such. The sign for the name An is actually the deity determinative and can actually mean any deity when used on it's own, so I'm curious if that was understood in his time. Inanna's name can be the determinative for any female deity's name as well or just mean goddess generically.

    EDIT: That said, it was fairly common for each city state to have its own patron deity which was locally placed at the top of the pantheon, and who generally had a female consort. It makes sense that An and Inanna were that pair at Uruk. An is "Sky" and and Inanna is "Queen of the Sky".
    Last edited by sumskilz; March 30, 2014 at 05:02 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Enros View Post
    You don't seem to be familiar with how the burden of proof works in when discussing social justice. It's not like science where it lies on the one making the claim. If someone claims to be oppressed, they don't have to prove it.


  6. #6

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    I don't think is evidence that monotheism is more 'natural' than polytheism. I think it's just a matter of mathematical progression. If you make a garden, you have to start by planting a single flower. If you write a book, you have to start by imagining a single character or situation. Likewise, with monotheism, it's a matter of it being physically impossible to have several fully-fleshed out deity mythologies before you have one. You always have to start somewhere. As a result, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a single deity is more likely or more pure than multiple. It's just math, yo.

  7. #7
    Euphoric's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    KALIFOЯNIA, AMEЯIKA
    Posts
    471

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Religion and spirituality began as a shoe-in for science, as a means for our early ancestors to explain existence. Naturally, multiple deities were used to explain multiple concepts. As our understanding of existence progressed, however, our concept of the divine became more complicated in order to reconcile with reality. Today, religion is forced to reconcile with scientific truths at an ever-increasing pace and the concept of the divine is becoming more and more deistic by necessity. Deism or spiritualism is clearly the next step in the evolution and dissolution of religion.
    "You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist." - Nietzsche

  8. #8
    Aeneas Veneratio's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen (Denmark)
    Posts
    4,703

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Aquila Praefortis View Post
    Actually, YHWH, is probably unique to Ancient Israel and Judah. I can’t help but to notice the sudden change of font (from size 11 Calibri to size 11 Arial) right after “was/is” in your post where you describe YHWH. I am curious to why this is so and could probably guess, but it is no matter.
    I can't help but noticing your complete lack of addressing my post. I'm curious to why this is so and could probably guess, but it is of no matter.

    Should anyone be curious as to where the links in the OP will take you, it's to wikipedia.
    Last edited by Aeneas Veneratio; March 30, 2014 at 07:57 PM.
    R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse

  9. #9

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissaki View Post
    That is not the only trouble with Christianity's status as a monotheistic religion, however. In both the Orthodox and Catholic churches, saints are venerated. Christians will protest that saints are not gods, and only has powers through God, but that does not change the fact that Catholics and Orthodox Christians use these saints, in practice, just like a follower of a polytheistic religion would use his gods: different ones for different occasions. In this sense it is little different from the schools of Hinduism which considers all the different gods to be mere aspects of the one true God. And on this point I know that many zealous Protestants would eagerly agree, as I have heard this particular argument presented by Protestants as well - while at the same time being blind as to how they view the devil.
    There is a world of difference between people or beings having power through God on the one hand, and them being manifestations of God on the other. It does not matter how powerful a temporal being is when compared an omnipotent God. Even if many temporally-limited deities were worshipped under omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God, then that would really be monism rather than polytheism as such.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissaki View Post
    my conclusion would be the opposite of yours, that polytheism - rather than monotheism - is natural to mankind.
    So why does the evidence indicate that the earliest societies originally worshipped one God, and only later developed polytheism? If it was natural to mankind, they would have worshipped it from the beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by sumskilz View Post
    Regarding Sumeria, I'm skeptical of Langdon's conclusion since he was hardly working with the complete corpus of Sumerian literature in the 1920s and 30s. Even today, only about 100,000 of the one and two million cuneiform tablets have been translated and published. It seems like someone had to mine older scholarship to come up with supporting data, was there really no scholarship from the last 70 years that supported this view? He was after all dating tablets to several hundred years before we now know the writing system was invented.
    Well like I said, his dates were a bit off, but the modern evidence shows the same pattern he observed of increasing polytheism from an originally very limited number of Gods, and he seems to have been correct in identifying An as the originator of what became the pantheon.

    Quote Originally Posted by What View Post
    I don't think is evidence that monotheism is more 'natural' than polytheism. I think it's just a matter of mathematical progression. If you make a garden, you have to start by planting a single flower. If you write a book, you have to start by imagining a single character or situation. Likewise, with monotheism, it's a matter of it being physically impossible to have several fully-fleshed out deity mythologies before you have one. You always have to start somewhere. As a result, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that a single deity is more likely or more pure than multiple. It's just math, yo.
    Modern scholars tend to take the view that monotheism emerged from polytheism, which in turn emerged from animism. That is the view I am challenging.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euphoric View Post
    Religion and spirituality began as a shoe-in for science, as a means for our early ancestors to explain existence. Naturally, multiple deities were used to explain multiple concepts.
    Not at first it seems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post
    Should anyone be curious as to where the links in the OP will take you, it's to wikipedia.
    I did that so you know that the information I am presenting has been verified by a relatively unbiased source, as opposed to a creationist website, or whatever.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    There is a world of difference between people or beings having power through God on the one hand, and them being manifestations of God on the other. It does not matter how powerful a temporal being is when compared an omnipotent God. Even if many temporally-limited deities were worshipped under omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent God, then that would really be monism rather than polytheism as such.
    There is not a world of difference, on the contrary the difference is merely a technical one. And the inevitable consequence of the polytheistic nature of Christian worship is that God is not omnipotent. They use that word, but as soon as they attribute any sort of autonomy to the devil, and place him in opposition to God, they inevitably detract from God's powers - even if they won't admit to doing just that.

    Another thing concerning omnipotence is that if you read the Bible without rose tinted glasses, there is little to suggest that God is omnipotent and a mountain of evidence to suggest his powers are indeed limited, but that is another topic.


    So why does the evidence indicate that the earliest societies originally worshipped one God, and only later developed polytheism? If it was natural to mankind, they would have worshipped it from the beginning.
    We have no knowledge of the earliest societies, because the earliest societies left no records. The earliest records, however, is a mixed bag. But if it is true that people tend to gravitate toward polytheism, then that is strong evidence that polytheism is more natural. If pantheons start out with a single god, it is because you can only think of one god at a time, and one of them had to be first.

    -Who made all this, then?
    -God. [First god created]
    -What's he like?
    -He's a lot like us, actually. And he watches over us.
    -So he's really powerful, then, and he is good?
    -Of course.
    -What about the bad stuff that goes on in the world?
    -Hmmm... That must be his evil twin or something. [Second god created]
    -So there are two gods?
    -Yeah, but only one of them created the world. The other one is evil and makes bad things happen.
    -Ok, makes sense. So the good god created the world, makes everything grow, makes it rain, makes the tides come in and out...
    -Well, I don't think he micromanages everything, he probably has underlings to do specific tasks. [More gods created]

    Whether the other gods are less powerful than the creator god (which is usually the case) is not the issue. The thing about polytheism is that it is not just God who is venerated, but several, at once. You may call the other gods "aspects", "saints" or "devils", but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

    Also, just because something is natural does not mean it will occur to us from the very beginning. Writing is natural to us, yet it took us eons to think of it. Certain natural behaviours only manifest themselves when the prerequisites are in place.

  11. #11
    Aeneas Veneratio's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen (Denmark)
    Posts
    4,703

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    I did that so you know that the information I am presenting has been verified by a relatively unbiased source, as opposed to a creationist website, or whatever.
    Then why didn't you just use the wikipedia articles on Monotheism and Polytheism, and read what they stated under "origins"?
    R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse

  12. #12
    Euphoric's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    KALIFOЯNIA, AMEЯIKA
    Posts
    471

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    Not at first it seems.
    To which point are you referring to? That religion and spirituality were a shoe-in for science, or that we began with multiple spirits/deities?
    "You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist." - Nietzsche

  13. #13
    pacifism's Avatar see the day
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    purple mountains majesty
    Posts
    1,958
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post

    I can't help but noticing your complete lack of addressing my post. I'm curious to why this is so and could probably guess, but it is of no matter.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquila Praefortis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post
    Judaism was originally polytheistic, it became monotheistic due to the Jews' favoritism of one of their gods during their time in Babylon. That god was/is Yahweh, the Divine Warrior god and leader of the heavenly armies against the enemies of Israel.
    Actually, YHWH, is probably unique to Ancient Israel and Judah.
    Read the latest TWC Content and check out the Wiki!
    ---
    Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement

  14. #14
    Mary The Quene's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Hatfield House
    Posts
    8,123

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Wasn't anchaton the first monotheistic god there was?
    Veritas Temporis Filia

  15. #15

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissaki View Post
    There is not a world of difference, on the contrary the difference is merely a technical one. And the inevitable consequence of the polytheistic nature of Christian worship is that God is not omnipotent. They use that word, but as soon as they attribute any sort of autonomy to the devil, and place him in opposition to God, they inevitably detract from God's powers - even if they won't admit to doing just that.
    How on earth is the difference merely technical? There is one God who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-present; every other being was created by him, and is temporally limited in their power, knowledge and presence. The devil has no autonomy to act against God, neither does any saint have the capacity to do the least good without him. Temporal beings may have varying degrees of power or knowledge, but the difference between them is a matter of degree. With God on the other hand, he is infinitely above them and transcends them in every respect. These are the attributes that make him God.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissaki View Post
    We have no knowledge of the earliest societies, because the earliest societies left no records. The earliest records, however, is a mixed bag. But if it is true that people tend to gravitate toward polytheism, then that is strong evidence that polytheism is more natural. If pantheons start out with a single god, it is because you can only think of one god at a time, and one of them had to be first.
    Hey, if you will grant that the historical evidence shows that monotheism was the original religion practised in the most ancient recorded societies, then I am happy with that because that is the case I came to put forth. However, I think I offered a more thorough explanation as to how polytheism emerged in my concluding paragraphs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kissaki View Post
    Also, just because something is natural does not mean it will occur to us from the very beginning. Writing is natural to us, yet it took us eons to think of it. Certain natural behaviours only manifest themselves when the prerequisites are in place.
    Writings is a technical development, worship is not. If, in the earliest [known] societies, people felt compelled to look to one God, being free from all the complex political and social developments that fostered later polytheism, then that suggests that monotheism is the more natural state.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aeneas Veneratio View Post
    Then why didn't you just use the wikipedia articles on Monotheism and Polytheism, and read what they stated under "origins"?
    Because the narrative they present is different from mine, hence why I linked to the specific examples that I used in support of my case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Euphoric View Post
    To which point are you referring to? That religion and spirituality were a shoe-in for science, or that we began with multiple spirits/deities?
    The latter. If monotheism came first, then this seriously challenges the evolutionary view put forth by many atheists today. If they can prove that the concept of monotheism only evolved from animism and polytheism, then that discredits the claims about monotheism's inherent truth.

  16. #16
    Aeneas Veneratio's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen (Denmark)
    Posts
    4,703

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    The latter. If monotheism came first, then this seriously challenges the evolutionary view put forth by many atheists today. If they can prove that the concept of monotheism only evolved from animism and polytheism, then that discredits the claims about monotheism's inherent truth.
    The only thing natural is mankind's search for answers, given that answers were/are hard to come by we invent stuff to fill the gaps. This doesn't give any validity to the stuffing, religion, as religions are just god/gods of the gap. To prove the inherent truth of monotheism, you need to find/prove your one god idea.

    People are naturally uneducated, when they are born, which must mean that having no education is the natural path of humans.

    Bolded: Most of the cases you presented had two gods, that's not monotheism.

    @ Aquila Praefortis: I did read that, but it offers nothing to counter/refute/agree/offer a different opinion to my post.
    Last edited by Aeneas Veneratio; April 01, 2014 at 07:44 PM.
    R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse

  17. #17
    Euphoric's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    KALIFOЯNIA, AMEЯIKA
    Posts
    471

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    The latter. If monotheism came first, then this seriously challenges the evolutionary view put forth by many atheists today.
    I would disagree with you here. If monotheism came first, it would be admittedly interesting, but it wouldn't have any profound impact on the philosophical paradoxes that surround organized religion in general. It wouldn't change the atheist position at all.

    Would it change our view of religious evolution? Absolutely. But you would need a lot of archaeological evidence for the rejection of multiple Gods early on in order to prove this theory, which seems impossible.

    What exactly do you think proving that humans began with monotheism would prove, exactly, beyond a need to revise our historical narrative?

    If they can prove that the concept of monotheism only evolved from animism and polytheism, then that discredits the claims about monotheism's inherent truth.
    I don't think that is true, either. If monotheism is inherently true (i.e. if monotheism is an objective truth), then its principles should be observable in the laws of nature and should be philosophically defensible.
    "You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist." - Nietzsche

  18. #18

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    How on earth is the difference merely technical? There is one God who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-present; every other being was created by him, and is temporally limited in their power, knowledge and presence. The devil has no autonomy to act against God, neither does any saint have the capacity to do the least good without him. Temporal beings may have varying degrees of power or knowledge, but the difference between them is a matter of degree. With God on the other hand, he is infinitely above them and transcends them in every respect. These are the attributes that make him God.
    You are making references to works written by theologians that did not exist for thousands of years until after the rise of polytheism. Humans did not have a good grasp of what it meant to be "divine" for a long time, and even now "perfection" is a catch all term. So yeah, people just believed in flawed gods for a long time and thought it was normal.
    They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an instant, then it's night once more.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    How on earth is the difference merely technical? There is one God who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-present; every other being was created by him, and is temporally limited in their power, knowledge and presence. The devil has no autonomy to act against God, neither does any saint have the capacity to do the least good without him. Temporal beings may have varying degrees of power or knowledge, but the difference between them is a matter of degree. With God on the other hand, he is infinitely above them and transcends them in every respect. These are the attributes that make him God.
    That's the theory - but it has never been that way in practice. God is not omnipotent - his worshippers merely want to think of him that way, and any and all evidence to the contrary is neatly swept under the rug, even as they embrace the very same evidence. For example: God creates. God repents. God gets angry. God has a plan. All of these are in the Good Book, and all of these are accepted - but the logical consequence of these are not, because 1) a perfect being would have no need to create anything, being perfectly content in its own company; 2) a perfect being would never make a mistake or change its mind, as its first decisions would be perfect from inception and would not require modification (and thus would never have cause to regret anything); a perfect being would never become agitated, because no events would be capable of rubbing it the wrong way; a perfect being would have no need for plans, because the only reason you plan is so that in future you can have what you want - a perfect being would have what it wanted from the start.

    And this, of course, opens the door to the devil, angels and saints, which you do not CALL gods, but are treated AS gods no matter how much you deny it. They serve the same functions as lesser gods in polytheistic religions.


    Hey, if you will grant that the historical evidence shows that monotheism was the original religion practised in the most ancient recorded societies, then I am happy with that because that is the case I came to put forth. However, I think I offered a more thorough explanation as to how polytheism emerged in my concluding paragraphs.
    Hey, you even offered an example of a two-god religion as representative of monotheism (the Sumerians).



    Writings is a technical development, worship is not. If, in the earliest [known] societies, people felt compelled to look to one God, being free from all the complex political and social developments that fostered later polytheism, then that suggests that monotheism is the more natural state.
    Worship is also a development. You start out without worship. Then you start worshipping... whatever. So going by your logic, atheism is the natural state. And just like writing depends on prior developments to take place, so does polytheism - and so does monotheism. If your point is that monotheism comes before polytheism, fine: you can't create a pantheon without first creating ONE god. But your conclusion that this somehow makes monotheism MORE natural than polytheism makes no sense at all. If monotheism was the MORE natural state, why on earth would anyone veer away from it?

  20. #20
    Thanatos's Avatar Now Is Not the Time
    took an arrow to the knee

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    33,188

    Default Re: Original monotheism and the decline into polytheism and idolatry

    Quote Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr View Post
    If they can prove that the concept of monotheism only evolved from animism and polytheism, then that discredits the claims about monotheism's inherent truth.
    What?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •