The Battle of Monotheism Versus Polytheism

[Centurion Quintus]

Something deep in human nature prompts us to imagine the existance of a power greater than ourselves, wheter we call it 'Yahweh", "Christ", "Allah", "Mother Nature", "the Higher Power", or "the Universe". Religious belief and practice begins with the origin of human species - the Neanderthals invented rituals for the burial of the dead - and modern medical science proposes the idea of "god" is literally hard-wired into the anotomy of the human brain. Human beings infact can be distinguished from lower orders of animal life not because we use language or make tools or fight wars, but because we are the only creatures who conceive of a higher power and who are inspired to offer wordship and sacrifice to that power.

Nothing in human nature, however, suggests the inevitability of the concept of just one god. On the contrary, men and women in every age and throughout the world have offered worship to literally thousands of Gods, Godesses, and Godlings. Male and female alike, and they still do. Only very late in the development of Homo Religiosus did monotheism - "one-god-ism" - first emerge, and whenever some visionary king or prophet sought to impose the worship of one diety in exclusion of all others, he would discover the ordinary people so cerished their many beguiling gods and godesses that the very idea of momotheism was appaling. That is why the very first recorded experiment in monotheism was an abject failure, and polythiesm has survived every effort to destroy it.

But, fatefully, monotheism turned out to inspire a ferocity and even a fanaticism that are mostly absent from polytheism. At the heart of polytheism in an open-minded and easygoing appraoch to religious belief and practice, a willingness to entertain the idea that there are many gods and many ways to worship them. At the heart of monotheism, by contrast, is the sure convition that only a single god exists, a tendency to regard one's own rituals and practices as the only proper way to worhip the one true god. The conflice between these two fundamental values is what I call the War of Gods. It is a war that has been fought with heart-shaking cruelty, and it is a war that is still being fought today.

So, what I ask you is what your perception and opinions of Monotheism and Polytheism is.

Shed light on examples of the conflicting views often devestating results, and most importantly, how do they, and could they live in harmony?

-cent

[Pra]

But, fatefully, monotheism turned out to inspire a ferocity and even a fanaticism that are mostly absent from polytheism. At the heart of polytheism in an open-minded and easygoing appraoch to religious belief and practice, a willingness to entertain the idea that there are many gods and many ways to worship them. At the heart of monotheism, by contrast, is the sure convition that only a single god exists, a tendency to regard one's own rituals and practices as the only proper way to worhip the one true god. The conflice between these two fundamental values is what I call the War of Gods. It is a war that has been fought with heart-shaking cruelty, and it is a war that is still being fought today.

What are your sources for this? (Just wondering, I can think of a few but I wanted to know whta you were thinking of...)

[Aaron88]

I don't think this war exists anymore because there are no more major polytheistic religions other than Hinduism, and they rarely clash with anyone. There is a fanatical approach of monothesistic religions(Christianity,Islam), but Judaism is also monotheistic and it is hardly fanatical. The rules of religions and their leaders dictate how the followers act. So technically, if the greek religion consisted of a whole bunch of deities that wanted the world to follow them, the result would be the greeks wanting to convert the world.

[Centurion Quintus]

On September 11th we were reminded once again of the real meaning of the 3000 year old conflict. The men who hijacked and crashed four civilian planes were inspired to sacrifice their own lives, and the take the lives of several thousand "infidels", because they had embraced the simple, but therrifying logic that lies at the heart of Mmonotheism: If there is only one god, there is only one way to worship that god, then there is only one fitting punishment for failing to do so - death. Once again demonstrating the power, and consequences in true monotheistic belief.

[Jesus The Inane]

The problem with believing in many gods is that the stories about each god are mostly dumb. Like Ovid claiming that the gods liked to raped beautiful girls...

Also, I could claim that in Christianity there are also many gods; Theres god, then Jesus, the son of god, so the son of a god has to be a god, and then I think somewhere it says that we are the children of god. Children, which means we are the sons of god, and hence we are gods too.... just a thought.

Also, with many gods, you have to have a supreme god, which created every other god...

[Gradivus]

You know, by that logic, someone would have to have created the supreme god (yes, i know i just butchered the english language, but i'll play the "not my first language" card to try and get away with it) ; And if you argue something along the lines of "he/she was always there", well, how can be so sure that wasn't also the case with multiple ones?

Also, forgive me if i find a bit hard to believe that some guy, being the son of a god, walked on water, turned water to wine, and then came back to life. I mean, you know, it's not that different from a guy who is also the son of a god and beats up a lion, and other assorted creatures. So i guess what i'm trying to say in those poor, broken sentences is: Monotheistic myth is easer to believe for you only because you were brought up on it, and it really doesn't make more sense than polytheistic myths; and remember that if you take the stories in the monotheistic holy books as "guidelines" and not real events, you can do the same with polytheistic stories.
It's not really a war between the way of seeing gods (or god), but a war of interests; the truth is, there is no absolute "will of god" in a polytheistic religion or belief structure, and thus, we are spared the extremely religious raving fanatic; at least, it's not a absolute paragon in the "warped belief" way.

Changing the subject a bit, the Greco-Roman pantheons are not exactly the best of representations of polytheism; Zeus/Jupiter plays an almighty sky-father god role in both, while all the other gods are considerably inferior in power.

[Portuguese Rebel]

One god means more unity and the leaders can claim that the "god of those others there is false". It comes in handy for the leadership as only the priests of this one god must be controled instead of the multitude of factions of polytheism. Furthermore, it lowers the chances that a part of your population starts worshiping a "foreign god".

All in all monotheism wins the confrontations.

[hannibal89]

is a fanatical approach of monothesistic religions(Christianity,Islam), but Judaism is also monotheistic and it is hardly fanatical.

With all due respect Aaron.
Judaism is just as fanatical as Christianity and Islam.

Just read the old testaments from the bible. That is straight out of the torah.

"Kill the Canaanites to the last man"
etc...

Hannibal89

[Garbarsardar]

In the polytheistic system there is also a boss, in a "capo di tutti capi" way like Zeus or Votan. And usually he ascended to the throne by dipatching the previous boss in a graphic way.
Not vey different from the way the new testament dispatches part of the old...
For me the polytheistic system was much more intriguing because it lacked a totally bad guy. The Jucaic and Muslim but mainly Christian obsession with the Devil, antichrist,666, whatever, is displaying an alarming lack of sufficient character development. While in the polytheistic system the God of the underwold can have intriguing ambiguities-like his love with Persephone, the Christian Devil is a poor SOB who gets his kicks by immersing people into very hot soup and similar cheap effects. I mean 2000 thousand yeras and all that they came up with is a guy with goat legs....spare me. In the polytheistic system every god has his chance of occasional mischief, and offers an attainable moral paragigm. The authoritarian monotheism on the other hand introduces a competely anti-intuitive infallability. A society with anal fixations about Mr.Perfect is much more prone to moral hypocrisy than a religion with questionnable gods.

[Portuguese Rebel]

The lack of a totally bad guy and the fact that gods seem to do large mistakes are also a con against polytheistic forms. If you control the priests of one infalible god it's much more rewarding.

[Zuwxiv]

Just a note: It was my understanding that, even though the Romans and greeks had multiple gods, they did not necessarily think of all of thos gods as seperate dieties. Instead, some (but not all) thought of the gods as embodiements of a concept, and there was some (limited) people who thought that there was just one god, before Rome converted to Christianity.

[vopohame]

Here is the Cheyenne God view so to speak
Maheo --- Everywhere father or All Father
His 3 essenses Power, Gift of Breath,life, and Order

Under Maheo is the four beings the Maheyuno they are the principal beings of the world.
Under them is the Maiyun they are similar to angels I guess and are guides and caretakers of the world.
The opposite is the Mistai evil spirits of the air and the main one is Veho'e which is called the trickster. He tricks people into doing evil and causes all kinds of problems. We also call the whites veho'e too *tongue*

Whether you want to call this polytheistic or montheistic I dont know. However while the cheyenne are deeply ethnocentric they have never carried out a "religious war".

My opinion there is no such thing as a religious war just religion used as a cover by people wanting to manipulate the masses for reasons based on greed for power, wealth and fame/destiny. There are no legitimate reasons to conquer others. Early polytheistic religions did enforce their religion as the romans did often in areas that they conquered especially the worship of the emperor as God especially to groups that the romans thought were incompatible with their religous view. In other circumstances the romans absorbed dozens of other cultures dieties as well.

[vopohame]

If people think polytheism does not have a bad side only need to look at ancient canaan or the mayans or aztecs for proof opposite. Human sacrifice by the tens of thousands each year. Aztecs took it to a whole new level sacrificing in one year nearly 100,000 people.

[Fedaiken]

Does anyone know anything about Taoism? It seems to be a weird blend of both Monotheism and Politheism as there is a belief in "the Tao" in which everything thing comes from and returns to but then there is also a reverence to the spirits of the world that embody everything that we encounter. I know this is a little off topic but just wanted to throw it into the mix as this is the only religion that has made any sense to me at all.

Edited to add that the translation of "Tao" is "the Way"

[Centurion Quintus]

I think that with an issue, and almost more of a state of mind as broad, and deep as religion, freedom is best. When it comes to something like religious beliefs, fanaticism is easily brought up. Especially with monotheism. The more fundamental, and high-and-mighty a sect, or group becomes, the more likely disaster befalling becomes.

[Pra]

I don't think this war exists anymore because there are no more major polytheistic religions other than Hinduism, and they rarely clash with anyone.

This statement is a bit spurious. Though on the surface Hinduism may present itself as a polytheistic religion, it is really a monotheistic one. The many gods are all manifestations of the Brahma who is analogous, to an extent, to Yaweh (sp?), God, Allah, Ahura Mazda, etc...

[Kino]

Deleted by user.

[Lugotorix]

imo, polytheism addresses and personifies aspects, faults and virtues, and forces of the earth and nature, in a reflection of man's perception

monotheism means the opposite, that we were created in reflection of a father, or mother, and that all these aspects are his work

[MoROmeTe]

If one is to follow Nietzsche's argument, then religion is only a tool designed by the powerful people of old so that they could better control and mobilize the masses. Through this viewpoint, which I share, monotheism is better. Why? Because it is easier to maintain and propagate, as there's only one founding myth to sustain and "prove" and there is one person (or a trinity that is unified) that has to be theoretized. Also, there is the fact that evil and associations of certain existing entities with the ultimate evil are easier to maintain. Someone stated earlier that polyteism does not have ultimate bad guys. Well, when you want to show people the bad guy so that they can be mobilized to fight him, then this is not helpful. In monotheistic religions the bad guy can be quickly attached to a easily identifiabe force of evil and the masses can be mobilized more eficiently. Also, as a matter of practice, it is easier to worhip one god that many gods, fewer rituals, fewer rules and all that. So, basically, monotheism wins the fight. That is not to say that monotheism is better. Only that it is more efficient to the cope of religion, control.

[Xiaodun]

What is a fanatical belief in monotheism but a show of ignorance and stubborness by denying the existance of anything but their god?
Forgot who said it.

Im Buddhist/Shintoist/Taoist/etc. (we are very lax on religion here) so Im a polytheist. Of course, there is the problem of me not being able to name most of the major gods, but we'll just skip that shall we?

I havent converted to monotheism because I belive that it is both a foolish and ignorant thing to consider there being only one higher power (if there is one at all&#33 and it being all powerful and perfect. There is no such thing as a perfect god in a religion where people can be made a god if he shows bravery in combat or eloquency with words. In such religions, there is no one way of living that is set by a god. And thus less of a will to spread religion.

There HAVE been wars between two polythesist religions, Persia against Greece for example, but I would like to remind everyone that the Roman empire, that streched from Britannia to Egypt and lasted for centuries, rarely attacked religions, and never started wars for religion (unless you count the acts of the Holy Roman Empire)