Bias , monotheism, polytheism and arguments

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

We all have our own personal bias whether we recognize it or not. We all have things we favor and we all have things we have personal issues with. Sometimes these bleed over into the arguments we will and won’t consider and why we agree with one side or another.



I notice in myself a bias against monotheism and for polytheism. IT seems to me no matter how many times I’ve investigated monotheism I can not help but dismiss it as a possibility. Not because I don’t like the idea mind you but because pretty much any monotheistic god that actually wants us to pay attention to him clearly isn’t trying very hard to get any skeptics attention. It’s arguments fall flat and the idea of taking the bible or the Quran or even the baha’i holy books on faith is not something I can see any reason to do.



And yet here I am considering adopting Hellenic polytheism with pinches of other things thrown in for good measure. Could I not apply many of the same arguments applied to monotheism here to come to a conclusion. Sure, but for some reason I still find myself rather attracted to the idea. I can’t seem to swat it away even if I feel the reason I would have to engage in this wouldn’t be a very strong one. AT least it would still be rather difficult to defend to people I know.



This is obvious bias and I can’t help but recognize it. Granted I don’t honestly think the case against polytheism is anywhere near as strong as it is against monotheism. Part of the reason behind this is the rigidity of the monotheism of the bible or quran opposed to the fluidity of the various mythological polytheistic texts.



What do you think about this particular bias of mine and what bias have you recognized within yourself?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

We all have our own personal bias whether we recognize it or not. We all have things we favor and we all have things we have personal issues with. Sometimes these bleed over into the arguments we will and won’t consider and why we agree with one side or another.



I notice in myself a bias against monotheism and for polytheism. IT seems to me no matter how many times I’ve investigated monotheism I can not help but dismiss it as a possibility. Not because I don’t like the idea mind you but because pretty much any monotheistic god that actually wants us to pay attention to him clearly isn’t trying very hard to get any skeptics attention. It’s arguments fall flat and the idea of taking the bible or the Quran or even the baha’i holy books on faith is not something I can see any reason to do.



And yet here I am considering adopting Hellenic polytheism with pinches of other things thrown in for good measure. Could I not apply many of the same arguments applied to monotheism here to come to a conclusion. Sure, but for some reason I still find myself rather attracted to the idea. I can’t seem to swat it away even if I feel the reason I would have to engage in this wouldn’t be a very strong one. AT least it would still be rather difficult to defend to people I know.

This is obvious bias and I can’t help but recognize it. Granted I don’t honestly think the case against polytheism is anywhere near as strong as it is against monotheism. Part of the reason behind this is the rigidity of the monotheism of the bible or quran opposed to the fluidity of the various mythological polytheistic texts.

What do you think about this particular bias of mine and what bias have you recognized within yourself?

I find if you limit yourself and your interpretation of monotheism within only christianity, islam, and judaism (bahai and all of that), then you're basically squeezing god (however defined) into a box.

I've always had a polytheistic mind but never (like everything else about my beliefs) really labeled it until I came on RF and found so many opinions about god(s) and realized everyone is pretty much talking about the same thing (unless you guys are aliens) just in different terms, culture, or so have you.

Different ways to view life whether in multiples or in single, binary or unity, and so have you. It doesn't "mean" the same thing but because we are not aliens to each other, the grasp for understanding and living life has yet to not overlap another religion regardless their theistic outlook, culture, and nationality.

I guess I have bias towards monotheism only insomuch that one person over all singles power and authority while polytheism singles family and unity. That's how I would interpret it. I rather believe in many gods than just one. Keeps it from being at a "I worship you and give you all of me" type of thing when the example of gods working among others would, in this imaginary scenery, helps me understand the world and my service in it as well.

Plus, polytheism to me has more options of spiritual growth. Even Hinduism, though not polytheistic (belief in multiple gods/creators), have that sense of connection because you have multiple incarnations and so forth working together. It's been like that way before judaism.

So, my bias also against modern religions-such as christianity-is another thing I kinda wish I can throw aside but there are some healthy bias too. I value the past and present not just the future. If I don't know who my family were and are, how would I know about myself and my family today?

 

[SomeRandom]

I'm reminded of a small sketch in Horrible Histories. A Bishop tries to convert a bunch of Anglo Saxons or Vikings I forget. Which surprisingly goes well for they are polytheists and simply absorb the bishop's god into their own pantheon. The Bishop then tells his new converts that his god is the god of everything. To which they reply, that's a bit greedy isn't it?

I guess that's how I view monotheism. Sort of.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

Rules Question: Can someone of no faith participate in the interfaith debate section?

 

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

Rules Question: Can someone of no faith participate in the interfaith debate section?

yeah, this is also not a debate section

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

yeah, this is also not a debate section

Is there a rules difference?

 

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

Is there a rules difference?

From what I gather you can more or less state your opinion in discussion and talk about it in debate there is more actual debate if you catch my meaning.

 

[sayak83]

We all have our own personal bias whether we recognize it or not. We all have things we favor and we all have things we have personal issues with. Sometimes these bleed over into the arguments we will and won’t consider and why we agree with one side or another.



I notice in myself a bias against monotheism and for polytheism. IT seems to me no matter how many times I’ve investigated monotheism I can not help but dismiss it as a possibility. Not because I don’t like the idea mind you but because pretty much any monotheistic god that actually wants us to pay attention to him clearly isn’t trying very hard to get any skeptics attention. It’s arguments fall flat and the idea of taking the bible or the Quran or even the baha’i holy books on faith is not something I can see any reason to do.



And yet here I am considering adopting Hellenic polytheism with pinches of other things thrown in for good measure. Could I not apply many of the same arguments applied to monotheism here to come to a conclusion. Sure, but for some reason I still find myself rather attracted to the idea. I can’t seem to swat it away even if I feel the reason I would have to engage in this wouldn’t be a very strong one. AT least it would still be rather difficult to defend to people I know.



This is obvious bias and I can’t help but recognize it. Granted I don’t honestly think the case against polytheism is anywhere near as strong as it is against monotheism. Part of the reason behind this is the rigidity of the monotheism of the bible or quran opposed to the fluidity of the various mythological polytheistic texts.



What do you think about this particular bias of mine and what bias have you recognized within yourself?

Try Hinduism which is monist, monotheistic and polytheistic at the same time. Or Buddhism which is agnostic and polytheistic at the same time. I believe publicly available evidence is insufficient to fix metaphysics, but enough to refute certain simplistic formulations of them that our minds have conjured up over the millennia. Human suffering is not caused because some first pair ate a fruit, there is no Cartesian theater, world is not made up of billiard ball like particles following deterministic laws, there are no thunder wielding gods sitting on the top of a mountain etc.

 

[shunyadragon]

I find if you limit yourself and your interpretation of monotheism within only christianity, islam, and judaism (bahai and all of that), then you're basically squeezing god (however defined) into a box.

Disagree with the generalization including Baha'i. In the Baha'i Faith God is undefinable, apophatic, from the human perspective. It is closer the undefinable Brahman of Vedic religions, and the Tao, ie if you claim to know what God(s) is it is not God.

The difference between polytheism and monotheism, including Christian Tritheism (three boxes in one box), is the number of boxes one imagines putting the 'Source' some call God(s) into.

 

[shunyadragon]

We all have our own personal bias whether we recognize it or not. We all have things we favor and we all have things we have personal issues with. Sometimes these bleed over into the arguments we will and won’t consider and why we agree with one side or another.

I notice in myself a bias against monotheism and for polytheism. IT seems to me no matter how many times I’ve investigated monotheism I can not help but dismiss it as a possibility. Not because I don’t like the idea mind you but because pretty much any monotheistic god that actually wants us to pay attention to him clearly isn’t trying very hard to get any skeptics attention. It’s arguments fall flat and the idea of taking the bible or the Quran or even the baha’i holy books on faith is not something I can see any reason to do.



And yet here I am considering adopting Hellenic polytheism with pinches of other things thrown in for good measure. Could I not apply many of the same arguments applied to monotheism here to come to a conclusion. Sure, but for some reason I still find myself rather attracted to the idea. I can’t seem to swat it away even if I feel the reason I would have to engage in this wouldn’t be a very strong one. AT least it would still be rather difficult to defend to people I know.



This is obvious bias and I can’t help but recognize it. Granted I don’t honestly think the case against polytheism is anywhere near as strong as it is against monotheism. Part of the reason behind this is the rigidity of the monotheism of the bible or quran opposed to the fluidity of the various mythological polytheistic texts.



What do you think about this particular bias of mine and what bias have you recognized within yourself?

Even though I believe in the Baha'i view of apophatic Monotheism. I try and take a less biased evaluation of the existence and nature of God or Gods.

Human beliefs in metaphysical have evolved over the millennia, from animism, to polytheism, hierarchal polytheism, to various forms of Monotheism. The evolution of beliefs follows a distinct pattern: (1) Animism associated with Paleo Neolithic and early Neolithic cultures, (2) Polytheism associated with late Neolithic and Bronze Age, Through the period of the evolution of animism to polytheism there is a trend from animal/human sacrifice to animal sacrifice. (3) Monotheism evolved in the Iron Age and latter with symbolic sacrifice replacing animal sacrifice. (4) Intellectual movements of Deism, Atheism and Agnosticism follow with the advancement of the sciences. The evolution of belief systems in human history appears to based on trying to explain unknowns and unknown causes. As our knowledge of our physical existence increases the unknowns fall away that justified the ancient views of Gods. For example supernatural heavens above occupied literally with Gods, angels and such, Hellish worlds below occupied by the eternally condemned fade. Beliefs in actual physical places for heaven, hell and realms of Gods above and below have been replaced with parallel spiritual worlds, and vague concepts of the soul and spiritualism. It remains that the beliefs of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are based on ancient worldviews, and the Babylonian mythology of Genesis, as the people in the past viewed their relationship with God(s).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Disagree with the generalization including Baha'i. In the Baha'i Faith God is undefinable, apophatic, from the human perspective. It is closer the undefinable Brahman of Vedic religions, and the Tao, ie if you claim to know what God(s) is it is not God.

The difference between polytheism and monotheism, including Christian Tritheism (three boxes in one box), is the number of boxes one imagines putting the 'Source' some call God(s) into.

I feel monotheism puts god in a box and polytheism makes god more accessible because each god has a reflection or "understanding" of life that one god can't provide.

Unless Bahai believes in more than one god, they and all other god-faiths would be together in my statement above.

 

[shunyadragon]

I feel monotheism puts god in a box and polytheism makes god more accessible because each god has a reflection or "understanding" of life that one god can't provide.

Unless Bahai believes in more than one god, they and all other god-faiths would be together in my statement above.

No, the apophatic 'Source' some call God(s), whether Baha'i or Tao cannot be put in a box, because the apophatic belief makes no positive statements that can limit God nor the Tao.

I believe any belief system of polytheism, including the Tritheism of Christianity reflects the ancient mythology of cultures no longer relevant to the modern world. Any concept of God that reflects a universal view as the universal 'Source' cannot be the God or Gods of any one ancient religion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I notice you have a lot of bias in your statements

No, the apophatic 'Source' some call God(s), whether Baha'i or Tao cannot be put in a box, because the apophatic belief makes no positive statements that can limit God nor the Tao.

Polytheism is a mixture of beliefs depending on one's geographical area, culture, and language. Many believe in one source and many reflections of that source. Others believe in many gods but no sources. Others don't call the things (with an -s) they believe in gods at all because they are not persons nor objects of worship. Polytheism is vast.

God, Tao, Vishnu, etc are very different concepts. Some actual beings and others a state of being. God just means object or person of worship. Not every religion has gods. Not all religions have the "Oneness" of god. Unification isn't in all religions. To say otherwise is extracting differin thoughts and worldviews outside your own.

I believe any belief system of polytheism, including the Tritheism of Christianity reflects the ancient mythology of cultures no longer relevant to the modern world. Any concept of God that reflects a universal view as the universal 'Source' cannot be the God or Gods of any one ancient religion.

Mainstream trinity isn't polytheism. That is just a huge misconception of christianity. God is the father (a being). God the son (a human). God the holy spirit (a spirit). God just means divinity. The Being is not human and spirit at the same time. The being in Christianity sent down a human who died for christians sins. Once this human died, the spirit came from him at pentecost and filled the apostles and from then people have received the spirit of this human with whom they call christ (or anointed).

They are not one person. "[Christianity and other] cultures no longer relevant to the modern world. Any concept of God that reflects a universal view as the universal 'Source' cannot be the God or Gods of any one ancient religion."

This is why there are so many wars. The sooner you get out of this "they are not like us and they should change" view and accept even value that people view their traditions as relevant for this age, past, present, and future the better.

As long as you and all Bahai, Christians, and so have you try to put people in one box under one god in one faith, you will always have wars. Your belief isn't the point. It's not about you.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Disagree with the generalization including Baha'i. In the Baha'i Faith God is undefinable, apophatic, from the human perspective. It is closer the undefinable Brahman of Vedic religions, and the Tao, ie if you claim to know what God(s) is it is not God.

The difference between polytheism and monotheism, including Christian Tritheism (three boxes in one box), is the number of boxes one imagines putting the 'Source' some call God(s) into.

Why is god not definable? Spirituality doesn't need to be a mystery nor a religion (such as Bahai compared to Christianity) to be valued.

Christianity trinitarianism is one box (the father-creator of heaven and earth) and under that one box is the son (the message of the creator) and from the son is the spirit (the love and "feelings" of the creator).

Still one creator. One denomination doesn't interpret christianity as a whole. Scripture doesn't support trinitarianism as seen by mainstream denominations it supports god existing, jesus the son of god, and the spirit the love (peace, patience, kindness, humility) of god.

One is a creator, next savior, next "breathe of life."

Creator created the world
Human saved humanity
Spirit gave us life

Not hard. Just I don't see why they all different things need to be worshiped.

 

[Sudy Rao]

Right here!

Rules Question: Can someone of no faith participate in the interfaith debate section?

 

[Tumah]

Not because I don’t like the idea mind you but because pretty much any monotheistic god that actually wants us to pay attention to him clearly isn’t trying very hard to get any skeptics attention.

This does not follow. Why can't a monotheistic god exist and just not want you to pay attention to him? Or just not care terribly if you do or don't?

 

[Sudy Rao]

I am with Carlita (in a way) in terms of your thought limiting yourslef what you thought / meant for Monotheism.

As that someone with no faith, I would say Monotheism is built, pushed and developed for having a robust belief among the adherents and it is more of a politically built system and would not give power to the most important things in the present world like nature, human (not limited) unity, way forward for a peaceful co-existence. Polytheism in most cases gives power to those mentioned above. However, people from polytheistic faiths are equally an easy prey for conversions for Monotheistic faiths.

My belief: In terms of attention to a God: I feel God did not create YOU / US (or) even running your life for that matter for your / our PRAISES, ATTENTION. I feel God needs humanity (Not within a belief system or within a community) and we fail it because of those books created for political successes whenever they really were.

PS: I am a believer of God. Just no other name please, it is/he is/she is God!

 

[outlawState]

What do you think about this particular bias of mine and what bias have you recognized within yourself?

Polytheism springs from a tendency to worship what is created, whereas montheism sees all religious value in worshipping the creator. More than one creator acting independently seems illogical. Worshipping what is created is also illogical. Multiple powers, thrones, authorities exist, for sure, but they are all created. Your bias is therefore in line with a preference for the created, not the creator.

The Greek church has the unenviable reputation in history of being conquered by Islam, such that its offshoots now operate under the autocephaly principle. It was also diminished by the Roman Catholics, operating out of Venice. Rome as the seat of the papacy had originally been established by Byzantium. Byzantium was responsible for promulgating the strong Trinity conception of multiple gods. Before Christianity, Greek pagan religion was the vicious opponent of Judaism and persecuted it in the days of the Maccabees.

Personally I would be very weary of Greek religion. Too much polytheism by far and I wouldn't want to treat any of it as having legitimacy. That is my bias. Obviously very influential in its day but I think, for myself, it has had its day, and I would consign it to being a subject of academic research only.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

This does not follow. Why can't a monotheistic god exist and just not want you to pay attention to him? Or just not care terribly if you do or don't?

That isn't the kind of god that cultures dominated by Christianity or Islam have been indoctrinated for centuries into believing in.

 

[Tumah]

That isn't the kind of god that cultures dominated by Christianity or Islam have been indoctrinated for centuries into believing in.

I understand that, I just wonder if the OP investigated "monotheism" or Christianity and Islam.