popsthebuilder
Active Member
What religions aren't monotheistic?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How an Omnipotent and All Loving God cannot exist.
- Thread starter Alitheia Aylso
- Start date
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I have no idea what point you intend to address with this question.
popsthebuilder
Active Member
They generally all go back to the One Creator God, except the ones I listed, or some I just haven't researched yet.
popsthebuilder
Active Member
You said I was excluding faithful religions. I want to know which ones.
Aquitaine
Well-Known Member
It is bad design, even elements of our own anatomy as humans are daft. The fact that childbirth requires extensive medical intervention in order to minimize what would otherwise be an event of high infant mortality is evidence of poor design by itself.
Also, perhaps the main obstacle to us reaching a "wholly peaceful existence" are our aggressive and territorial primate instincts, another silly design if God's plan is to have us all co-exist peacefully.
Aquitaine
Well-Known Member
Polytheistic ones. For example Hinduism.
Student of God
New Member
1 I agree that happiness isn't one of the reasons someone becomes muslim, happiness and peace of mind do come through following islam (though thats subjective since everyone can claim that about his/her way of life). The main reasons people aremuslims is because of cultural reasons or because they believe islam to be the truth after being convinced by the evidence for it. Anyway I know many cultural muslims and really their islam is debatable and oftentimes don't even understand the basics of islam. What I wanted to ask you though, is how did islam spread? Islam can't be forced on anyone, thats common knowledge. That probably isn't what you are referring to though, you are probably referring to the spread of islamic law. Islamically the first islamic state arose a year after the leaders of Madeenah accepted islam, the message of islam had been understood by the people and many became muslims after that the jews,christians and non-muslim arabs agreed on a treaty. After that there was an islamic state (not ISIS, they're unislamic), so people had an example of islam and didn't have to suffer from lies and misconceptions. The islamic state send people to other nations to tell them of islam and to call people to become muslims after explaining islam. If they refused they called them to become dhimmi's, they live and are part of the islamic state and like the muslims are obliged to do (zakat) pay a specific tax( jizya) for protection and the right to live in an islamic state,similar to regular tax, besides that the protection part was serious and for example if the muslims failed to protect them they'd give back the tax. They also had other rights such as the freedom to keep their religious buildings and practicing their religion freely (with the only limitation being that they can't do dawah openly). One of their other rights was that for example the christians could raise pig and drink alcohol , not too much knowledge on what other religions could do, but this shows that they don't have the same prohibitions as the muslims while living in an islamic state. They could also have their own courts with limitations. One of their duties was aiding the muslims if they were attacked, not going on campaigns and such. If they refused this option then they would be fought untill the islamic law was established in that area. In an islamic state this process continues untill the whole world is under an islamic law. Regardless of whether this concept is right or wrong (which for us is subjective) its a fact that living under an islamic law doesn't equal being a muslim and that as long as the word islamic is in the name people shouldn't be opressed, if they are being opressed then its not an islamic law anymore.
Student of God
New Member
I'm the same guy who you replied to, just got a new account with a different username because I'm a total idiot... (can log in to the other account to confirm, though I won't be using that account anymore anyway)
Regardless of that, lets get to your question.
You asked me why I believe in the quran. I won't answer it in this post because I'd like to ask you if you prefer the long detailed version of my answer or a short tl,dr-like answer (might still be pretty long). Also I'm not sure if this forum is the right place to post this, since this isn't really relevant to the topic.
HekaMa'atRa
Member
Perhaps in theory but history shows otherwise. Monotheism has only been divisive.
Pagans had to stay in the shadows after the decrees of Theodosius. Not doing so could cost you your property, livelihood, or life. Why? Because of persecution and religious intolerance from Christians and Muslims. Your comments after that about corruption are complete nonsense.
popsthebuilder
Active Member
Perhaps you could say RCC instead of all Christianity. Just because religions haven't united in the past because of greed and the powers that be including ancient pagans doesn't mean it can't happen. It will never happen while people are greedy and selfish, and bicker over names.
TheSounding
village idiot
When put into practice, which belief results in the most benefit for
the individuals' well-being and quality of life? If neither has any
benefit then there is no point challenging them. How is belief in
mono/polytheism practical?
1. What are the benefits?
2. How are those benefits acquired?
3. Why is it the most beneficial?
So far I have tried to answer these questions with respect to
monotheism. I have noticed no attempt to answer these questions by
those challenging the idea of monotheism. I will make a post in the
format listed above and expect the same from those who are persuaded
different.
If someone happens to agree with me in what I say but might say it
differently, I encourage you to follow the same format. If someone
thinks the above format is lacking in clarity and direction then please
post with a clearer and more focused format. Though my main objective
is to come up with a format which could be used for comparison.
Remember my fundamental concern in discussing this is to determine
whether or not either belief is beneficial to individuals' well-being
and quality of life. If it has no real use then discussing it has the
same value as discussing fiction.
Monotheism:
1. The practical benefits are happiness and contentedness. This
translates into less stress and better focus, and a better quality of
life.
2. The benefits of monotheism require daily worship to the greatest
extent possible. Worship must be focused on the principles of divine
will and mercy. Divine will because everything moves according to that will,
and mercy because everything acts as an all-encompassing strength and
protection for the monotheist. The divine will is all-embracing and presiding.
3. By accepting monotheism through its practice in worship a
monotheist comes to perceive every happening a strength and
protection from God through whatever fashion, and they have the potential
to apply this perception to any occurrence in life. Whereas a
polytheist is unable to consistently apply the perception of an
all-embracing divine will—by virtue of multiple gods—a monotheist is
consistently able to—by virtue of unity. It is ultimately the belief in
an all-embracing divine will which allows a monotheist the experience
of an all-encompassing strength and protection, which is the monotheistic
cause for happiness.
I hope I was clear and concise. Some might ask for evidence or proof
that believing in this form of monotheism actually provides
happiness. But my question to that is, how would one go about testing
this for its validity? What experimentation is needed for proof?
the individuals' well-being and quality of life? If neither has any
benefit then there is no point challenging them. How is belief in
mono/polytheism practical?
1. What are the benefits?
2. How are those benefits acquired?
3. Why is it the most beneficial?
So far I have tried to answer these questions with respect to
monotheism. I have noticed no attempt to answer these questions by
those challenging the idea of monotheism. I will make a post in the
format listed above and expect the same from those who are persuaded
different.
If someone happens to agree with me in what I say but might say it
differently, I encourage you to follow the same format. If someone
thinks the above format is lacking in clarity and direction then please
post with a clearer and more focused format. Though my main objective
is to come up with a format which could be used for comparison.
Remember my fundamental concern in discussing this is to determine
whether or not either belief is beneficial to individuals' well-being
and quality of life. If it has no real use then discussing it has the
same value as discussing fiction.
Monotheism:
1. The practical benefits are happiness and contentedness. This
translates into less stress and better focus, and a better quality of
life.
2. The benefits of monotheism require daily worship to the greatest
extent possible. Worship must be focused on the principles of divine
will and mercy. Divine will because everything moves according to that will,
and mercy because everything acts as an all-encompassing strength and
protection for the monotheist. The divine will is all-embracing and presiding.
3. By accepting monotheism through its practice in worship a
monotheist comes to perceive every happening a strength and
protection from God through whatever fashion, and they have the potential
to apply this perception to any occurrence in life. Whereas a
polytheist is unable to consistently apply the perception of an
all-embracing divine will—by virtue of multiple gods—a monotheist is
consistently able to—by virtue of unity. It is ultimately the belief in
an all-embracing divine will which allows a monotheist the experience
of an all-encompassing strength and protection, which is the monotheistic
cause for happiness.
I hope I was clear and concise. Some might ask for evidence or proof
that believing in this form of monotheism actually provides
happiness. But my question to that is, how would one go about testing
this for its validity? What experimentation is needed for proof?
HekaMa'atRa
Member
What do you mean, "Perhaps you could say RCC instead of all Christianity" - in regards to what?
This can also apply for polytheists.
This can also apply for polytheists.
What makes you think polytheists aren't able to apply a perception of an all-embracing divine will by a virtue of multiple Gods? What if that's exactly the case? There are polytheistic religions that also have a concept of unity, where the many make up a whole. And even then with hard polytheism (all the Gods are separate entities) - there's nothing stopping these Gods from granting a perception of an all-embracing divinity.
Your entire argument is simply a opinion and doesn't hold true for all monotheists or polytheists.
TheSounding
village idiot
How so?
Religions like Hinduism where many gods make the whole is really monotheism from another angle. It is not polytheism in the true sense of the word.
The notion that many gods work together to do something is quite absurd. The idea of God has its origins in nature. Ancient peoples conceived of God based on what they could see and hear around them, the motion of things. Now someone could divide nature into parts and assign those parts to various gods, but what benefit does it bring? Nothing. There is no added value. You seem to speak of theory when I am speaking of practicality. As far as theories go it's either or and doesn't really matter. But when it comes to the effect it has on a believer and the community of believers it is a different matter altogether. I remember my college professor telling me about style in writing. He said keep it simple and short, and if you can say it in a more concise way then do it. This is about keeping it simple. I said before polytheism only convolutes the principles of divine worship.
Would you care to follow my format of the post you quoted? If you did that we can compare and contrast in a clear and simple way.
HekaMa'atRa
Member
Sure, I will answer these questions in your format, according to my particular polytheistic faith.
1. What are the benefits?
Through worship I am able to develop a personal relationship with the Netjeru (Gods, the Divine). From this relationship, I am able to feel more connected with the Divine (Kemetics believe we were formed from the Gods' own body), I am able to tap into something much greater than myself, bringing me feelings of happiness, wonder, reverence, and completeness.
2. How are these benefits acquired?
Through ritual and prayer, the Netjeru blesses me with all the above attributes. These rituals involve making offerings, reading ancient texts, reciting hymns, and simply conversing with the Divine. By exercising this ritual, I am creating Ma'at which is often translated as truth, justice, and harmony. The universe requires Ma'at in order to maintain balance and fend off chaos from turning the universe back into nonexistence. Humanity and the Divine take equal responsibility in maintaining this order, Ma'at. Through Ma'at, for which the God's love and live on, the Netjeru, and Heka (divine power gifted by the Gods), I am able to create a barrier from chaotic forces that may cause myself harm. No that doesn't make me immune to harm, it simply alleviates and curbs all the everyday chaos we run into as humans. Chaos cannot be completely subdued, it is a necessary part of our universe.
3. Why is it the most beneficial?
My faith isn't plagued by religious dogma or rules. It is not oppressive, nor does it say you must believe in X or bad things will happen to you. It doesn't look down on other religions or the people practicing those religions. It doesn't try to separate itself from other religions. It doesn't kill people in the name of God, or try to pass laws that restricts the rights of others. Its principles simply revolves around being a good person, showing appreciation to the Divine for all its blessings, making good choices through Ma'at, and helping others.
Do not forget it is monotheism that evolved out of polytheism. There are Hindus who believe in hard polytheism and there are Hindus who practice soft polytheism. Same for Kemeticism.
Perhaps to you. I already illustrated through my religious faith how the Gods do just that, work together to maintain harmony and order.
Everything in this universe is made of many parts. Assigning Gods to different parts of nature makes sense to certain polytheists because nature itself is viewed as divine. The trees, the animals, the Earth, the sky, the oceans, all have a spirit of the Divine in them - giving them a name only allows the polytheist to connect deeper with whatever aspect of nature you want to get closer with. Now again, not all polytheists feel this way. I'm just showing it through my lens.
Absolutely. But God has chosen to punish sin, and being the creator and sustainer of everything that exists he has every right to do so. This is his world and we are his creatures. God isn't unfair to punish those who live in unrepentant evil.
You don't understand. I never stated that disbelief in God will in of itself result in Hell if the circumstances of that disbelief were invincible. Disbelief becomes a sin when it is in fact a conscious refusal to acknowledge one's conscience. I was in this position for years. I repeated all the same arguments against the folly of theistic beliefs, yet deep down I could not kill that inner voice, that inner voice that told me that I knew what I was doing was wrong. The truth was that I didn't so much disbelieve, so much as I hated the idea of religion. My atheism was post-hoc and deep down I knew it. THAT is the sin is disbelief. The fact that I cannot be empirically certain of God is no excuse to deny the testament of my own conscience as Romans 19:21 states.
(emphasis mine).
I can't see into anyone's heart, but I suspect many atheists are in the same boat as I was. They don't sincerely disbelieve, they hate the moral demands of religion.
Oh you.
Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive, they in fact compliment each other. Of course I know it's common internet rhetoric to conflate faith with blind credulity, but I assure you I think about my beliefs every day.
Last edited by a moderator:
TheSounding
village idiot
I enjoyed reading your post. It was more detailed than I thought it would be.
My comment is this, on an individual level there is perhaps no difference between monotheism and polytheism in regards to happiness. But on a societal level I believe there is a difference. How does polytheism affect a community based on polytheism? And how does monotheism affect a community based on monotheism? How does the community foster its spirituality and implement its teachings for future generations? Which does a better job of creating peace and prosperity for a community, monotheism or polytheism?
Koldo
Outstanding Member
What difference do you see on a societal level ?
TheSounding
village idiot
I see that monotheistic communities are liable to practice pluralism whereas polytheistic communities are not. Pluralism equals happiness.
What I find interesting is that I can name several communities founded upon monotheism but I cannot name any community founded upon polytheism. What gives?
What I find interesting is that I can name several communities founded upon monotheism but I cannot name any community founded upon polytheism. What gives?
Last edited: