How did monotheism become so popular?

[Aupmanyav]

Diverse gods means there is no true morality. Gods would be in this case just like us, lost on to what truly is moral guidance and would have no pathway. Then their power and structure would be similarly politics, and not really based on truth.

What is true morality? That which is followed by Shias or Christians? An atheist can be moral without any religion (of course, I do not fit there. I am an atheist and a Hindu. So, I go by Hindu concept of morality - 'dharma'). Morality is the law of the society, like wearing a scarf for women in Iran.

 

[Link]

What is true morality? That which is followed by Shias or Christians? An atheist can be moral without any religion (of course, I do not fit there. I am an atheist and a Hindu. So, I go by Hindu concept of morality - 'dharma'). Morality is the law of the society, like wearing a scarf for women in Iran.

Whatever it is, without God, it can't exist truly. Without God, it's an illusion.

 

[danieldemol]

Whatever it is, without God, it can't exist truly. Without God, it's an illusion.

Break the law in any non-Shia country and you'll soon find its no illusion in my view.

 

[Aupmanyav]

IMHO, God, soul, and what is perceived; all of that is illusion.

 

[wellwisher]

How did monotheism become so popular?

Polytheism described reality in terms of a bunch of specialists. You had a goddess specialized in love and a god who was specialized in war. If you needed help in battle, you call in the war specialists. Monotheism integrated all the specialists under a single principle; God the King of Kings.

This integrating affect allowed the team to become more than the sum of its parts. There is a time for everything since it all under one principle. In polytheism, the gods and goddess were often divided in politics. This was not a good team. But monotheism changed that;

A time to be born, a time to die
A time to plant, a time to reap
A time to kill, a time to heal
A time to laugh, a time to weep, etc.

Relative to the human personality, for the ego to become well rounded and balanced; reflect the inner self, required an integrating principle. It had to do with the layout of the brain's operating system. There is an integrating factor called the inner self. It has a jukebox of apps that are called the archetypes of the collective unconscious. Polytheism was more connected to the individual apps, while monotheism was connected to the underlying principle that ran the entire show.

In polytheism, if you wanted to become a good soldier, you would worship the god Mars. But since the gods were not all friends, or all on the same page, you could get stuck being only a soldier. This was not healthy. With monotheism, since God was over all the apps, you could become a solider and then a lover, since there no conflict in the jukebox playing one or the other; there is a time for all things. This allowed people to become more balanced which allowed persistence in culture, based on this merit of completeness. Today we have a choice or not.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Polytheism described reality in terms of a bunch of specialists. You had a goddess specialized in love and a god who was specialized in war. If you needed help in battle, you call in the war specialists. Monotheism integrated all the specialists under a single principle; God the King of Kings.

What do you like? Democracy or dictatorship?

 

[Nakosis]

How did monotheism become so popular?

I think through Christianity. Christians decided their God was the only God which every one else needed to accept as well.

Even Jew, though they had no other God before their God didn't necessarily deny other people has their own Gods. Christians took over other lands and force acceptance of their God. Basically monotheism was force by the sword onto a large portion of the world.

Christianity became a violent religious belief and used the supreme nature of their God to justify that violence.

 

[DNB]

How did monotheism become so popular?

Because it made the most sense - only one omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and all powerful Being, who lacks nothing and is perfect in every way, can exist at one time. If there were more than one, there would be absolutely nothing to differentiate one from the other, as it would also be the quintessence of redundancy.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Even Jew, though they had no other God before their God didn't necessarily deny other people has their own Gods.

@Viker

Notice, Judaism never took up the sword or compelled non-Jews to assimilate.

Um, y'all do know that the Old Testament is the Hebrew Bible, right? It goes behind merely denying those Gods, it demonizes and insults them and their worshipers. Then it has Yahweh ordering genocide of the neighboring people around the Jews and the destruction of their objects and sites of worship. So it started there. Not with Christianity.

69 Bible verses about False Gods

A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic

bible.knowing-jesus.com

Also, Jews have a history of radical and violent fundamentalist movements. The Maccabees, for example, were a bunch of violent religious fanatics who wouldn't have been too different from Al-Qaeda. They would also attack Jews who had assimilated into Hellenic culture. There's also Phineas, the grandson of Aaron, who is depicted murdering an Israelite man and his Midianite lover in a gross episode of murder that sounds very similar to killing an interracial couple for "miscegenation" (in fact, Phineas is a beloved figure for white supremacist Christians and racists who murder interracial couples were called "Phineas priests").

I know people want to have more sympathy for Jews because of past persecution but let's not act like Judaism isn't problematic in its own ways.

 

[jhonsteve111]

Christianity wasn't really forced on people by a sword until later. The Romans became Christians gradually of their own accord, as those whom Paul and the others evangelised. By the time Christianity was prevalent in Rome and the Middle East the Pagan temples were gathering dust; Emperor Julian tried to resurrect the Pagan situation but failed. Christianity had triumphed without a hint of violence. Egypt converted without violence, for example.

In the European colonies, the same thing happened. The Celtic peoples of Gaul, Britain, Iberia etc. wanted to be Romans and thus took on Roman culture, which included Roman religion. So the Celts became Christians of their own will, trying to ape Roman custom (and many really were Romans by now, having been under Roman yolk for hundreds of years and knowing no different). Many became heretical types, such as Pelagians, but were no longer Pagans at any rate.

The Germanics who invaded, largely the Eastern Germanics (Goths, Vandals, Lombards mainly) became Arians, another kind of heretical Christian. By 476, Odoacer, an East Germanic, took the throne and became Western Roman Emperor. He was an Arian. Theodoric, another Eastern Germanic, reigned after Odoacer from 493 as 'King of Italy' and was an Arian Ostrogoth. Both coexisted with the Catholic/Orthodox (what would become so) Christians, maintained friendliness with Popes etc. and there was no idea of religious violence against them.

All of these groups, the majority of Europeans at the time, were converted voluntarily and by 500 most of Roman Europe was Christian. By 800 this included some Slavs, Saxons etc. the people who had never been under Roman dominion in the West but came under Eastern Roman dominion, mainly Slavs, and so many took to Orthodox Christianity. This was largely a muddled situation with both Latins and Greeks (West/East) trying to evangelise the Slavs to their own. So Poland and Czechia become Catholic, for instance, while Serbia, Bulgaria, Russia etc. become Orthodox. But these people were missionaries going to these places, not soldiers with weapons, and were often killed in their missions.

The Vikings were converted usually as they settled in Christian countries, namely England, Scotland and Gaul. By the first millennium, the Normans were Catholics and all the Pagan Vikings who'd settled in Britain were also Christians. When William invaded he found no Pagans, nor expected to. The Vikings converted largely to be able to have relationships with the rest of Europe. If Gaul allowed them to settle they would convert. The Vikings accepted the deal and stuck to it. This idea spread to their homeland; it was pragmatic and political, but it wasn't 'at the point of a sword'.

What Charlemagne did to the Pagan Saxons was inexcusable even in his day. The Church fathers had forbad it and the Saxons strongly resisted. This may be said to be forced conversion.

The insular Saxons, however, were converted gradually largely by Irish missionaries, but also by the missionaries sent by Augustine of Canterbury. It took about ~100 years to convert them, but by the time the Vikings were invading there were broadly no more Pagans in mainland Britain. So no forced conversions there.

The situation with the Slavs was complex and fraught with racism and imperialism, and they once deconverted back to Paganism.

#Mediaevalist.

How did Christianity spread peacefully in early Europe, and what were the exceptions to this non-violent conversion?

 

[Mock Turtle]

How did Christianity spread peacefully in early Europe, and what were the exceptions to this non-violent conversion?

Don't expect a reply, since Rival has apparently decided to leave RF.

 

[jhonsteve111]

I think through Christianity. Christians decided their God was the only God which every one else needed to accept as well.

Even Jew, though they had no other God before their God didn't necessarily deny other people has their own Gods. Christians took over other lands and force acceptance of their God. Basically monotheism was force by the sword onto a large portion of the world.

Christianity became a violent religious belief and used the supreme nature of their God to justify that violence.

Hi, hope you are well, can I ask you how did Christianity's belief in one God lead to the spread of monotheism, and what role did violence play in enforcing that belief in other lands?

 

[Audie]

How did monotheism become so popular?

Can that which is forced be properly referred to as popular?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How did monotheism become so popular?

Portability.

It's not just the violence. The monotheistic religions that dominated the world are especially portable to a new place or culture.

With most polytheistic religions, the gods will be associated with specific places or things. The god of a particular mountain is of limited relevance in a country far away. Forest spirits aren't a thing in the desert.

OTOH, a monltheistic "god of everwhere" is relevant anywhere. That sort of religion works equally well regardless of where you are.

Even then, monotheistic religions can be more or less portable. Temple-era Judaism was, well, focused on the Temple and as a consequence, didn't really spread beyond a reasonable travel distance from the Temple.

Islam is still focused on a specific geographic location, but the Hajj is only a once-in-a-lifetime obligation, so this allowed a wider spread. It didn't spread to areas farther from Mecca (e.g. Malaysia) until travel between those areas became practically possible.

Islam also had a disadvantage to Christianity in terms of dietary rules: any food is fair game to Christian proselytizers, so they can travel anywhere, but Muslim proselytizers can really only function in areas where they have access to halal food.

... so monotheism isn't the be-all and end-all of making a religion portable and transferring from culture to culture, but it definitely helps.

 

[firedragon]

How did monotheism become so popular?

I believe it's because it's the most rational worldview.

 

[Nakosis]

Hi, hope you are well, can I ask you how did Christianity's belief in one God lead to the spread of monotheism, and what role did violence play in enforcing that belief in other lands?

You might want to look into the history of Justinian, a Roman emperor.

Justinian's religious policy reflected the Imperial conviction that the unity of the Empire presupposed unity of faith, and it appeared to him obvious that this faith could only be the orthodoxy (Chalcedonian). Those of a different belief were subjected to persecution, which imperial legislation had effected from the time of Constantius II and which would now vigorously continue. The Codex contained two statutes[99] that decreed the total destruction of paganism, even in private life; these provisions were zealously enforced. Contemporary sources (John Malalas, Theophanes, and John of Ephesus) tell of severe persecutions, even of men in high position.

Justinian I - Wikipedia

As he went on to conquer Western Europe he brought his ideas of Christianity with him.

The conquests of Justinian - The map as History

Originally Christianity was not strictly seen as monotheistic was not that different from pagan beliefs so was easily adopted as another God to worship among several by the common people.

 

[jhonsteve111]

Justinian's religious policy reflected the Imperial conviction that the unity of the Empire presupposed unity of faith, and it appeared to him obvious that this faith could only be the orthodoxy (Chalcedonian). Those of a different belief were subjected to persecution, which imperial legislation had effected from the time of Constantius II and which would now vigorously continue. The Codex contained two statutes[99] that decreed the total destruction of paganism, even in private life; these provisions were zealously enforced. Contemporary sources (John Malalas, Theophanes, and John of Ephesus) tell of severe persecutions, even of men in high position.

How did Justinian's belief in religious unity lead to the persecution of non-Chalcedonians and the enforcement of anti-pagan laws?

 

[Nakosis]

How did Justinian's belief in religious unity lead to the persecution of non-Chalcedonians and the enforcement of anti-pagan laws?

To my understanding, by his will/authority. He felt that unity of religion was key to the control of the empire. As Emperor he held authority through enforcement. Like many emperors of the time he saw it his duty to act on behalf of Christ.

 

[The Hammer]

How did monotheism become so popular?

Mostly through force. With some missionary work.

"Christianity was not spread peacefully during the Middle Ages in all cases:

Inquisition
The Catholic Church launched the Inquisition in 1184 to persecute, torture, and execute people who didn't strictly follow the church's doctrine.

Political pressure
In the Late Middle Ages, some kings and princes in Eastern Europe pressured their people to convert to Christianity.

Military coercion
In the Northern Crusades, princes used military force to convert people to Christianity.

Conversion of Old Prussia
The conversion of Old Prussia resulted in the deaths of many of the native population, and their language became extinct.

Conversion of Iberia
Christian monarchs in Iberia forced Jewish and Muslim people to convert to Christianity or leave. "

 

[sayak83]

Because morality is only justified by it.

We were conquered by the Mongols. The Mongol rulers ended up converting to our religion, and not the other way.

So conquest does not explain everything.

Non sedentary people (Goths, Mongols, Turks etc) usually converted to the religion of the sedentary civilizations they conquered. Mongols in China converted to Confucianism, Huns who entered India became Hindu Rajputs, Mongols of Mid East became Muslims, while Goths and Vandals became Christian.