Monotheism is not economically, or socially viable

[IndigoChild5559]

The Taureg just had resources and you can make a bustling economy with resources. But you exacerbate that by freedom.

First, resources very much are a part of any economy.

Second, it stated other things as well, for example their domination in trade, as a major factor in their wealth. That's economy by any definition.

You can reply if you want, but I'm no longer going to engage in your, since you are the sort of person that insists you are correct even when overwhelming evidence is provided to the contrary. You are too devoted to your ethnocentrism to think clearly on these matters.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes and Ghenghis weighs very heavily in the free side. For instance he was one of the first to allow people 5o choose their religion. He also let governates rule themselves. He is a great example of my over all point.

You mean your point that people who live in tents can have a good economy?

 

[ChieftheCef]

First, resources very much are a part of any economy.

That's what I implide

Second, it stated other things as well, for example their domination in trade, as a major factor in their wealth. That's economy by any definition.

Yes and scant of them that are monotheist and successful had it because they had the resources

You can reply if you want, but I'm no longer going to engage in your,

In my? Your engagement is showing

You mean your point that people who live in tents can have a good economy?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes and scant of them that are monotheist and successful had it because they had the resources

What does living in tents have to do with monotheism? There are nomads that are monotheistic, and nomads that aren't. There are city dwellers that are monotheistic, and city dwellers who are not. This smells like a red herring to me.

 

[ChieftheCef]

What does living in tents have to do with monotheism?

now that im remembering the conversation i dont remember mentioning Nomads. It means less economy so poorer people can only afford tents. Is this a joke?

There are nomads that are monotheistic, and nomads that aren't. There are city dwellers that are monotheistic, and city dwellers who are not. This smells like a red herring to me.

It's true!

 

[IndigoChild5559]

now that im remembering the conversation i dont remember mentioning Nomads. It means less economy so poorer people can only afford tents. Is this a joke?

Oh I completely misunderstood you. MY bad! I thought you were making a reference to the ginormous and wealthy tents that nomads like Abraham and others use. It never occurred to me that you were referencing the poor. That gives incredibly different context. So sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[ChieftheCef]

I don't follow.

As a polytheist my criticisms of monotheism are numerous, but this is definitely not among them. I'm just not seeing how the answer to the question "how many are the gods" would have any substantial impact on economics.

Besides what I have mentioned earlier

Besides this because they were open to the other they got really high caliber people to come to Egypt and spread their genes, so they became really ****ing good at having a variety of high caliber people able to do more for the state, their people, and their allies, and anyone per chance who understand their beliefs, including about anything but the afterlife or the gods

Besides these they also got really good with other countries and made alliances with them. Thus when their geniuses invented that new whatever, there was greater chance that Egypt (and everyone else because of trade) would have those new whatevers. There was also greater survivability. If you could be cozy with other countries you both could have a greater survivability. And you would trade with each other, giving more flow to the creation and discovery of new things.

 

[ChieftheCef]

It's the ancient mechanism by which Athens, Rome, Babylon and Egypt operated, openness to the other. It's a trait of polytheism.

It mnight just be associated with polytheism. Polytheism tends to have it more than monotheism... Because one is religion and another is copied.

 

[shunyadragon]

Athens, Babylon, Rome, Egypt and others were all better than ancient israel, because they were open to the other: so, and this is really a long list, less people would be hurt, physically or mentally, for their life choices and so they became more efficient and economically productive benefiting everyone within and somewhat out of it's bounds. The Ancient Israelites, and Persians, and other stubborn people were closed off from others, and so their economics went kaput.

Confusing all ancient religions and some contemporary beliefs are to a degree closed off and tribal. including the dead religions Athens, Babylon and Egypt did not survive. Actually Babylonia became dominantly Monotheistic with the teachings of Zarathustra.

 

[shunyadragon]

Athens, Babylon, Rome, Egypt and others were all better than ancient israel, because they were open to the other: so, and this is really a long list, less people would be hurt, physically or mentally, for their life choices and so they became more efficient and economically productive benefiting everyone within and somewhat out of it's bounds. The Ancient Israelites, and Persians, and other stubborn people were closed off from others, and so their economics went kaput.

Confusing all ancient religions and some contemporary beliefs are to a degree closed off and tribal. including the dead religions Athens, Babylon and Egypt did not survive. Actually Babylonia became dominantly Monotheistic with the teachings of Zarathustra.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Confusing all ancient religions and some contemporary beliefs are to a degree closed off and tribal. including the dead religions Athens, Babylon and Egypt did not survive. Actually Babylonia became dominantly Monotheistic with the teachings of Zarathustra.

Yes, and you must not be tolerant to the intolerant. Basic ****.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Confusing all ancient religions and some contemporary beliefs are to a degree closed off and tribal. including the dead religions Athens, Babylon and Egypt did not survive.

Grasping at straws here. Just because it didn't survive doesn't mean it wasn't greater, which it was.

Actually Babylonia became dominantly Monotheistic with the teachings of Zarathustra.

Proof?

 

[shunyadragon]

Grasping at straws here. Just because it didn't survive doesn't mean it wasn't greater, which it was.

Proof?

There is no such thing as proof or what is greater or lesser when dealing diverse conflicting subjective religious beliefs.

You made assertion that you believe something is greater without a supporting argument.

 

[ChieftheCef]

There is no such thing as proof or what is greater or lesser when dealing diverse conflicting subjective religious beliefs.

You can still proof it. Give evidence to suggest, dawg.

You made assertion that you believe something is greater without a supporting argument.

No I didn't. I radically supported the arguement. Are you a monotheist? Only monotheists don't agree.

 

[shunyadragon]

You can still proof it. Give evidence to suggest, dawg.

No you cannot proof the subjective.

No I didn't. I radically supported the arguement. Are you a monotheist? Only monotheists don't agree.

So far you have provided an adequate argument to support anything.

Neither Monotheism nor Polytheism can be proven of objectively supported. They are beliefs.

 

[ChieftheCef]

No you cannot proof the subjective.

Yes you can. You can very well defend your beliefs. You seem too smart to be smart. Watch that. Meditate.

So far you have provided an adequate argument to support anything.

Nice Freudian, shows your dragon.

Neither Monotheism nor Polytheism can be proven of objectively supported. They are beliefs.

That's not true, one is genuinely ascertained by spiritual experiences. The other a lie for power. Do you know about Akhenaten?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Only monotheists don't agree.

Seriously?

 

[ChieftheCef]

Seriously?

You're right it's not just monotheism. Others denigrate the other at their own expense.

 

[shunyadragon]

Yes you can. You can very well defend your beliefs. You seem too smart to be smart. Watch that. Meditate.

Nice Freudian, shows your dragon.

Nonsense

That's not true, one is genuinely ascertained by spiritual experiences. The other a lie for power. Do you know about Akhenaten?

Spiritual experiences are subjective and too variable and conflicting to represent any sort of support for even a discussion.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Nonsense

Spiritual experiences are subjective and too variable and conflicting to represent any sort of support for even a discussion.

Neither of those are true.