-
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!
Polytheism vs. Monotheism
- Thread starter Rex
- Start date
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Well, one advantage I can think of for monotheism over polytheism is you would only have to keep up with one god!
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
one advantage to polythism is you don't have to have one all perfect god responsible for both bad and good things.
wa:do
wa:do
Druidus
Keeper of the Grove
That isn't nescessarily a problem with polytheists. They tend too, as I have done, choose a patron, or matron, deity. I have chosen both a patron and a matron deity, and so I don't have to pray to every one (about 33). I still, of course, respect and honour the other ones.
Fluffy
A fool
You are of course entitled to your own opinion but a religion is made up of the beliefs of its followers. Therefore if I believe in a pantheon of gods, then there is a religion which does not follow one supreme being.
Polytheistic religions are generally more interesting in terms of literary pieces than monotheistic religions. Although I have to say that Jesus dying on the cross was particularly poignant even if the writers of the Bible did not quite capture it as well as they might have done (my personal opinion).
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Polytheism would be sweet--it's so much more interesting! Plus, you know what they say: "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
I prefer polytheism. As has been said, there's so many more 'characters' to get to know!
I also enjoy having a relationship with a variety of dieties. It's like having dozens of friends instead of one. (Not saying that those who have a relationship with one are in any way mistaken- that they just approach things differently.) If you're feeling peaceful, you can 'hang out' with someone with Kwan-Yin. If you're feeling the need to channel justifiable anger or to celebrate and commune with nature, you can charge out with Artemis or her kin.
I also enjoy having a relationship with a variety of dieties. It's like having dozens of friends instead of one. (Not saying that those who have a relationship with one are in any way mistaken- that they just approach things differently.) If you're feeling peaceful, you can 'hang out' with someone with Kwan-Yin. If you're feeling the need to channel justifiable anger or to celebrate and commune with nature, you can charge out with Artemis or her kin.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I think what monotheists don't understand is that they cannot understand thier "one god." And the only way to understand it is to look at its "creations." These creations are what make up polythiestic panthenons, so while some monotheists reject the polythiestic approach, they lose insight into their "one god" by doing so.
Melody
Well-Known Member
Maybe from an outside perspective it appears that way. As a monotheist, I have a good understanding of my God by looking at His creations and how they interact with each other. In much the same way I can tell a lot about someone by how they keep their home, how they raise their children and the choices they make in life if I pay close attention and get to know them. This means having personal knowledge and interacting with this family on a day to day basis.Master Vigil said:
No, I would definitely have to disagree that I lose insight into my "one God."
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
Sure you do may, because you are looking at things that are finite and imperfect. These two are the exact opposite of what "god" is defined as. Do you find the spiritual in a tree? Or a running river? Or perhaps the majesty of the ocean? The gods of these things are the recognition of the sacred in them. And if you believe they are "just trees, or just water," than you lose sight of your "one god." Especially since you cannot even come to know your "one god" since you are imperfect, and finite. And trust me, an imperfect and finite book doesn't help much either. It may point in the right direction, but stop focusing on the pointing finger, and focus on what its pointing at.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Well Master Vigil as a monothiest myself I can say that I see the spirituality in the tree and the river. 
I don't need a seperate god for each thing to realize thier sacredness. By knowing each thing in creation I know a bit more about Creator. Everything in creation has part of Creator within it.
Yes I know the spirit of the river and the tree but I do not think of them as gods, they are my brothers and sisters.
Remember that fingers point in more than one direction. :tsk:
wa:do
I don't need a seperate god for each thing to realize thier sacredness. By knowing each thing in creation I know a bit more about Creator. Everything in creation has part of Creator within it.
Yes I know the spirit of the river and the tree but I do not think of them as gods, they are my brothers and sisters.
Remember that fingers point in more than one direction. :tsk:
wa:do
Melody
Well-Known Member
You look at God's creations as finite and imperfect. I do not. I see my Creator's compassion, love, humor, intelligence and mercy in everything He has created. I do not think a river or tree is sacred except as it applies to the fact that they are a creation of my God and deserving of my respect and good stewardship.Master Vigil said:
Isis-Astoroth
Member
I'm a polytheist, and I must say, I prefer it to monotheistic Christianity, because although there is very much more history, there is that ability to connect with deities of different personalities.carrdero said:
I don't agree with what you said; you can get to know several gods as well as you can get to know one.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
My point Painted wolf is, those gods are not Perfect, infinite, eternal beings. They are creations, and just because they use the word "god" doesn't mean it is on the same level. But a polytheist would recognize the sacred in trees and rivers easier than a monotheist would. As Melody has wonderfully shown us.
"You look at God's creations as finite and imperfect. I do not."
Show me one thing in the universe that isn't finite and imperfect.
"I do not think a river or tree is sacred except as it applies to the fact that they are a creation of my God and deserving of my respect and good stewardship."
And I suppose you believe yourself to be above them? This is another reason why monotheism is not in my liking. It shows a connection between humans and the divine but all other creations fall by the wayside. Especially judaism and christianity, man is made in gods image. What a bunch of crap in my opinion. I'm sure you respect them and keep them in good stewardship, but I for one find them more pure than humans, and see them as sacred.
"You look at God's creations as finite and imperfect. I do not."
Show me one thing in the universe that isn't finite and imperfect.
"I do not think a river or tree is sacred except as it applies to the fact that they are a creation of my God and deserving of my respect and good stewardship."
And I suppose you believe yourself to be above them? This is another reason why monotheism is not in my liking. It shows a connection between humans and the divine but all other creations fall by the wayside. Especially judaism and christianity, man is made in gods image. What a bunch of crap in my opinion. I'm sure you respect them and keep them in good stewardship, but I for one find them more pure than humans, and see them as sacred.
No*s
Captain Obvious
Frankly, it just makes more sense to me. Monotheism posits a deity outside the universe, not contained or limited in any fashion. This deity creates the universe and sustains it. God is not comprehensible.
However, if I were a polytheist, I would have the universe as my god, which I strongly feel is created. As a result, I'm simply giving the title of "deity" to another creature. They aren't self-existant, and are more like the universe than they are the Creator.
Monotheism frequently posits the existence of divine revelation. That's the only way we know about God. Polytheism, though, doesn't seem to do that in its modern forms (the ancient form had revelation a plenty). Without revelation, I really don't see any need to be anything but a deist.
Polytheism, ultimately, must fall back on the universe as its ultimate reality, and that simply doesn't make sense to me.
However, if I were a polytheist, I would have the universe as my god, which I strongly feel is created. As a result, I'm simply giving the title of "deity" to another creature. They aren't self-existant, and are more like the universe than they are the Creator.
Monotheism frequently posits the existence of divine revelation. That's the only way we know about God. Polytheism, though, doesn't seem to do that in its modern forms (the ancient form had revelation a plenty). Without revelation, I really don't see any need to be anything but a deist.
Polytheism, ultimately, must fall back on the universe as its ultimate reality, and that simply doesn't make sense to me.