Soft, Hard & Others

[Lux et Umbra]

I saw that there was no threads in this section so I thought I might post some definitions:

Soft polytheism is a variety of polytheism whose adherents believe in many Gods and Goddesses but consider them in some way as manifestations of a single personal God, or God and Goddess, rather than as completely distinct entities. Common types of soft polytheism include monolatry, henotheism, and polytheist mythologies coupled with forms of, pantheism or panentheism. Soft polytheism is generally distinguished from hard polytheism, the belief that the various Gods and Goddesses are distinct and separate personal divine beings.
The term "soft polytheism" is most often used to describe a theological position in Neopaganism, sometimes expressed as "All Gods are One God and all Goddesses are one Goddess"
(from Wikipedia.org)
*
Hard polytheism specifies a variety of polytheism which considers the various Gods and Goddesses to be distinct divine beings with separate personalities. Hard polytheists reject the idea that "All Gods are One God", that the Gods are temporal manifestations or aspects of only one of the Gods or that deities merge or change into each other. In that, their point of view can be contrasted with soft polytheism. Hard Polytheists also reject the ideas that the Gods are merely archetypes or that they are simply personifications of natural forces.
<snip>
The term "hard polytheism" is most often used to describe a theological position in Neopaganism, most commonly found among practitioners of reconstructionist Neopagan religions. It is especially prevalent in Hellenismos and Religio Romana, as these revivalist movements are based on the ancient religions of Greece and Rome, which were generally hard polytheist in outlook.
(from Wikipedia.org)
*
The Others:

*functional polytheism – Symbolic use of polytheistic theology and terminology as a ritual tool or useful concept, without literal belief in the existence of multiple gods.
*archetypal polytheism – Belief in multiple gods/goddesses as representing psychological (Jungian) archetypes, or elements of the human personality; belief that there are a relatively small set of unique gods/goddesses, and that gods/goddesses from different cultures who have similar personalities and domains are representations of the same god/goddess.
*polytheism + monism – There are multiple Gods, but they are all aspects of one divine Force; OR, there are multiple Gods, and there is also a divine Force. (also known as “monolatry”)
*polytheism + dualism – There are multiple Gods, but they are all aspects of one of the two divine Forces (“all Gods are one God, all Goddesses are one Goddess”).
*panpolytheism - Belief in all gods/goddesses, moving between pantheons at will; extreme eclectic polytheism.
*henopolytheism - Devotion in one pantheon or set of gods/goddesses, without denying the existence of other gods/goddesses outside of that set.
*single-pantheon polytheism - Belief in one pantheon or set of gods/goddesses, to the exclusion of all others.
Added:
*Henotheism—belief in, and possible worship of, multiple gods, one of which is supreme. It is also called inclusive monotheism or monarchial polytheism.
From: http://www.ksu.edu/psg/handout1.doc

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Interesting thread! I would say that I consider myself a panpolytheist.

 

[Lux et Umbra]

Right now functional polytheism and archetypal polytheism seem to fit my idea of the gods. I used to consider myself a soft polytheist a few years ago, but things changed. The functional and archetypal polytheism make sense to my agnostic view.

 

[Gentoo]

I think that polytheism + dualism would work well for me

 

[Circle_One]

Soft polytheism is a variety of polytheism whose adherents believe in many Gods and Goddesses but consider them in some way as manifestations of a single personal God, or God and Goddess, rather than as completely distinct entities. Common types of soft polytheism include monolatry, henotheism, and polytheist mythologies coupled with forms of, pantheism or panentheism. Soft polytheism is generally distinguished from hard polytheism, the belief that the various Gods and Goddesses are distinct and separate personal divine beings.
The term "soft polytheism" is most often used to describe a theological position in Neopaganism, sometimes expressed as "All Gods are One God and all Goddesses are one Goddess"
(from Wikipedia.org)

Just to be difficult (because it's fun), I consider myself a Monolatric Polytheist

I worship the entire Kemetic Pantheon, each God and Goddess as their own, seperate entities, while at the same time, recognizing them as seperate facets of a whole: Netjer.

 

[Feathers in Hair]

I imagine one can be a panpolytheist and a archetypal one at the same time.

 

[Lux et Umbra]

Just to be difficult (because it's fun), I consider myself a Monolatric Polytheist
I worship the entire Kemetic Pantheon, each God and Goddess as their own, seperate entities, while at the same time, recognizing them as seperate facets of a whole: Netjer.

That sounds like henotheism and from my time with the House of Netjer I know Kemetic paths can be classifed as such:

Henotheism—belief in, and possible worship of, multiple gods, one of which is supreme. It is also called inclusive monotheism or monarchial polytheism.

So in your case Netjer and the many Names.

 

[Zephyr]

Old thread, but I just noticed it and I don't seem to be screwing things up too badly here.

I used to consider myself an archetypal polytheist, but I've moved on to become much more of a hard polytheist.

 

[TimothyA]

I describe my beliefs as Inclusive Polytheism... that there is only one pantheon of Gods, which are perceived differently through the veil of cultural and personal perceptions. However, I also accept as true the concept of Unity, and therefore it cannot be not neatly categorized as monism, pantheism, or polytheism. I believe the Gods exist at a higher level of reality, and therefore exist at a higher level of unity with our Source. This Unity allows for the distinctiveness of an individual in such a way that it does not conflict with diversity and individual expression. Therefore, the Gods do exist as individual and distinct beings, while at the same time unified with The One.

 

[IsmailaGodHasHeard]

This is very interesting.

 

[SpentaMaynu]

I've got a question here: I consider myself to be a monotheist with monolatrist and panentheist elements, but how with you guys clasify me? These is what I believe:

I believe God is One but with many names. All these names can be seen in all religions (ancient, old and new religions). Thus I believe Allah, Christ, Buddha, Krishna, Nam etc etc are all names of One God. I also believe that God should be seen in all around us including ourselves. This extend the names of God to each and every one of our names as well as those of the animals and the rest of nature.

 

[lovesong]

By these terms I would be a hard panpolytheist, although I have a few issues with the "moving between pantheons at will" part. A god can't go from being Greek today to Egyptian tomorrow and back to Greek again the day after. Permanent movement from one pantheon to another has been seen in mythology, but they aren't fluid between pantheons like the definition would suggest.

 

[syo]

*functional polytheism – Symbolic use of polytheistic theology and terminology as a ritual tool or useful concept, without literal belief in the existence of multiple gods.
*archetypal polytheism – Belief in multiple gods/goddesses as representing psychological (Jungian) archetypes, or elements of the human personality; belief that there are a relatively small set of unique gods/goddesses, and that gods/goddesses from different cultures who have similar personalities and domains are representations of the same god/goddess.

these two are atheistic. gods are real they are not symbols.

 

[VioletVortex]

these two are atheistic. gods are real they are not symbols.

They aren't really atheistic. I'd like to create a term for "quasi-theism". Metatheism works well.

 

[Joshua Pryce]

The beautiful things about Christianity is its less theological seclusion and more practical and technical and symbolically accurate. Having more than one God is believing in glorified beings that work and deal like humans. That is a huge problem because human beings are flawed in every single way. Jesus Christ is the only man to be completely and show complete divinity. Historically, theologically and morally and in identity.