• 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!

There are no polytheists in the West.

Shermana

Heretic
Polytheism.

Or at the very least henotheism progressing towards monolotry and eventual monotheism.


Henotheism, which is what the Bible most definitely paints the picture of and the ancient Israelites most likely believed in, is a lot different than Polytheism, the power system is not shared in Henotheism but very top down and hierarchic. In Polytheism you'd have different equal gods of equal ability or independence. There would be no "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) in true Polytheism, but if that "god of the gods" was split into 3 "persons" who are each a god, that's definitely Polytheism. Judaism was arguably not "Monotheistic" until well after the 2nd Temple period.
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
Why does viewing the gods as teachers mentors and friends suddenly make them not gods in your view? And for that matter why should that view have any barring on pagans themselves or whether or not they are polytheist?

because biblically speaking that doesn't qualify as worship. If the ultimate authority in one's life is their own will, then biblically speaking they are servants of themselves and they themselves are their own god. Why the biblical definition is of "god" by far the most relevant definition of "god" in terms of implications for our lives? It's because it tell us more about our heart than anything else. Most especially, it tells us the direction we're headed in life.
 

jasonwill2

Well-Known Member
Henotheism, which is what the Bible most definitely paints the picture of and the ancient Israelites most likely believed in, is a lot different than Polytheism, the power system is not shared in Henotheism but very top down and hierarchic. In Polytheism you'd have different equal gods of equal ability or independence. There would be no "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) in true Polytheism, but if that "god of the gods" was split into 3 "persons" who are each a god, that's definitely Polytheism. Judaism was arguably not "Monotheistic" until well after the 2nd Temple period.

I don't think, from my understanding, that henotheism always implies that the god you worship is the most powerful.
 

Shermana

Heretic
Biblically speaking, the word "Worship" only means "To bow down" or "To physically show a tangible display of loyalty and willful service" such as through kneeling. The modern English use of the word however is much different, however in Olde English, the word "Worship" meant "Worth-ship" as in "One who was worthy of being kneeled to", that's why Judges were called "Your worship".

Like the word "god", which means "Power" and can apply to Angels, it is important to separate modern English use of the word from its actual Biblical context which itself can be a whole discussion to garner. But the word "Worship" never means anything outside of bowing down, " or "falling on one's face" or kneeling. In Asia, cultures that retain the bow are in a way what is called "Worship". King David was "worshiped". The commandment is to worship God AND serve Him only, this would mean one can worship beings under Him in his chain of command so long as they don't serve another god. Worshiping the Evil one would not be serving Him.
 

Shermana

Heretic
I don't think, from my understanding, that henotheism always implies that the god you worship is the most powerful.

I think the exact definition is not clear and up to interpretation. Definition 1 supports your idea, but definition 2 seems to support mine. I think my understanding of the term is its original implication ,and definition 1 is what it has taken on as late.
2. ascription of supreme divine attributes to whichever one of several gods is addressed at the time.
If several gods are being addressed, that means the "Supreme Divine" indicates a hierarchy of these "Divine attributes" (i.e. angels have a lower Divine attribute than the Supreme one).
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Why the biblical definition is of "god" by far the most relevant definition of "god" in terms of implications for our lives? It's because it tell us more about our heart than anything else. Most especially, it tells us the direction we're headed in life.

...no, it doesn't. Not for those of us who don't use the Bible.
 

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
because biblically speaking that doesn't qualify as worship. If the ultimate authority in one's life is their own will, then biblically speaking they are servants of themselves and they themselves are their own god. Why the biblical definition is of "god" by far the most relevant definition of "god" in terms of implications for our lives? It's because it tell us more about our heart than anything else. Most especially, it tells us the direction we're headed in life.

So you're just going to ignore my other questions? Like the one I keep asking about why we should "speak biblically" about religions that don't use and have nothing to do with the bible?

Why should we follow what you claim to be the biblical definitions of worship and god when we don't use the bible?

It's a simple question so please stop dodging it and actually answer it this time.
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
Biblically speaking, the word "Worship" only means "To bow down" or "To physically show a tangible display of loyalty and willful service" such as through kneeling. The modern English use of the word however is much different, however in Olde English, the word "Worship" meant "Worth-ship" as in "One who was worthy of being kneeled to", that's why Judges were called "Your worship".

Like the word "god", which means "Power" and can apply to Angels, it is important to separate modern English use of the word from its actual Biblical context which itself can be a whole discussion to garner. But the word "Worship" never means anything outside of bowing down, " or "falling on one's face" or kneeling. In Asia, cultures that retain the bow are in a way what is called "Worship". King David was "worshiped". The commandment is to worship God AND serve Him only, this would mean one can worship beings under Him in his chain of command so long as they don't serve another god. Worshiping the Evil one would not be serving Him.

I think you're making this too complicated. It's really a pretty simple concept I'm talking about.

1 Samuel 12:21

"Do not turn away after useless idols. They can do you no good, nor can they rescue you, because they are useless."

Psalm 115:

4Their idols are silver and gold,
The work of man’s hands.

5They have mouths, but they cannot speak;
They have eyes, but they cannot see;
6They have ears, but they cannot hear;
They have noses, but they cannot smell;
7They have hands, but they cannot feel;
They have feet, but they cannot walk;
They cannot make a sound with their throat. 8Those who make them will become like them,
Everyone who trusts in them.


Habakkuk 2:18

"Of what value is an idol, since a man has carved it? Or an image that teaches lies? For he who makes it trusts in his own creation; he makes idols that cannot speak"

My contention is that the idea of actually trusting these entities is completely lost among Westerners claiming to be polytheists. Yes, the Christian God calls them useless idols but the point of this thread was not to say that. In the minds of these ancients, they truly believed that what God called "idols" were indeed actual "gods" with power.
 

Shermana

Heretic
An idol is a representation of a god, not the god itself. As for making it too complicated, I presented the Biblical understanding of the concept. Can you prove that the idol itself is the god when the scriptures refer to real beings called "gods"? Even Paul said, yes there are "indeed lords and gods".
 

jasonwill2

Well-Known Member
because biblically speaking that doesn't qualify as worship. If the ultimate authority in one's life is their own will, then biblically speaking they are servants of themselves and they themselves are their own god. Why the biblical definition is of "god" by far the most relevant definition of "god" in terms of implications for our lives? It's because it tell us more about our heart than anything else. Most especially, it tells us the direction we're headed in life.

To be quite blunt, I don't think that 90% of the posters in here give a darn about what The Christian Bible says, or what you think it says, or what it might say, or what X or Y is by your religion's system.

The fact that the definition I'm using comes from the Bible is irrelevant in the sense that it doesn't change the fact this is about what we trust most and what directs our steps.

What is it that we trust most? What directs our steps? I trust my literal brother most and my feet and legs direct my steps. What's your point? Are you saying that The Christian Bible is the ultimate authority for even non-Christians? Are you saying we trust it most?

Or are you saying that someone's god must be that which someone trusts most and directs their steps? I trust other things more than even my own god in certain contexts, and my god doesn't direct my steps, at least not in the way that you are thinking. Gods are not so narrowly defined, and they can be fickle beings that do not want to direct people's lives.

Example: Loki doesn't want your trust or to direct you, he just wants to mess with you.

Example: Pluto doesn't want your trust or to direct you, he just rules over the underworld.

Example: Isis doesn't want you to trust her or to direct you, she is a fertility goddess.

These are three different examples from three different time periods and cultures and geographical locations to show you that a God is not always about controlling people's lives and earning their trust. Your concept is the exception, not the rule throughout history.
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
So you're just going to ignore my other questions? Like the one I keep asking about why we should "speak biblically" about religions that don't use and have nothing to do with the bible?

Why should we follow what you claim to be the biblical definitions of worship and god when we don't use the bible?

It's a simple question so please stop dodging it and actually answer it this time.


Again, the definition of "god" found in the Bible is the only one truly relevant to our lives because it describes who has the ultimate authority in our lives. If it makes you feel better, we could forget the fact that it's from the Bible and simply frame the question as "who or what has ultimate authority in your life?"
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
Again, the definition of "god" found in the Bible is the only one truly relevant to our lives because it describes who has the ultimate authority in our lives. If it makes you feel better, we could forget the fact that it's from the Bible and simply frame the question as "who or what has ultimate authority in your life?"
Our lives?
Why should the definition of god from the Bible matter in the lives of those who do not accept the Bible as an authority on god(s)?

God is not a strictly Biblical concept.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
The fact that the definition I'm using comes from the Bible is irrelevant in the sense that it doesn't change the fact this is about what we trust most and what directs our steps.

Yes it is. All it takes to be a polytheist is to believe in the existence of many Gods. It has nothing to do with trust.
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
What is it that we trust most? What directs our steps? I trust my literal brother most and my feet and legs direct my steps. What's your point? Are you saying that The Christian Bible is the ultimate authority for even non-Christians? Are you saying we trust it most?

Or are you saying that someone's god must be that which someone trusts most and directs their steps? I trust other things more than even my own god in certain contexts, and my god doesn't direct my steps, at least not in the way that you are thinking. Gods are not so narrowly defined, and they can be fickle beings that do not want to direct people's lives.

.


Thank you. This is all I'm talking about. I'll put it this way, I don't think whatever spiritual entities you have communion with are "gods" in any relevant sense if there's no submission and/or they have no say in the path you choose for your life.
 

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
Thank you. This is all I'm talking about. I'll put it this way, I don't think whatever spiritual entities you have communion with are "gods" in any relevant sense if there's no submission and/ or they have no say in the path you choose for your life.

Why not?
 

MoonWater

Warrior Bard
Premium Member
Again, the definition of "god" found in the Bible is the only one truly relevant to our lives because it describes who has the ultimate authority in our lives. If it makes you feel better, we could forget the fact that it's from the Bible and simply frame the question as "who or what has ultimate authority in your life?"

how is it the only one truly relevant when talking about religions that don't follow the bible? Why bring up the bible in the first place?

And if all you want is to know "who or what has ultimate authority" well what barring does that have on whether or not a religion is polytheistic? Are you saying we HAVE to define the gods as beings of ultimate authority? why? Why do we have to conform to your ideas about worship and god in order for you to admit that we are polytheist?

And what area of my life are you asking about in terms of who has authority?
 

Shermana

Heretic
Yes it is. All it takes to be a polytheist is to believe in the existence of many Gods. It has nothing to do with trust.

I think that to qualify as a true "Polytheist" in its oldest usage one would not just "Believe in" the existence of the gods but also adopt those gods as "their gods". Acknowledging the existence of other beings that are called "gods" or "powers" is a different kind of "believe in" than to have trust and faith in them as "your gods".

polytheism (ˈpɒlɪθiːˌɪzəm, ˌpɒlɪˈθiːɪzəm) — n
the worship of or belief in more than one god
Polytheism | Define Polytheism at Dictionary.com

Again, the Trinity by dividing the One Supreme god into 3 "Co-equal persons" is in fact Polytheism.

The distinction between Henotheism and Polytheism should be more pronounced by historians.
 
Last edited:

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
I think that to qualify as a true "Polytheist" in its oldest usage one would not just "Believe in" the existence of the gods but also adopt those gods as "their gods". Acknowledging the existence of other beings that are called "gods" or "powers" is a different kind of "believe in" than to have trust and faith in them as "your gods".

polytheism (ˈpɒlɪθiːˌɪzəm, ˌpɒlɪˈθiːɪzəm) — n
the worship of or belief in more than one god
Polytheism | Define Polytheism at Dictionary.com

Again, the Trinity by dividing the One Supreme god into 3 "Co-equal persons" is in fact Polytheism.

It's why I also try to add other types to my identity. In this instance, I'm a polytheistic panentheist.
 
Top