-
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!
Which religion invented the idea of "One god" first?
- Thread starter s2a
- Start date
Judaism, actually, as far as the recognizably contemporary monotheism. There probably were a few older or proto-monotheisms before that in the Greek mystery traditions and Zoroastrians to name a few, but the one God concept really had its earliest origins in the Axial Age.
Philda Tressie
God Supremist
We, of the Abrahamic faiths KNOW that there is only one GOD - our Creator. He is not a concept created by man.
F0uad
Well-Known Member
Typical you not understanding my point.
Hindus believe that the Vedas are eternal.
Most Hindus are some version of monotheist.
knock_ask_seek
New Member
..pardone me ...I just wanted to know if the above quote is from Quran. I have not read Quran and right now I have no interest in reading one yet if it is found to be true that the Quran and the islam acknowledged that Adam as one man first created by God as was expressed from the Bible scriptures the same Adam who was purportedly or purposely created by God to start human race who will fill the earth? Is it also possible that this God who was spoken in the Quran is the God that is spoken in the bible who did confused the people's language back when people were only speaking in one language as it is writen in the bible this scripture when Babel was built?
...who're you talking to? What quote do you mean?
Recommend you both learn to doubt your final vocabularies for the sake of your own intellectual developments.
Very nice. And where in this googled laundry list do we find a reasonably credible claim that "Zoroastrianism ... is credited by most scholars as being the first monotheistic religion"?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Those deities emanating from Brahman are separate gods though, to my understanding. Sort of like the trinity, with Jesus being the "Son of God".
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Anyways, yes, the Judaic monotheism gets my vote
cheers
cheers
Never separate. Nothing is separate from Brahman. Everything is a manifestation or expansion of Brahman.
Shermana
Heretic
Does Henotheism count? Because that's the general consensus on what the ancient Israelites believed, but it becomes a Semantic quagmire of what "god" means. One chief supreme "god" (which means "power") who reigns over lesser subordinate "gods" (who are the "angels").
"The god" is articulated for a reason, he's called "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) and "Elohim" are clearly referenced as Angels. So Jewish "Monotheism" may be a misnomer until the Masoretic days. We also see things like major differences like in the Masoretic and Septuagint of Deuteronomy 32:8.
"The god" is articulated for a reason, he's called "god of the gods" (Psalm 136:2) and "Elohim" are clearly referenced as Angels. So Jewish "Monotheism" may be a misnomer until the Masoretic days. We also see things like major differences like in the Masoretic and Septuagint of Deuteronomy 32:8.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
How to account for the different personalities then?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
That's just theory, it doesn't hold up in the light of religion based analysis, IMO
God is infinite in every way. Each manifestation is an expression of some aspect of the One. Therefore each personality is just an expression of God in a particular manifestation.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Ah, o.k.
Shermana
Heretic
http://www.michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/BBRMonotheism.pdf
Sure holds up to the "religion based analysis" of all these scholars Heiser cites.
Besides, I've already gone over this with you, the word "god" most definitively refers to Angels without question or dispute in many Biblical passages.
Quote Psalm 136:2 for me and explain what you think it means, and look at what even all the orthodox commentators say about it.
I'd like to see what you consider "religious based analysis" while you're at it.
Even with Isaiah, it seems to have been recognized that After me" means "Like me" like "After this fashion".
As I've brought before, the reference to other lesser gods who were the Angels is clearly cited by Josephus and the particularly very Jewish "Sibylline Oracles" (not the pagan ones the Romans went by) that even the Church Fathers considered authoritative.
To call it "Theory" is simply a misnomer. EVERYTHING is theory in this speculative world of religious studies. What's not theory is the way that the text explicitly interchanges "Angels" with "Elohim".
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Worship of one Deity is Monotheistic, though, I personally feel that the term "Henotheism" does not fit Judaic belief. That being said, sure, it can be viewed as such, I suppose, but I question the intellectual accuracy of that description.