Tywin et al. Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) @The Anti-Targ is right, this deserves its own thread. I am on team polytheism. He's on team monotheism. Discuss. Edited January 12 by Mr. Chatywin et al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fionwe1987 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 As an atheist, I always found polytheism better. At least the stories are more interesting, and the morality tends to be more realistic. Luzifer's right hand, Erik of Hazelfield, Winterfell is Burning and 4 others 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conflicting Thought Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 im an atheist, but i think that polytheism makes more sense if you belive. i find its the better option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I know this started out as a joke, but I'd say the two have very different purposes. As I understand it, polytheism is derived from animism, or "representations of forces of nature or ancestral principles" (wikipedia). So the original purpose of polytheism is to make sense of the world, with humans being one force among many, and part of a greater whole - today we call it "nature" but the division itself was made relatively recently (see: Descola). Hunter-gatherer tribes and Asian cultures still have traces of the old spirituality - Miyazaki's Mononoke is the tale of humanity turning away from it for example, a Japanese version of the Promethean myth. Monotheism, by contrast, is often said to come from politicomorphism: historically speaking, it seems rooted in monolatry, i.e. the preferential worship of the King's tutelar deity. Whereas defeated peoples were expected to forfeit their King's God in favor of the victor's, the exiled Hebrew elite subverted this by blaming their monarch instead, giving their one God a social function rooted in the sacred - Durkheim would say that they sacralised the cultural values of their people - to become a geographically-autonomous ethno-religious group. I'd speculate it was originally a politically-motivated theology, and that later variations of monotheism also developed for political purposes. Point is, polytheism would originally be about humans' relationship with the cosmos and "nature," whereas monotheism is about organising human society. They're not completely mutually exclusive, but human societies moving from one to the other is a reflection of the fact that humans came to view themselves as part of increasingly larger human societies rather than viewing themselves as part of a natural world. Iskaral Pust, Phylum of Alexandria, Erik of Hazelfield and 4 others 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I think we've had a similar thread in ages past. Polytheism as mythology for making fun stories is the best. Though even those mythologies often have a single supreme being as the real creator. Monotheism as serious theology for the creation of our multiverse is the only logical explanation (on the basis of the cause and effect principle) for a multiverse made by a conscious creative entity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 Monotheism is just a fun story too and is as valid as a comic book. The Torah, for example, is wildly inaccurate. Erik of Hazelfield, Prince of the North, Craving Peaches and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fionwe1987 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 18 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: Monotheism as serious theology for the creation of our multiverse is the only logical explanation (on the basis of the cause and effect principle) for a multiverse made by a conscious creative entity. Hmm... Why so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Funnily enough, there seems to be traces of polytheism in the Torah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 23 minutes ago, Rippounet said: Funnily enough, there seems to be traces of polytheism in the Torah. There's a bit depending on how you want to interrupt it. All three Abrahamic religions have this in common. Which is why polytheism still wins the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadlines? What Deadlines? Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, Rippounet said: Funnily enough, there seems to be traces of polytheism in the Torah. I've heard this. Some speculation about Yahweh being a god of war in an earlier pantheon... with a consort. There were early Christian sects that were polytheistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Catholics have a saint for almost everything, which is basically just stealing polytheism! LongRider and Prince of the North 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Whatever Pharaoh Akhenaten was doing was on point In all seriousness, polytheism (no hate on monotheism though). Some points are serious, some less so. 1. Supreme Power Power Set Most monotheistic religions appear to ascribe characteristics to the Creator that they seem unlikely to possess at the same time. I find it hard to accept that the power that be is simultaneously all-powerful, all-seeing, and all-benevolent. I know there is the free will argument, but you also have people suffering despite not choosing to do so, just because other people chose to cause said suffering, so I guess their free will to harm others trumps the free will of other people to not be harmed (I would be interested if there is a theological argument to address this point). 2. Supreme Power is Harder to Relate To Arguably it can be easier to 'connect' to gods from the various polytheistic pantheons because they are more like real humans. Make mistakes, display human emotion more frequently, etc. And they relate to concepts that are easier to grasp such as the sea, the sky and so on. There is also often a more tangible element to worshipping them. And, if Odin doesn't answer your prayer, you can try Thor instead, whereas if God doesn't answer your prayer, you seem kind of stuck? 3. Polytheist 'Lore' is potentially better The drama is better since the stakes are real. Gods vs other gods or mythological beings, where the gods could actually be hurt/killed, or a human being brave enough to take on a god, has more dramatic tension for me than, for example, the Bible. In the Bible, it is obvious that whomever has God on their side will win. Also, the Bible seems to have very obvious continuity issues (some of which can be solved with Gnosticism), which I don't see so much with polytheistic works. Bible also has moments where someone slips up and admits the polytheistic nature of the world. Translation errors may also be more of an issue. And you have to read quite a few parts of the Bible metaphorically or they either don't make sense or are not suitable for the modern world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I think Irvine Welsh nailed the montheistic God (no pun intended) in Acid House. I think that's the most on point characterization, if you believe in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 44 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: 1. Supreme Power Power Set Most monotheistic religions appear to ascribe characteristics to the Creator that they seem unlikely to possess at the same time. I find it hard to accept that the power that be is simultaneously all-powerful, all-seeing, and all-benevolent. Just keep it simple, how did this all-powerful god get tricked by a dumb woman and a talking, walking snake? Craving Peaches 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: Just keep it simple, how did this all-powerful god get tricked by a dumb woman and a talking, walking snake? The argument I've seen is that Big G let it happen because 'free will'.* Most arguments seem to be 'free will' or that it was 'all part of the plan', 'God works in mysterious ways'. *Although this appears to contradict the following Bible passage. Quote And the LORD God said, 'The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.' https://www.bibleref.com/Genesis/3/Genesis-3-22.html The tone sounds like it wasn't part of the plan, also why is Adam not allowed to live forever? What about free will? Shouldn't he have that choice? Also, who is God talking to? Edited January 12 by Craving Peaches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iskaral Pust Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 My initial reaction to the thread title was that polytheism allows you to build war elephant military units but monotheism allows you to build Michaelangelo’s Chapel, which is a crucial Wonder Of The World if pursuing an expansionist strategy. Besides, the one leads to the other anyway. So I was ready to jump in and see if anyone has a different take on this. NGL, I’m pretty disappointed that the thread isn’t actually about Civ 2 game strategy. Rippounet, Fragile Bird, Kalbear and 3 others 2 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 11 minutes ago, Iskaral Pust said: NGL, I’m pretty disappointed that the thread isn’t actually about Civ 2 game strategy. Well its 2024, we are more aligned to Civ 6 ways of thinking. I think if Christianity could aim for the Work Ethic tenet and get a production bonus from it's Holy Site adjacency then we might see a resurgence worldwide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fionwe1987 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said: Just keep it simple, how did this all-powerful god get tricked by a dumb woman and a talking, walking snake? It wasn't part of the plan, but it was part of the ineffable plan. Just watch Good Omens, and it'll all be clear (not!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Monotheism is undoubtedly superior in EU4 though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 6 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said: I've heard this. Some speculation about Yahweh being a god of war in an earlier pantheon... with a consort. Asherah, yes. Yahweh basically took over her cult and she was forgotten for thousands of years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah Imagine how pissed she must be. Ormond 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.