God vs gods

[Elijah John]

Here on this site, one often hears from non-believers statements and questions doubting the existence of "gods", plural. Not sure why that is. Why not just question God, singular? In Western culture, that would be a more relevant question.

Hardy anyone believes in "gods" anymore. Hindus and Pagans maybe. But most folks here in in the West are either Jewish, Christian of Muslim. Monotheism is predominant.
(Whether or not Trinitarians are actual Monotheists is another debate).

But this leads to an important question. Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural?

What IS the case for Monotheism, as opposed to Polytheism?

(please, this is not intended to become a "prove God or gods exists", thread)

[connermt]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural?

Maybe a better question is "Are there any other reasons outside of upbringing and culture, that so many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural?"?
Meaning, are those the only reason to believe?
To your question, I can't think of any other than 'because'.
One would think if there was only one real god, everyone would have, at least, that one god in their god repertoire to consider....
But maybe original sin, caused by mere humans, was SO great that it blinds us to the obvious...?

[Divine Insight]

What IS the case for Monotheism, as opposed to Polytheism?

The need for monotheism seems to me to be entirely an egotistical construct.

What would it mean for a God to be an individual entity? It basically means that it has a single personality, and single ego, and single personal self.

The Abrahamic religions actually fail miserably to create a single monotheistic God. To begin with they have Satan as this God's arch enemy. That alone brings into question the ideal that this is a monotheistic religion. How can Satan be a threat to a God if Satan is not on the same playing field as God. If God could crush Satan at any moment, then there would be no reason for God to allow Satan to interfere with his creation to the point where Satan is causing God to drown out the bulk of humanity.

So IMHO, it's a farce to even claim that the Abrahmic religions represents "monotheism". It's a false claim that these religions represent this concept.

Christianity takes this even further and demands that God is a monotheistic trinity. And that Jesus was both the Father and the Son simultaneously praying to himself and talking to himself. He's claimed to be both 100% God and 100% man simultaneously which is an absolute oxymoron. This is just extreme desperation to try to keep the religion monotheistic.

Also, you need to ask why monotheism was so important over polytheism. And the answer probably stems from the Greeks. Tribes invented their own gods. And in doing so every culture had their own God. So the early attempt at trying to unify religion was to create Zeus (the God of gods). He's the FATHER of all gods.

The Hebrews then just took this concept one step further by demanding that their God is a jealous God who will allow no other gods to be placed before him. Notice that at this stage it's still polytheistic. There must exist other gods for their God to be jealous of and demand that you don't both those Gods before this God.

But then as time went on the idea evolved into the thinking that there actually are no other Gods at all. And that the God of the Hebrews is actually just the only God and all other gods are just false illusions that don't really exist at all.

This whole line of thinking was religious cultural warfare. Everyone was trying to create a religion that has only one God who trumps all other religions and makes all other religions false. This is why monotheism became so important to these cultures. Like I say, we see this attempt in Greece with Zeus being the God of Gods. Then again with Hebrews proclaiming that their God commands that thou shalt not place any other gods before him.

Christianity then creates the demigod Jesus and proclaims that no one get to the Father God but by him. Also anyone who refuses to believe in him is condemned already. The tolerance for other Gods has no become absolute zero. This is religious bigotry at it's pinnacle. You either worship our God or go to hell. It's that simple. There are no other gods, and therefore to reject our single monotheistic God is to reject the only God there is.

This is the epitome of religions monopoly.

The Arabs would have none of this so they played the same game. They created Muhammad, the "The Last Prophet" of God to clean things up in a book called the Qur'an. And they named the original God of the Bible Allah. And they claim that Allah does indeed demand that you worship only him and therefore if you reject his last prophet Muhammad you are rejecting the one and only "Real God".

Monotheism became important precisely because religions were being used for political authority. This is why it became important to imagine that there is only one monotheistic God.

Now Let's Change Gears Big Time

Actually the only truly monotheist religions are Pantheism, or Panenthism. They proclaim that all is God, there is nothing that is not God. You can't get anymore monotheistic than this. Pantheism is the most monotheistic religion you can imagine. But pantheism doesn't view God as being an egoistical individual jealous entity. Instead God is the part of you that makes your existence possible.

It's not a religion that thinks of God as being a selfish egotistical ruler sitting on a throne in heaven, instead it's a religion that thinks of God as the essence of your being.

So Pantheism is the Queen of the monotheistic religions. But it doesn't need to turn God into an egotistical entity in order to do this. The Pantheistic view of God does not require an evil Satan. It's the purest form of monotheism. It doesn't even require polytheistic human souls since all humans are an expression of a monotheistic living god.

Pantheism did not evolve to become monotheistic for the political reasons of proclaiming ownership of a single egotistical God. Instead, pantheism evolved from introspection and the realization that all is one.

Now Let's Change Gears Again

Forgetting about pantheism for a moment, and returning back to the idea of an egotistical God, we can ask, "Why should there be only one egotistical God?"

If there can be one egotistical God then why can't there be infinitely many of them? Doesn't it seem strange that if God is an ego sitting on a throne in heaven that there would only be one of them? Especially when this God is said to have a "Kingdom" which must stand against its enemies?

The Biblical picture of God evolved around the concept of Earthly Kings. Kings get their power by the number of loyal subjects they can get to serve them. In the Abrahamic religions this same mentality is carried over. Not only is God seen as a King of Kings (a title given to Jesus by the Christians), but he also desperately needs your loyalty and vow of servitude to obey his every command without question.

Is this really what a single-existing monotheistic egotistical God would need? Why does this monotheistic God so desperately need such loyal obedient followers to serve him and join his army against Satan, etc.?

It doesn't even make any sense if you stop and think about it. It's clearly modeled after the medieval monarchies where earthly Kings desperately needed to keep their loyal subjects in line. Because those earthly Kings get their power in numbers.

But a genuine supernatural omnipotent God would have no need for any loyal followers who are willing to martyr themselves for him. Yet in both Christianity and Islam there is no higher honor than to martyr ones self for God's sake.

That's the mentality of medieval monarchical Kingdoms. Being a martyr for your King or for the Kingdom is the greatest act possible.

But does this really make any sense in the context of a supposedly omnipotent God. Why would an omnipotent God need your martyrdom?

It's clearly not even a supernatural concept.


What Does Monotheism Mean Anyway?

If there exists a "God" why can't there exist infinitely many Gods?

And what would be the result of that if it were the case?

Are Gods egotistical jealous entities? According to the Hebrew Bible their God most certainty is. But why should that be the case? Egotistical jealously is already something that we consider to be a failing of a mortal human.

What if there are many Gods that have no petty flaws like jealousy?

In Greek polytheism the multiple Gods behaved as poorly as mortal humans. But what if Gods were above those failings. What if the God's had grown beyond these kinds of ego-centric failings? Then we could imagine many polytheistic Gods all getting along in harmony without conflict.

So actually if we allow for ONE GOD to be "perfect" and flawless in terms of human failings (which clearly the biblical God is not), then there's really no reason why we can't imagine infinitely many "perfect" Gods all of whom get along in perfect harmony with no petty problems that mortal humans have.

So there's really nothing to be gained by a single monotheistic Godhead. Have infinitely many perfect Gods would be just as fine.

In fact, if you think about it, one reason we might think a monotheistic Godhead would be better is because then he wouldn't have any other God's to argue with, disagree with, and therefore go to war with.

But look at what we have done here. All we have done is imagine a single imperfect egotistical Godhead who can't get along with other Gods, and we solve that problem by giving him the ultimate authority so that he has no one to argue with, he just gets his way without argument.

Does that really represent a single perfect monotheistic Godhead? Or is this just a cop-out because we can't imagine multiple Gods actually getting along with each other without conflict.

If a single Godhead can be "perfect" then there is no reason why there can't exist infinitely many "perfect" Godheads. All of which can get along with each other without going to war over every little disagreement.

There is truly nothing special about the idea of a monotheistic Godhead. That very ideal is actually nothing more than the human ego raising it's head and trying to imagine a single most powerful EGO.

In pantheism that whole idea is nonsense. And it does indeed stem from the ego.

It's the ego that dreams of the ultimate ego. And that is what a monotheistic God would be. The ultimate ego. The ego that is so powerful it always gets the last WORD.

Is that God? The ultimate ego in the sky? Complete with jealously, wrath, a desire to be obeyed and served, and every other human failing? And if he doesn't get his way he'll take an egoistical temper tantrum and start casting people into a state of eternal damnation to egotistically punish them for not worshiping his ego?

Excuse me, but that IS the God portrayed by the Bible.

It's not only monotheistic, but it's a monotheistic monster.

If there were more than one of those they most certainly would hate each others guts. And they would be doing nothing but trying to cast each other into hell so the remaining one could be the top ego.

[wiploc]

Here on this site, one often hears from non-believers statements and questions doubting the existence of "gods", plural. Not sure why that is. Why not just question God, singular?

Suppose I said, "I don't believe in god." That strikes me as a bit weird. If I didn't believe that anyone lived in Kansas, I wouldn't say, "I don't believe in Kansan," I'd say, "I don't believe in Kansans."

I could say, "I don't believe in a god," but why not just say that I don't believe in any of them?

If I want to talk about a specific god, I'm likely to say "Jehovah" or "the Abrahamic god." I try not to call Jehovah "God," because that's kowtowing to the cultural imperialism of those people. They like it (or so I imagine) when we talk like theirs is the only god worth considering, like anytime one refers to a deity in the singular, the deity has to be theirs.

But I'm not consistent.

Hardy anyone believes in "gods" anymore.

The Jews are monotheists. The Christians arguably have three gods, but have to call them one in order not to contradict their Jewish roots. But "gods" would be as accurate as "god" when referring to the Christian pantheon.

But this leads to an important question. Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural?

I don't understand why you would exclude upbringing and cultural conditioning when asking why so many people in a given culture do some particular thing.

Capitalizing the singular word "God" is part of that conditioning.

I've been told, in school, that monotheism is better, more sophisticated, than polytheism.

When we read about Egypt, there was a monotheistic Pharaoh, and that was presented as a good thing, as progress.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 3 by Divine Insight]

I understand your gripe about the Abrahamic portrayal of God as personified in the Bible. But in some ways, that is beside the point I am trying to make.

Let's, for the moment. consider the Deist image of God. Based on Reason and Nature, aside from all the Bible baggage.

Why, I'm wondering, does the Monotheistic idea of God prevail in the minds of Jews, Christians, Philodophers and most Deists...instead of say, a Pagan pantheon. Why does Monotheism make more sense to so many?

Personally, I am somewhat challenging my own assumptions here, because I do have reasons to prefer the Monotheistic God idea over Polytheism.

But I would like to explore the case for Monotheism further....hence the topic.

But I will say, regarding Paganism, the Wiccan idea of a Goddess and a God, one of each principle (as taught by Marion Weinstein) makes more sense to me than say a whole Norse, Roman or Greek pantheon...a god/ess for this and a god/ess for that..etc, etc.

But still, the idea of God as a duality does not make AS MUCH sense to me as does God as a singular Unity. But there does seem to be an echo of Polarity in Nature, ...male and female, Sun and earth/Moon, proton and electron...night and day, etc.

Oh, and I just want to note...Monotheism does not necessarily HAVE to be triumphalistic, culturally dominating bullying etc. Not if God is One in reality, and in that case, God is the God of ALL.

That's what many Muslims say, when they are accused by Christians of worshiping a "different God". "That is ridiculous" they say, "there is only ONE God!".

That's what I believe too, the One God, or Divine Reality, is worshiped in many different ways.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 4 by wiploc]

I think I understand now, why non-believers do that. I think some do it consiously, and some unconsiously. To diminish credibility of belief in One God and put Monotheism on the same plane as polythiesm. To put belief in One God in the same category as believing in Zeus and Hera, Posiedon, Thor, and Odin. Trying to make it seem as ridicuoulus as believing in pixies, leprachauns, and unicorns. Am I right?

Otherwise, why question panteons when hardly anyone is making polytheistic claims in the first place.

Sure, it easy to punch holes in the belief system of the of Olympian Gods. Less so, the single, God of the Philosophers.

And by way, I am inclined to agree with you, that the Trinity is a panethon, it is tritheism as far as I am concerned. But no Trinitarian will admit that,, and they hold that it is a form of Monotheism. But that is another debate.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

But this leads to an important question. Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural

I don't think there is a philosophical reason one way or the other. your excluding the biggest reason why western culture is predominately monotheistic. CULTURAL upbringing.

Furthermore if you look at world religions as a whole the percentage of monotheistic religions is actually pretty small.

[wiploc]

Oh, and I just want to note...Monotheism does not necessarily HAVE to be triumphalistic, culturally dominating bullying etc. Not if God is One in reality, and in that case, God is the God of ALL.

Right, absolutely.

You asked why some people say "gods" instead of "God," and I have a strong preference, so I sought to explain my thinking, or at least my emotional reaction.

I'm not speaking for anyone else; I don't think I've ever heard anyone give an explanation like mine.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 8 by wiploc]

Or mine, my speculation anyway. I'm sure there are different reasons and reasoning, including your own unique one.

I guess the topic is somewhat multi-faceted, but I am trying to focus on one, the Case for Monotheism vs Polytheism.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

But this leads to an important question. Why philosohically, (excluding reasons of upbringing or cultural conditioning) do SO many in the West believe in God, singular, as opposed to "gods" plural

I don't think there is a philosophical reason one way or the other. your excluding the biggest reason why western culture is predominately monotheistic. CULTURAL upbringing.

Furthermore if you look at world religions as a whole the percentage of monotheistic religions is actually pretty small.

Well, I like to think the FOUNDERS of the Monotheistic religions were beyond cultural conditioning anyway. Abraham and Moses and the Prophets anyway. Jesus too, being had his own originality in his teaching. Mohammed and the Muslims have their reasons and do explain why Monotheism is true and Polytheism is not...a reasoned explanation.

So I while that may be true among the masses, I do not think the founders of those religion were acting from cultural conditioning.

Abraham (to whatever extent he was real,) was theologically revolutionary...before him, Akenhaton, the monotheistic pharoh, went "against the grain".

-Judaism,
-Christianity
-Islam
-Bahai
-Sikhism

That's five monotheistic religions, but many millions of adherents.

They are dominant in Western culture anyway.