Monotheism vs Polytheism

Which do you prefer


  • Total voters
    23
Ah, familiarly breeds contempt. (and ease of murder)
 
Civilized societies and the successful Civilizations that prevailed were almost entirely the monotheistic ones. From the Persians with Zoroastrianism to the Romans and Byzantines after they became Christian, they set the precedence for everything else. The Muslims conquered pagan (polytheistic) lands and having one God to unite them surely helped. The power of the belief in one God helped the Spanish conquer the Aztecs and the rest of Western Europe conquer the majority of the rest of the pagan world. Now that these countries are mostly monotheistic, we have seen their standards of living and economies rise greatly and continues to do so. The power of only one God can unite an entire country or empire!
 
Civilized societies and the successful Civilizations that prevailed were almost entirely the monotheistic ones. From the Persians with Zoroastrianism to the Romans and Byzantines after they became Christian, they set the precedence for everything else. The Muslims conquered pagan (polytheistic) lands and having one God to unite them surely helped. The power of the belief in one God helped the Spanish conquer the Aztecs and the rest of Western Europe conquer the majority of the rest of the pagan world. Now that these countries are mostly monotheistic, we have seen their standards of living and economies rise greatly and continues to do so. The power of only one God can unite an entire country or empire!

What's India now, chopped liver?
 
I think some of the serious polytheistic religions had a line of thought , where all the gods are a different aspects of same god or of nature. I think pantheism could coexist with polytheism.
Yes, but the way it would work would be that within Pantheism, both polytheism and monotheism are possible. And if we give sway to Mr. Occham, then Pantheism is most likely to be true and the others are just incomplete versions of the truth.

Civilized societies and the successful Civilizations that prevailed were almost entirely the monotheistic ones. From the Persians with Zoroastrianism to the Romans and Byzantines after they became Christian, they set the precedence for everything else. The Muslims conquered pagan (polytheistic) lands and having one God to unite them surely helped. The power of the belief in one God helped the Spanish conquer the Aztecs and the rest of Western Europe conquer the majority of the rest of the pagan world. Now that these countries are mostly monotheistic, we have seen their standards of living and economies rise greatly and continues to do so. The power of only one God can unite an entire country or empire!
Ah no. Disease and rebellious subjects defeated the Aztecs. Disease and gunpowder defeated the rest.
 
I didn't realize God was smallpox.

Not to mention the Roman Empire was in its decline when it adopted Christianity.

gg.
 
What's India now, chopped liver?
Yes, they are. When did India manage to invade anyone else? How many internal conflicts/civil wars were there in India? How was the economy and production of India from before the Christian led Brits came to when they left?

Not to mention the Roman Empire was in its decline when it adopted Christianity.

gg.

Counter-argument: It would have ended even sooner if it wasn't for Jesus to save them. Christianity preserved their empire much longer than it would have been without it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty sure Jesus told them to go for the kingdom of heaven, and not on Earth. Losing the ancient military civic virtues meant the only thing really keeping them alive was gold to pay barbarians, and not fighting spirit.

But I thought we were talking about prevailing and Rome at its height was never Christian.
 
I didn't realize God was smallpox.
Well, I think some folks do see belief as a disease just as deadly as small pox. But in any case, smallpox was the major force that defeated the Aztecs, not god. Unless, of course, you are saying that god sent smallpox to ravage North America because he is so loving. Furthermore, the prime motivation for Cortes and his soldiers was the accumulation of gold and power. And they would have lost if they hadn't had tens of thousands of Indian allies. Like most wars of conquest, his was a war based on greed and power.
 
Pretty sure Jesus told them to go for the kingdom of heaven, and not on Earth. Losing the ancient military civic virtues meant the only thing really keeping them alive was gold to pay barbarians, and not fighting spirit.

But I thought we were talking about prevailing and Rome at its height was never Christian.

How can you explain how the Christians kicked so much ass during the Crusades? How united would they have been if each kingdom in Europe had their own set of polytheistic Gods? The key to success in an empire is efficiency. Surely only one God would simply things?
 
Pantheism is atheism for people who really like poetry.
OK. :D

Gibran said:
And an old priest said, Speak to us of Religion.
And he said:

Have I spoken this day of aught else?
Is not religion all deeds and all reflection,
And that which is neither deed nor reflection, but a wonder and a surprise ever springing in the soul, even while the hands hew the stone or tend the loom?
Who can separate his faith from his actions, or his belief from his occupations?
Who can spread his hours before him, saying, "This for God and this for myself; This for my soul, and this other for my body?"
All your hours are wings that beat through space from self to self.
He who wears his morality but as his best garment were better naked.
The wind and the sun will tear no holes in his skin.
And he who defines his conduct by ethics imprisons his song-bird in a cage.
The freest song comes not through bars and wires.
And he to whom worshipping is a window, to open but also to shut, has not yet visited the house of his soul whose windows are from dawn to dawn.

Your daily life is your temple and your religion.
Whenever you enter into it take with you your all.
Take the plough and the forge and the mallet and the lute,
The things you have fashioned in necessity or for delight.
For in reverie you cannot rise above your achievements nor fall lower than your failures.

And take with you all men:

For in adoration you cannot fly higher than their hopes nor humble yourself lower than their despair.
And if you would know God be not therefore a solver of riddles.
Rather look about you and you shall see Him playing with your children.
And look into space; you shall see Him walking in the cloud, outstretching His arms in the lightning and descending in rain.
You shall see Him smiling in flowers, then rising and waving His hands in trees.

Hafiz said:
I follow Barefoot

I long for
You so much
I follow barefoot
Your frozen tracks

That are high in the mountains

That I know are years old.
I long for You so much
I have even begun to travel
Where I have never been before.

Hafiz, there is no one in this world
Who is not looking for God.

Everyone is trudging along
With as much dignity, courage
And style
As they possibly
Can.

EDIT: the spoiler tags seemed to curtail much of the quoted text in my view of the post.
 
Last edited:
They conquested much of the middle east and by the end, they freed Spain from Muslim occupation. In fairness, the Islamic world was also monotheistic, and any polytheistic opponent would not have put up that kind of resistance.
 
They conquested much of the middle east and by the end, they freed Spain from Muslim occupation. In fairness, the Islamic world was also monotheistic, and any polytheistic opponent would not have put up that kind of resistance.
No. The Crusades conquered very little of the Middle East and then they lost it all. The Christian god failed to deliver. Yes, the Christians did take back much of the Moorish lands in Spain. You really don't understand actual history do you?
 
Did I say their gains were permanent? Few things truly are. But they won lots of battles.
 
How can you explain how the Christians kicked so much ass during the Crusades? How united would they have been if each kingdom in Europe had their own set of polytheistic Gods? The key to success in an empire is efficiency. Surely only one God would simply things?

??? We were talking about Rome.

If we're going about what was left of the Byzantines during the Crusaders, they were pretty rekt by that time.

Also, I'm not really sure why you'd bring up the Crusaders lol, since it was one monotheistic religion against the other. I would assume those God bonuses would cancel out. Not to mention the end result was the Muslims winning and what was left of Rome being renamed to Istanbul.

Well I guess the Fourth Crusade was Christians kicking ass. Other Christian ones though.
 
Did I say their gains were permanent? Few things truly are. But they won lots of battles.
Oh. The Atheistic commies won lots of battles in WW2. The Mongols conquered most of Asia. Prior to 300 AD, the Romans won lots of battles too. They even conquered the Jews. Your point makes no sense at all.
 
How can you explain how the Christians kicked so much ass during the Crusades? How united would they have been if each kingdom in Europe had their own set of polytheistic Gods? The key to success in an empire is efficiency. Surely only one God would simply things?
The Romans seemed to do fairly well for most of their history. Remember, by the time Jesus came along Rome already had over 750 years' worth of history under its belt. Then it was another 350 years before Christianity became the official religion of Rome. So that's over 1000 years of polytheism.

After Christianity became the official state religion, the Western Empire fell within a century.*


*And no, I'm not saying that was the cause of the downfall of the Empire, okay? There were many contributing issues that led to the end of the Western Empire.
 
Back
Top Bottom