Polytheism not fitting into the binary positions some many atheists and monotheists hold in debates

[SorcererGaheris]

I read this post by polytheist G B Marian and found it very thought-provoking. Discussions/debates on theism vs atheism almost always centre upon atheism and monotheism, with polytheism often excluded.

GBM:

I've been seeing lots of posts about "theism versus atheism" lately, and they all seem rather disingenuous. The discussions in these posts are always framed as conflicts between monotheism and atheism, without fail. No other kind of theism seems to be included or accounted for, except for random occasional commenters like myself.

The monotheists in these discussions always claim that "morality is impossible without God." Meanwhile, the atheists conclude that "all religion is crap" because people don't actually need religion to be good. Neither side makes any leeway with the other, and that's not really the point anyway. These conversations tend to function more as "echo chambers" (and for both sides).

For polytheists like myself, who acknowledge and believe in many different Gods, neither side of this argument really seems to understand the actual purpose of "religion" (as we understand it at least). For us, religion and morality are two completely separate categories. "Religion" is what you do to build a relationship with one or more Gods, spirits, etc., while "morality" is how you treat other living people and creatures.

In polytheism, being a good person is just a social and natural duty. You don't have to worship any particular deity to be good. Atheists are not "sinners," and their disbelief is not a "moral failing." They're just people who don't engage with any Higher Powers, that's all. They are not predestined for hell; in fact, they are entitled to a happy afterlife just as much as anyone else, so long as they are good people at least.

Polytheists do not worship our Gods because They will "send us to hell" if we don't. Nor do we worship Them because we think it is "necessary" for us to be good people. We worship our Gods because we love Them and enjoy Their company; that's literally all there is to it. If you do not already love a God or enjoy Their company, then there is no reason for you to worship Them, and you are not expected to. End of story.

Yes, there are certain ways in which religion and morality can intersect for polytheists. Our Gods are more likely to listen to us when we are good people and we treat others with dignity. But this is very different from thinking you absolutely HAVE to believe in order to be considered "good" in the first place.
If your religious life is likewise centered around relationships, reciprocity, ritual, devotion, and presence with multiple Powers, then the standard “morality needs God" vs. "religion is unnecessary” dichotomy does not apply. When a monotheist says “morality requires God,” a polytheist can fairly respond: “That may be YOUR theology; but it isn’t the only way religion relates to ethics.”

At the same time, polytheistic religion—especially where devotion is elective, plural, and relational—does not fit neatly into the “religion = authoritarian moral policing” template that most atheists are typically reacting to. We are here to demonstrate that religion can (and, indeed, SHOULD) be about practice and relationship WITHOUT hinging on “believe this or be damned.”

Remember these things the next time you're invited to a group that presents itself as being some kind of "showdown" between "theists" (read: monotheists) and atheists.

No one can be omnipresent - it’s an impossibility. Where’s the evidence ?

I should point out that adherents of those individuals religions also believe in all other gods and goddesses from all other pantheons and religions as well.

Once again you're making wild, sweeping claims about what other pagan polytheists believe.

Do you have anything to back up that claim other than that you're a pagan polytheist, you're happy to accept that all other god-claims are valid in name if not in form (eg, you appear to believe that Yahweh exists but don't believe that Yahweh is the only god), and therefore you simply assume that all other pagan polytheists think the same way you do?

How did you arrive at the conclusion that Smith was deceived by a supernatural entity instead of a simpler explanation such as that he just made it all up?

I'm approaching it from a Christian perspective, rather than a secular one, but if not, then there are other explanations, sure.

Regardless of whether you're coming from a Christian or secular perspective, why decide on Smith being deceived rather than him being the deceiver? Even Christians lie sometimes.

@GasperyJacquesRoberts

My experiences in the pagan polytheist communities (both online and offline) means I consider myself quite well acquainted with what pagan polytheists generally believe.

Perhaps it is possible that a minority of pagan polytheists do not believe in literally all of the deities, but they would be an exceptionally small minority, if so.
The overwhelmingly prevailing view is that all deities exist. You routinely find pagan polytheists and occultists who engage with deities from multiple pantheons (they might focus more on one particular pantheon, but if they feel moved to, they'll engage or honour deities from different ones, too.

I can link you to a few examples of fellow polytheist pagans stating that they believe in all gods.

Do You Believe Magic Is Real? | John Beckett

The first line is: When someone asks “do you believe in God?” my standard answer is “I believe in all the Gods.”

The diversity of religions | Golden Trail

Here is a blog post written by a practitioner of Roman paganism, who states that they believe in all deities, including the Abrahamic God. I quote from the blog post here:

As a polytheist, I accept the existence of multiple divine beings. It doesn’t mean I worship all of them, but I acknowledge their existence or, at the very least, I don’t assume they don’t exist just because I don’t pray or present offerings to them. It’s called inclusive polytheism, which is in the exact opposite of the exclusivist monotheism that’s usually used to characterize religion as a whole. Although not part of my religious practices, I don’t deny the existence of Egyptian, Canaanite, Hindu, Chinese, Japanese, tribal African, or American deities. And yes, that includes the Abrahamic Yahweh.

A question from a Monotheist : r/polytheism

This is a thread from the 'polytheism' sub-reddit, in which a monotheist asks polytheists there if they believe in the Abrahamic God. If you read through, it's pretty much a universal 'yes' (the only quibbler is someone who says they believe he has "the potential" to exist), so even that is not an outright no, but admittedly it's not technically a 'yes' either.

Concerning the “Legitimacy” of Contemporary Paganism | Hellenic Faith

In this blog post (by a Hellenic Pagan), whilst the author does not explicitly state their personal belief in all gods, they do say that if someone denies other people's Gods, it weakens the case for their own. This strongly implies that the author themselves believes in the existence of all deities. The quotation is below:

At the barest, to deny the existence of other people’s Gods weakens the case of your own. If you suddenly decide to call another person’s religious experience fake, especially if from or derived from a set of long-standing religions with the historical agency of living, individual Gods, then what value are your own?

This is a video by Norse Pagan Youtuber 'Ocean Keltoi', who addresses the question "Can you worship Gods from multiple pantheons?" (to which the answer is 'yes' and if you watch the full video, you'll see how he explains the history of this happening in polytheism.

The very fact that this is such a commonly asked question ("can you worship gods from multiple pantheons") is strong enough evidence to show that belief in gods and goddesses outside of one's own favoured pantheon is a prevalent (and I would say the vastly predominant) worldview in pagan polytheism. Ocean Keltoi doesn't mention the Abrahamic God here, because the majority of pagan polytheists have no desire to worship the Abrahamic God, but he does not exclude the Abrahamic God from existence.

you're happy to accept that all other god-claims are valid in name if not in form (eg, you appear to believe that Yahweh exists but don't believe that Yahweh is the only god)

I do believe that Yahweh exists. But believing in deities doesn't equate to believing in every single claim about those deities. Yahweh supposedly being the sole god isn't a property of his existence, it's a statement made about him, and one, as a polytheist, that I don't accept. I think he exists, but as just one of many.

It may be worth pointing out that the quotation regarding this in the Bible is that Yahweh tells the Jews, "You shall have no other Gods before me", which surely is an acknowledgement that other gods exist?

It is also said that the Yahweh initially was honoured by the Canaanites as a one God of many (from the Canaanite pantheon) - I quote from the Wikipedia article here:

Yahweh - Wikipedia

The early Israelites likely engaged in polytheistic practices that were common across ancient Semitic religion,[14] because the Israelite religion was a derivative of the Canaanite religion and included a variety of deities from it, including El, Asherah, and Baal.[15] Yahweh likely became conflated with El in later centuries, taking his place as the head of the pantheon in the Israelite religion. El's consort Asherah became associated with Yahweh, and El-linked epithets, such as ʾĒl Šadday (אֵל שַׁדַּי), came to be applied to him alone.

So that surely further undermines the claim that Yahweh is the only deity?

This kind of chaos is the result of 'freedom to choose'
. I really don't see how someone can believe in their own god/s as well as all the other gods anyone could possibly believe in. it sounds to me like madness. So much self-indulgence. I don't mean to offend, but, to me, religion is in many ways about self-control, and here there seems to be absolutely no control whatsoever. It leaves me with the feeling these are not religions at all, but different ways to indulge oneself.

@SorcererGaheris , if you're meaning to suggest @RedTagAlan is an atheist, you're very much mistaken, from what I've learned about him. 😁

@SorcererGaheris so you're saying that all claimed gods are accepted in pagan polytheism. How do you feel about the vengeful space alien YHVH-1 from the Church of the Subgenius? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster from Pastafarianism? Are they equally as plausible as, say, Zeus, Horus or Itzamná or do you engage in a degree of discernment?

I am well aware that certain readings of the Bible suggest that Yahweh is not the only god but I don't feel it's my place to tell Christians, who believe the god of the Bible to be the only god, what they believe. Maybe you feel differently. If a Christian tells me that their belief is that there is only one god then while I don't have to necessarily agree with them, I feel I should take that statement at face value.

That being said, if you say that you believe that Yahweh does exist but is significantly different from what billions of its believers say it is - that it's the only god, that it created the universe, is love, is the source of morality etc - then surely you're talking about a very different entity than that which Christians talk about? As such, are you really talking about the same thing at all?

Great point @GasperyJacquesRoberts . This is the kind of thing I was trying to to get at in my pp, but without the eloquence
I do so enjoy a bit of intellectual cut and thrust!🤣
No , seriously, I do; one doesn’t come across it every day.

Every religious person creates their own religion. They put particular emphasis on the teachings that they agree with and find ways to disregard those that they don't. That's why you see Christians who are divorced, Muslims who are billionaires, and Hindus who drink alcohol.

Hindus believe that the individual consciousness is the crucible in which direct experience of God may be attained, thus allaying any atheistic doubts as to His/Her existence. Their belief system encompasses all religions and all shades of agnostic and atheistic positions. It allows a high degree of personal choice as to which deity or deities to worship. It is believed that eventually everyone, even the most laggard soul, attains self-realisation although it may take aeons to achieve the goal. Hinduism is the closest religion to paganism as it incorporates worship of earth, air, fire, water and spirit. It celebrates the Divine energy which cyclically creates sustains and dissolves the whole universe.

@GasperyJacquesRoberts

I addressed a question about The Flying Spaghetti Monster earlier in the thread; and my response to that also applies to YHVH-1 from the Church of the Subgenius. If you go back through the thread, you will find the post where I spoke on that matter.

I am well aware that certain readings of the Bible suggest that Yahweh is not the only god but I don't feel it's my place to tell Christians, who believe the god of the Bible to be the only god, what they believe. Maybe you feel differently.

I don't tell Christians what they believe/what to believe. Christians believe that Yahweh is the only deity; that is their right. I am simply saying that I don't share the belief that he is the only one. I am not telling Christians (or other monotheists) that they must change their minds and agree with me. The point about Yahweh probably emerging from the Canaanite pantheon was made to you specifically, on the assumption (from what you have said before) that you are a non-Christian.

That being said, if you say that you believe that Yahweh does exist but is significantly different from what billions of its believers say it is - that it's the only god, that it created the universe, is love, is the source of morality etc - then surely you're talking about a very different entity than that which Christians talk about? As such, are you really talking about the same thing at all?

Yes, I do believe I'm talking about the same entity. There is no reason for me to believe monotheists are correct when they say their god is the only one; like I said, it is fine for them to believe so, but I don't have to. As a non-Christian, I do not need to agree with their description of Yahweh. If that it how they view him, then fine - but I don't need to share their views of that god.

Is this a bad thing?

@SixtySomething

Well everything @RedTagAlan has said in this thread so far strongly implies that they are an atheist. What have you learned about them?

I'm not passing a value judgement, merely an observation. Everyone's religion is their own.

I had missed your earlier point regarding tulpas. Essentially then if someone might believe in a given god-claim then that's potentially another god that you would believe in. Must be difficult to keep track of them all. Not least because what constitutes a god is pretty vague. Some descriptions of elves have quite a lot of cross-over with some descriptions of minor gods.

Regarding your/Christians view of Yahweh, I think this comes down to a fundamental philosophical point. If person A says that a bandersnatch has fourteen legs, is blue with yellow spots and can fly, whereas person B says that a bandersnatch has four legs, is green, and cannot fly, are both people talking about the same thing? Or are they talking about completely different things but just muddling up the name?

@GasperyJacquesRoberts

I don't need to keep track of them all.

Or are they talking about completely different things but just muddling up the name?

I couldn't say. Even if the Christians were talking about a different deity, that would just be another deity to add to the list, as far as I'm concerned. It wouldn't make monotheism indisputably correct.

The idea that the Abrahamic God is the sole god is a belief and/or claim of his followers, and there is no reason for me to believe they are correct about that. Just as much, if not more, anecdotal evidence exists for the other deities, as there does for Yahweh. Just as some Christians report experiences with their God, polytheists are reporting experiences with other gods. Polytheism, in my opinion, is the better explanation for this diversity of experience, and the most inclusive one. Monotheism, in contrast, either states that everyone except the monotheists are deluded about their experiences, or states that what others are experiencing are not gods but some kind of evil non-divine spirits.

I am atheist.

In fact, I am maybe the worst sort of atheist ( for theists), I am an ex Christian atheist. So I know the Bible.

I am like an ex-smoker in a smoky room :-)

Yup. Best comment I have seen about this is a post on an Irish political forum, where a poster said, I paraphrase, " If there are a billion Catholics in the world, then there are a billion Catholic Popes".

I was a Christian for 20 plus years. I was a born again rapturist. But what I believed was not the same as say a US Southern Baptist. Because my thing was to read the Bible, and try to work it out for myself. Not to be told what it says.

And boy oh boy, when I look back and think about the mental gymnastics I had to do to make sense of that book.

@SorcererGaheris

You have not addressed the violent polytheists mentioned above. Want to have a go ?

Is your reply going to be similar to what monotheists say ? That they are not real believers ?

Because if so, that would back up my assertion that it is really for the theists to sort out among themselves. Then go to the atheists and say " Right, this is what we believe, lets debate".

See I don't think you were ever taught about the Christian faith properly (and that's not uncommon). I do think all new Christians need to be taught the theology behind their denomination so it gives them a solid understanding. When I first became a Christian decades ago I learned precious little about it. It's only now at an advanced age that I'm being taught how to properly study the Bible verse by verse via expositional preaching, and alongside that being taught the foundation of systematic theology. It's made and is continuing to make a huge difference to my understanding. I'm very grateful to my pastor, I could have just continued along as I was and not really grown as a Christian nor understood much of the faith, potentially drifting away or falling for false teaching.

I'll say it again because I've said it in other threads, you cannot study the Bible purely on your own and hope to understand it properly. You need guidance from someone who has a solid Christian background and you also need regular group Bible studies so you can ask all those tricky questions!

There you go, The not a real Christian thing.

Tell me, does everyone in your Bible group agree on points, and does your group agree with another group down the street ?

There are over 50k Christian denominations in the world today. By your logic they are all wrong, and only your denomination/group is the "correct" one.

For example. The CofE has a woman Archbishop of Canterbury. Is that something your group agrees with ? If your group does agree with it, how does it deal with 1 Tim 2:12 "I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet." (NIV)

How on earth did you get the impression that I think all groups are wrong apart from mine, from saying that you need a firm foundation in theology - note I said all new Christians need to be taught the theology behind their denomination so it gives them a solid understanding "...their denomination..." ! Nowhere in my post did I say all other denominations are wrong apart from mine - so no thanks for that strawman! All that so you don't have to answer your own highly problematic way of 'studying' scripture!

Ok. So just as a matter of interest, where does your group stand on women Bishops ?

You did post upthread that you think Mormons are a fake religion. Or was it Satan led sorry. So I assumed you do not consider them real Christians.