Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Hi,
Genesis - in Hinduism says: “God created the Universe from His own substance”! There is one just one God in Hinduism. Anything else is just about how He can manifest. In Christianity, we are talking about Trinity, Father, Son and Holly spirit which doesn’t mean Christianity is a polytheistic religion, isn’t it?
Genesis - in Hinduism says: “God created the Universe from His own substance”! There is one just one God in Hinduism. Anything else is just about how He can manifest.
That’s the way I understand it too.
chrisssteeven - 15 February 2010 01:42 AM
In Christianity, we are talking about Trinity, Father, Son and Holly spirit which doesn’t mean Christianity is a polytheistic religion, isn’t it?
In Christianity, we are talking about Trinity, Father, Son and Holly spirit which doesn’t mean Christianity is a polytheistic religion, isn’t it?
And then there’s the lesser god, Satan too.
Polytheism though?
Arguably so. It’s a matter of debate.
It’s not just Satan and God’s removable parts we’re talking about either, you also have Archangels, angels, demons, Saints, infallible Popes, and the virgin Mary. In my opinion Christianity is certainly a polytheistic religion. Perhaps “monolatry” is a better term for Christianity, or perhaps “henotheistic”, but I don’t think it’s fair to the word “monotheism” to call Christianity monotheistic.
Depends on whether we consider anything of supernatural agency to be labeled as a God or Gods. Angels, Saints, souls etc.,
Some can argue that only God, is the creator, of life, the universe etc., and his other supernatural subordinates are not actualy his equal, therefore not Gods, but…
It just shows how ridiculous and superstitious this whole business actually is.
It also shows that although the debate is usually centered around believeing in GOD, it is also a debate about exactly what a GOD is.
Makes it hard for me to believe in something, especially without evidence, when it cannot even be defined.
Depends on whether we consider anything of supernatural agency to be labeled as a God or Gods. Angels, Saints, souls etc.,
Some can argue that only God, is the creator, of life, the universe etc., and his other supernatural subordinates are not actualy his equal, therefore not Gods, but…
I don’t think I can agree with that. In the religions that Christians eagerly deem polytheistic there are plenty of beings who did not create anything, were not equal to other pagan gods in power and standing, and were certainly not as powerful as the Christian god, but are nonetheless considered gods. Even if people don’t believe in them, figures like Apollo and Peneus are still considered “gods” based on their qualities.
For that reason I say that if pagan gods (especially the relatively weak ones) are still considered gods, then Satan and angels must also be considered gods.
eudemonia - 15 February 2010 06:31 AM
It just shows how ridiculous and superstitious this whole business actually is.
Agreed.
eudemonia - 15 February 2010 06:31 AM
It also shows that although the debate is usually centered around believeing in GOD, it is also a debate about exactly what a GOD is.
Makes it hard for me to believe in something, especially without evidence, when it cannot even be defined.
I would like a solid definition of “god”. I think it would help the debate immensely… help us of course.
Collins-here is the first definition of the word God-
1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe
CREATOR and ruler of the universe.
As I stated above, some could argue for this being a pre-requisite. There then could be other Gods, but they would be subordinate to the creator of the universe God.
“Capitalized” is key here. When you capitalize the word “God” (in a context where you would not normally capitalize a noun) you change it from a noun to a title for a monotheistic god, just like when you capitalize words like “He”, “Lord”, “His”, “Father”, etc.
If theists want to use that definition then that’s fine by me. That means some pagan religions would then be considered monotheistic, since they usually have one top god who created the world, and other minor gods who do various other things, like maintain rivers and oceans or supply humans with love or victory in war. The lesser gods would cease to be gods by that definition, and then become… angels and demons I guess?
Main Entry: 1god
Pronunciation: \ˈgäd also ˈgȯd\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German got god
Date: before 12th century
1 capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind 2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship; specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
3 : a person or thing of supreme value
4 : a powerful ruler
I think two is the most pertinent. That deals with “god” the word, the noun, not the title.
I think a god has to be at the top of the food chain, subordinate to maybe one supreme god but no further down a hierarchy, to be considered a god ... but that’s just the way I understand it. In any case it doesn’t seem reasonable to me to insist that any and all alleged “supernatural” beings be considered gods.
Well, like the definition says, gods require human worship, I think that narrows it down enough. No one would worship unicorns, leprechauns, fairies etc., but people did worship many of the lesser pagan gods, many people worship and pray to angels, saints, and the virgin Mary, and people have and do worship Satan.
But getting back to the OP here, concerning polytheism and Hindusim, it is being posited that because Hinduism talks about a God as Creator of the universe it is not a polytheistic religion.
I would say that all Monotheisms then gauge their God to be THE creator.
I understand this point but am inclined personally to think that any supernatural Gods that are worshipped, acknowledged, idientified, etc., makes that partilcuar religion a polytheistic religion.
Christianity and Islam? Crap shoot. God manifested as a trinity, or three different gods. Take your pick.
Hi,
Genesis - in Hinduism says: “God created the Universe from His own substance”! There is one just one God in Hinduism. Anything else is just about how He can manifest. In Christianity, we are talking about Trinity, Father, Son and Holly spirit which doesn’t mean Christianity is a polytheistic religion, isn’t it?
I suppose Hinduism can seem polytheistic because of the amount of deities involved.
I suppose Hinduism can seem polytheistic because of the amount of deities involved.
Technically, Hinduism is neither Polytheistic or Monotheistic. If anything, it is Monotheistic more than anything; here’s the reason why: Brahma is the essence of everything, and as such, he can transform into many deities to suit his follower’s needs. In a sense, it is this that makes Hinduism such a personal religion, for it is not set in stone such as Islam and Christianity. Technically, any individual may become a “god” in Hinduism, but that “god” is really Brahma transformed. That make sense?
So many people, so many religions, so many gods ... God help us!
