Why is a monotheistic religion considered more “advanced” than polytheistic ones?
You could ask the reverse to those in “polytheistic” religions.
I have difficulty with Christianity being Mono based on the trinity controversey.
I believe its considered such by the monos so its kind of natural they would feel more advanced. Im sure the poly side feels they are more advanced as well.
Another angle is that there has been an evolution toward mono over the centuries simply through the number of believers they have acquired. Numbers = prevailing attitude
My aunt was a staunch catholic, but almost all of her daily prayers were directed to saints, or the virgin mary.
I had lunch with an ex-hindu priest, and asked him about all of the different gods. He said that they were kind of incidental to Vishnu, who is the one god of love (I’m sure I’m misquoting him, but I think that’s what he said).
It seemed that the Hinsdu was more monotheistic than my aunt.
Some translations of the psalms in the old testatment describe man as ranking “just a little bit lower than god, and above the angels”, so maybe we are sort of gods. I know thats what my dogs think.
My grandma sounds a lot like your aunt. That’s what I always found funny about Catholocism, there seems to be a saint for everything. I still remember her telling me that when I lost something to pray to St. Anthony “Tony, Tony, come around, something’s lost and can’t be found.”. I’m pretty sure that if there really was a patron saint of lost things, he’d be insulted if I called him Tony.
Christianity itself is monotheistic, but I’d label Catholocism as pseudo-poly. They really don’t look at the saints as gods, but moreso as middlemen who intercede on your behalf. In my mind, if God is omnipotent, I shouldn’t need to use a go between to talk to him.
I look at it as a “truth trajectory.” In the early days of man, they deified every single thing they couldn’t understand. As humanity began to acquire the tools necessary to carry knowledge from one generation to the next and apply rational thought against it, the mysteries of nature shrank and along with it the number of gods necessarily declined. I’m quite happy to live in an age where mankind can simply acknowledge there are some things we don’t know, and rather than build a god around it (the cop-out solution) we catalog it as something to study and learn more about. Hence the need for zero gods.
Why is a monotheistic religion considered more “advanced” than polytheistic ones?
Which religions and who considers it more advanced?
The true polytheistic religions were more like the pagan religions that really did believe in multiple separate Gods. Hinduism is a lot more like Christianity with the concept of separate Gods that are also the same.
My aunt was a staunch catholic, but almost all of her daily prayers were directed to saints, or the virgin mary.
I had lunch with an ex-hindu priest, and asked him about all of the different gods. He said that they were kind of incidental to Vishnu, who is the one god of love (I’m sure I’m misquoting him, but I think that’s what he said).
It seemed that the Hinsdu was more monotheistic than my aunt.
Some translations of the psalms in the old testatment describe man as ranking “just a little bit lower than god, and above the angels”, so maybe we are sort of gods. I know thats what my dogs think.
We all started out mono. We had to get stupid to turn poly. Think about it, there can be only one omni-xx Being. The Trinity does not mean God is not one God, which is a hard concept to absorb.
It’s not that hard to absorb. You just have to repress your rational mind.
It’s not that hard to absorb. You just have to repress your rational mind.
Or, be open to possibilities.
Contradictions don’t exist in reality.
My aunt was a staunch catholic, but almost all of her daily prayers were directed to saints, or the virgin mary.
This is a misconception by many non-Catholics and maybe some Catholics.
When we “pray” to the Virgin Mary/Saints, we are actually ask the Virgin Mary/Saints to pray for us. The Saints and the Virgin Mary do not forgive sin, answer prayers etc… But as mentioned in the bible it is good to go to other believers (saints with small s) to pray for you. So much the better to ask for the help of the cannonized Saints with the capital S.
ETA for clarity.
Contradictions don’t exist in reality.
Paradoxes don’t exist?
Contradictions don’t exist in reality.
Paradoxes don’t exist?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox
Similar to circular reasoning, a paradox is a logical statement or group of statements that lead to a contradiction or a situation which (if true) defies logic or reason. Typically, however, quoted paradoxical statements do not imply a real contradiction and the puzzling results can be rectified by demonstrating that one or more of the premises themselves are not really true, a play on words, faulty and/or cannot all be true together.
Contradictions don’t exist in reality.
Are you absolutely sure of that?** **
.
Contradictions don’t exist in reality.
Are you absolutely sure of that?** **
They exist in language. Not reality.
They really don’t look at the saints as gods, but moreso as middlemen who intercede on your behalf. In my mind, if God is omnipotent, I shouldn’t need to use a go between to talk to him.
Your mind is mostly correct. You might notice that when most Christians pray, then often end their prayers by saying “… in Jesus’ name. Amen.” We should pray to the Father. By the power of the Spirit our prayers are “lifted” and interpreted by the Spirit, on behalf of the Son. See passages below.
Yet, it’s not a “if God was imnipotent, I shouldn’t need to use” issue. It’s about a if all man is sinful, then one man talking to other sinful people to do something for you is not helpful. King Saul tried to do this by appealing to Samuel. God rejected Saul’s action.
Romans 8:26-27; 33b-34
26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, becauseg] the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.
Why is a monotheistic religion considered more “advanced” than polytheistic ones?
I’m not sure what your “advanced” means because it’s in quotes; so, it could probably mean a large range of things that you personally assign to it … thus, the quotes.
Still, I would not identify it as being an issue of advanced as much as it’s an issue of right or true. I have my thoughts on which is true, but that’s not really relevant to your immediate question.
Let’s presuppose that Christianity is true. If so, then it must have been true from the beginning. It could not have been as a result of merely “advanced” thinking. Even if man did not know about Christianity from the beginning (for whatever reason, e.g., God did not reveal Himself to man), then it’s still not an issue of advanced (in what I would call advanced).
We all started out mono.
Based on what? Almost every ancient culture in the world was polytheistic. For the most part people didn’t believe that one being, omni powerful or not, did all this stuff. I mean really how could the “God of love and babies” also be the god of death, destruction and cancer? Doesn’t make any sense, so people had various gods to fit various roles to match the reality of every day life.
Think about it, there can be only one omni-xx Being.
Why? Yes I’m thinking about. Why couldn’t there be a whole plethora of gods with omnipotent power? On many levels this makes FAR more sense, to a rational mind, than does a single god. Again, why would a god that loves us all decide to kill a bunch of us. Makes no sense. Why would a god that created us also decide to destroy us on whim, again, makes no sense.
OTOH a god that loves us, created us, but is also preoccupied with battling another equally powerful being that is doing all the “Bad stuff” makes much more sense. Sometimes the good guy wins and Tebow moves further into the playoffs. Then the bad guy wins and Tebow get’s crushed.
But you say an omnipotently powerful god could never lose…then explain the idea of god being able to make a rock so big he can’t pick it up. Either he CAN make a rock so big he can’t pick up, which means he can’t pick it up and he can’t do everything…or he can’t make a rock that big which means he can’t do everything.
So regardless of gods omnipotent power, that power does not rationally translate to the human mind and existence so god may be able to do anything but it still appears as a failure to us. Thus winning and losing of omnipotent gods one over the other.
~Matt