 |
|
|
Because monotheism requires a perfect God it is too limiting A basic assumption of monotheism, one that is felt so strongly that monotheists rarely find it necessary to speak aloud, is that this God is a perfect God. By perfect most monotheists believe that God is without beginning or end, without form, without equal, lacking in nothing, all-powerful, supremely good, untouched by passion or change. Most monotheists assume that God created the world or Cosmos and that he remains supremely aloof from his creation. Since that which is named is no longer God, as Aristides said, this God must remain essentially Unknowable. And, with room for sectarian squabbling, this is the accepted belief of a large portion of the world's population. So, why then, is this belief unacceptable to myself and a growing number of dissatisfied polytheists? Because such a God is too narrow, too perfect to inspire anything like devotion in our hearts. Monotheism strives always to push God further back, further away from his creation, to make the gulf that separates us insurmountable. Dionysius the PseudoAreopagite said that nothing could be said of God, save for in negative terms. But we polytheists do not accept this. Rather, we strive to know God through positive terms, by saying, God may be more than X, but X suggests something of his nature. Therefore, instead of seeing a world devoid of God, we see a world full of God (or at least those of us who are also pantheists do). As polytheists we strive to know God as he is, not as we would wish him to be. Therefore, in order to gain that understanding of God, we do not require that he reveal himself to us perfectly. And if God is no longer constrained to appear as one, he reveals himself in multiplicity. Monotheism does not sufficiently answer the tough questions If one God is proposed, a number of different and troubling questions arise: Is God really omnipotent, omnipresent, and all-wise? Does God have limitations? Is God wholly good, without any evil? Is this a limitation? Is God really the creator? How does God relate to his creation? If God is the creator, is he not then responsible for evil and suffering? If one proposes another power responsible for evil - the devil say - have we not then set up another God in opposition to God? Was not God ultimately responsible for this being's creation too? How fair of a fight can it really be, if God is all-powerful etc. If God knew from the beginning what was going to happen, can one really say that there is free will in the universe? If free will is lacking, can God really be said to be good? By proposing a single, moral, force in the universe, all these questions arise, and while I will not suggest that there is no satisfactory answer while assuming monotheism to be the truth, I have not yet found it. But when one proposes either a God unconcerned with morality (a distinct but unfulfilling possibility) or a number of different and differently powerful Gods, these questions do not remain quite so troubling. Therefore, these questions arise from stipulations that we place upon God, and not from the nature of God himself. Polytheism better reveals the nature of God Polytheism literally means belief in multiple Gods. For polytheists, this multiplicity is not seen as merely an act. Rather, each God or Goddess is viewed as a unique and distinct individual unto itself. Each one is really and truly God - not just a mask behind which God peaks out at us. It is important to approach each God as a distinct individual, if one would gain an understanding of that God's nature. To insist that Zeus is the same as Allah is to misunderstand the nature of both Gods - even though it may be true on some level that they are both one. We ponder the Gods in isolation and in communion with each other, and in these ways we gain an understanding of the divine nature. For instance, in Hellenic Polytheism, the Dodecatheon or Twelve Gods are considered the governing body of the Cosmos. But why Twelve? As way of an answer, I shall quote from Sallustius' seminal work 'On the Gods and the Cosmos' which reads, "of the cosmic Gods some make the world be, others animate it, others harmonize it - consisting, as it does of different elements - and the fourth class keep it when harmonized. These are four actions, each of which has a beginning, middle, and end, consequently there must be Twelve Gods governing the world. Those who make the world are Zeus, Poseidon, and Hephaistos; those who animate it are Demeter, Hera, and Artemis; those who harmonize it are Apollo, Aphrodite, and Hermes; those who watch over it are Hestia, Athena, and Ares. One can see secret suggestions of this in their images. Apollo tunes a lyre; Athena is armed; Aphrodite is naked (because harmony creates beauty, and beauty in things is not covered)." Hence, the Gods have orders, powers, and spheres of influence, and by contemplating them in isolation and in communion with each other, we come to a better understanding of the divine. Polytheism allows for a personal God in a way that monotheism just doesn't If one accepts a supremely transcendent God, a God who governs and sustains the vast Cosmos, it is either arrogant or insane to believe that that God could take notice of you, let alone speak directly with you. But, when one accepts a multiplicity of Gods, it is fully possible that some of them could take notice of you, and that it is even within their sphere or power to intervene in your life. It is comforting to believe that God takes note of us, and works in our lives. It is very difficult to accept a blind and impotent God. Therefore I believe in multiple Gods who are not so constrained. Polytheism is more tolerant Monotheism is not just the expressed belief in a single deity - rather, it is the belief that there are no other Gods besides the deity in which one has expressed belief. This runs through every word and deed of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - however else these great traditions differ from each other. "I am the Lord thy God, and thou shalt have no Gods before me," Moses has YHWH proclaim in the Pentateuch. Christians turned the Gods of other people into devils, and then proceeded to stamp their worship out. Islam took up the battle-cry, and even waged war upon those who had "added three to the one". Such a concept was unthinkable to the Greeks, Romans, and all those who made up the Hellenic tradition, for a number of different reasons. For one, as Plato said, "Jealousy stands outside the divine Chorus". Although the Gods required proper tendance, they nowhere said that a man could worship no other Gods. Indeed, it was considered bad form not to offer sacrifice to all the Gods, even those Gods whom we may not know. Further, who can say that this God over here is not either our God known under a different name, or a God who has befriended our God? By snubbing this God, might we not also offend our Gods? This idea was carried over into everyday life, so that respect for different rites as well as different Gods was considered the norm, provided that those rites were not considered contrary to the welfare of the State. (I.e., the Jews and Christians were unpatriotic, hence, they occasionally incurred the wrath of the State.) Thus, such things as witch-hunts, heresy trials, holy wars, or genocidal purges, were rare or unheard of in the setting of Hellenic Polytheism. All of these factors contribute to my belief in
Polytheism. But it would be a vain belief, were not for
personal experience. Take all of these factors away,
disprove all my points, and I would still believe in the
Gods, because I have personally experienced them, and I know
for a fact that they are unique and distinct individuals.
Their worship makes my life better and fuller, and I will
follow them all the days of my life. |
