Polytheism or Monotheism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KrazyKaiju
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

KrazyKaiju

Guest
I don’t intend to offend anyone here by asking, but are there any formal arguments that try to rule out the possibility of polytheism?

I’ve been reading up on alot of arguments for the existence of God, and it doesn’t seem like any of them rule out the possibility of polytheism.

(I’ve also read the Argument from Degrees of Perfection, and it doesn’t seem to work)
 
There are several arguments and I’ll just give a few off the top of my head without researching …

There is the problem of the first cause – this cannot be shared among multiple entities. Multiple gods would be contingent - sharing being. Existence must come from a supreme being – it cannot be shared or divided. If a god had only partial powers, then it would be contingent on another force and therefore cannot be the cause of its own existence.
 
This may be off-topic but henotheism is another possibility… i.e. “there are many gods like Him but this One is mine…” as is monolatry “my God is better than your God.”

I guess for the purpose of this discussion they are forms of polytheism.
 
reggieM said:
There are several arguments and I’ll just give a few off the top of my head without researching …

There is the problem of the first cause – this cannot be shared among multiple entities. Multiple gods would be contingent - sharing being. Existence must come from a supreme being – it cannot be shared or divided. If a god had only partial powers, then it would be contingent on another force and therefore cannot be the cause of its own existence.
Click to expand...
Here’s a rather abstract question – why can one God be uncaused but two gods must be contingent? I think I have a hunch for an answer but it strikes me as very Eleatic.
 
I believe it was Socrates who proved there could only be one God, that’s why he was executed. The logic is a series of “if, then” statements and is as follows:
  1. If God is God then God is perfect and infinite. This is the definition of God.
  2. If there are two of anything (gods or something else) they are inherently different.
  3. If they are different, there is a standard and therefore one is better than the other
  4. If one is better than the other, the lesser one is then finite and imperfect
  5. If the lesser one is finite and imperfect, then it is not God.
  6. If the lesser is not a God, then there can only be one God.
This does not rule out the existence of beings that are higher than humans and lower than God (angels and demons). They most certainly have powers far beyond what we do (part of me believes that ancient polytheism was actually worshipping real angels and demons and just got them mixed up), but they are not gods in and of themselves.

By the way, the arguement from the first cause was a good one. I hadn’t thought of that. Thanks 👍
 
DavidHume said:
Here’s a rather abstract question – why can one God be uncaused but two gods must be contingent? I think I have a hunch for an answer but it strikes me as very Eleatic.
Click to expand...
God by definition is the origin of being or existence. The supreme being, first cause, God, is perfect and complete and therefore non-contingent.

The reason why two gods must be contingent is that both gods would be dependent on each other in order to complete the fullness of being. Each god would lack something – some perfection would be lacking. Thus, in order to complete the fulness of being and perfection, both gods would be needed together, and thus separately, they would be contingent on each other. God, by definition, is the necessary being. If two gods were required to make up the one necessary being, then both would be contingent (neither alone would be sufficient).

Since God, by definition is not limited and is not lacking in any being (and is the source of existence itself), then there cannot be two gods because both would be limited.

As far as the hierarchy of values, that is a problem also because if they were both perfectly identical in every aspect, then the qualities of one would be unnecessary since they are found perfectly in the other. If they were not perfectly identical, one would have greater powers than the other.

Every parent recognizes that one child has more experience than the other, is taller, weighs more and is thus different.

God possesses the fullness of knowledge – in the same way, if there were two gods, both would possess only partial knowledge (since one could not know what it is to be the other).

There are many other problems. With two gods, each is lacking something. That lack is an unfulfilled potential. But there can be nothing unfulfilled in the nature of God.
 
DavidHume said:
I find that dubious and I think any parent should also find it dubious. 🙂
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. My sister and I are equal because we both have souls, but we are different. She is a better artist, I am a better intellectual. But we are both limited.

When we are talking about gods, they must be unlimited, or else they are not gods. If there are two “gods” then there is something that they differ upon. So if there is difference, one is limited and therefore “lesser”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top