FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-27-2007, 02:27 AM   #1
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default The origins of monotheism

OK, an Egyptian went monotheistic, but I would argue the flame died out soon after him.

I would put the blame on Zarathustra and the Persians.

I would see it as in many ways a political invention, enabling central control.

I would argue Judaism - Abraham - did not invent the idea - they copied it when they were in Exile.

One of the major themes of Marathon and the battles between Greeks and Persians was about the concept of priesthood of all believers versus central priesthood, or the right to make your own religion and gods or be forced to follow the ruler's god.

What happens if we trace how monotheism develops assuming it starts with Zoroaster? Do Judaism, Christianity and Islam then become basically Iranian religions?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 02:15 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post

I would put the blame on Zarathustra and the Persians.

...

What happens if we trace how monotheism develops assuming it starts with Zoroaster? Do Judaism, Christianity and Islam then become basically Iranian religions?
I’m no expert but it looks to me like Zoroaster was a dualist. It looks to me like Zoroaster believed in at least two gods: A “good god” and a “bad god.” If my understanding is correct than I can’t see how monotheism can be blamed on Zoroaster.

It looks to me like Deutero-Isaiah rejected dualism. His version of Yahwism was strictly monotheistic. Deutero-Isaiah says Yahweh created good and evil. And he did it alone.

Deutero-Isaiah = strictly monotheistic = one god = no Satan.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 02:35 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post

What happens if we trace how monotheism develops assuming it starts with Zoroaster?
I think it fails because it does not explain Deutero-Isaiah.

Have you read this?

Origins of Biblical Monotheism

What’s wrong with that explanation?

It looks to me like Smith’s explanation might even explain how Zoroastrianism was born.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 02:37 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,674
Default

I'd say that the first true monotheists were among the Greek philosophers.

I'm not sure about the Egyptians, but Jewish "monotheism" wasn't really monotheism, as they didn't really view their god as the one and only god of the universe, they just viewed it as the only god for their tribe.

As far as I know, the Greeks were the first to put forward a monotheistic concept like the modern one that we have today, and indeed modern monotheism, via Christianity's integration with Greek philosophy, comes from the Greeks.

The Stoics basically developed monotheistic deism around the 3rd century BCE, which was integrated with the single Jewish tribal god by the Christians.
Malachi151 is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 03:05 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi151 View Post
Jewish "monotheism" wasn't really monotheism, as they didn't really view their god as the one and only god of the universe, they just viewed it as the only god for their tribe.
I agree that that would be one paradigm, but I can’t see any reason to conclude that the OT represents a unified theology.

It looks to me like there are shitload of paradigms and “god hierarchies” described in the OT. It just depends on what you are reading.

I mentioned Deutero-Isaiah. That guy was certainly a strict monotheist - even to the extent of not believing in Satan.
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 03:15 PM   #6
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loomis View Post
I agree that that would be one paradigm, but I can’t see any reason to conclude that the OT represents a unified theology.

It looks to me like there are shitload of paradigms and “god hierarchies” described in the OT. It just depends on what you are reading.

I mentioned Deutero-Isaiah. That guy was certainly a strict monotheist - even to the extent of not believing in Satan.
Yeah, this is probably true, but again, I think that the passage you are pointing to is post Hellenistic influence and after Greek monotheism, though I could be wrong on that. When was that (actually) written?
Malachi151 is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 03:30 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The recesses of Zaphon
Posts: 969
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachi151 View Post
Yeah, this is probably true, but again, I think that the passage you are pointing to is post Hellenistic influence and after Greek monotheism, though I could be wrong on that. When was that (actually) written?
Good question. I don’t know - and I’ve got to go for now.

Final thought:

Why is it necessary for “monotheism” to originate in one place?
Loomis is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 03:40 PM   #8
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wales
Posts: 11,620
Default

In a superstitious - look for word - landscape - where different tribes worshipped different gods, and were sometimes at war with each other, having the most powerful god on their side would be a good thing, to both rally the troops and give fear to the opposition.

'Our god is the only god there is' seems to me to trump 'our god is the king of the gods'.

Polytheism is perhaps a more natural starting stance, where people must have seen the sun, stars, moon, thunder, perhaps volcanoes and earthquake, different sorts of creatures, predator and pray.

But my just so story foe monotheism - my working hypothesis - is that monotheism is what Dennett would call a 'good move' from the POV of memetics.

David B
David B is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 03:42 PM   #9
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
What happens if we trace how monotheism develops assuming it starts with Zoroaster? Do Judaism, Christianity and Islam then become basically Iranian religions?
No, IMO it is not tied to any land, but to the regime of
rulership that had and has a standing army. As per
Terry Jones:

The “Logic” was that religion provided justice, the basis of an
ordered society that could sustain military expenditure” .

The MANTRA was that …….

‘There can be no power without an Army’
‘There can be no Army without Money’
‘There can be no Money without Agriculture’
‘There can be no Agriculture without Justice’.


The DEATHBED ADVICE of ARDASHIR to SHAPUR I:

“Consider the Fire Altar and the Throne as inseparable
as to sustain each other."
Monotheism and dictatorships seem highly related.
The Zoroastrian Avesta, the NT-Bible, the Koran are all publications that
first appeared under a political and military regime of total
and absolute power.
mountainman is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 04:13 PM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David B View Post
In a superstitious - look for word - landscape - where different tribes worshipped different gods, and were sometimes at war with each other, having the most powerful god on their side would be a good thing, to both rally the troops and give fear to the opposition.

'Our god is the only god there is' seems to me to trump 'our god is the king of the gods'.

Polytheism is perhaps a more natural starting stance, where people must have seen the sun, stars, moon, thunder, perhaps volcanoes and earthquake, different sorts of creatures, predator and pray.

But my just so story foe monotheism - my working hypothesis - is that monotheism is what Dennett would call a 'good move' from the POV of memetics.

David B
I'm not so sure, because Jewish monotheism was destroying the Jews. Their religion was a major factor in their downfall really, it was tearing their society apart.

Greek monotheism was totally different, it was more like deism or pantheism, and was not hostile at all.

Christianity sort of merged the two, but really polytheism had many advantages in that it lent itself well to tolerance and acceptance in many cultures, whereas Jewish monotheism was highly intolerant and hostile and led to infighting and was not welcome in new communities, and thus had a hard time spreading, until the Christian mix emerged.
Malachi151 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:57 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.