My New Take on Soft Polytheism

[TeaDidikai]

Most folks know I'm not soft polytheistic, and for the most part I get ticked when people suggest my gods are theirs.

Well, I came to an interesting conclusion.

A Christian walks up to a pagan and says "You're worshiping Satan, he deceived you into thinking you're worshiping gods, but you're not."

A Soft Polytheist walks up to a Hard Polytheist and says "Your gods are my gods, because they deceived you into thinking they are individuals and not merely manifestations of my divine being."

Pretty damn insulting right? This is one of the reasons it pisses folks off. Not the only reason by far, but likely a subtle unconscious one.

My solution would be to point out that Soft Polytheists thus worship the same evil Deity that called the Frosts to rape little kids.

We're not talking about sanitizing nature or theology, but pointing out that in their worship, they are honoring a deity that influences humans in order to perpetuate child rape.

Low blow? Yes. But if any* of them would actually consider accusations of the fact that they are worshiping the Devil without saying in all seriousness that they don't believe in him thus they can't be worshiping him, I wouldn't need to use perhaps the most hideous examples possible to demonstrate that gods aren't universally the same- especially when you have gods that rain sulfur down on whole villages for such crimes.

* Any being an exaggeration in order subtlety hint at a personal frustration, not an attempt to disparage the select few soft polytheists who aren't horribly insulting to folks who disagree with them through implication.  

[Wrath of Ezekiel]

O___________O;

Nice argument against it. I just thought how silly it is, because everyone assumes that all gods and goddesses are good-natured beings.

Of course, the Hindu soft polytheists don't realize that when they believe in soft polytheism, that also includes the Judeo-Abrahamic deity that the Mughals and then the Europeans both worshiped when they were setting about their empires in India and abroad.

I wonder what certain fundamentalist groups will think when they realize that.  

[TeaDidikai]

True Colours of Destiny

Nice argument against it. I just thought how silly it is, because everyone assumes that all gods and goddesses are good-natured beings.

To be fair, there are Soft Polytheists who acknowledge or even worship the more terrific elements of their gods- but that's a new fundamental contradiction.

YHVH smites whole groups that do horrific things involving sex.
The god of Frostian Wica encouraged it.  

[Ashley the Bee]

I was having this sort of conversation with someone just this past weekend. Even though it wasn't long ago, I may muddle some of the message trying to get it from inside my brain to into this window, so forgive me if things sound a little strange.

He suggested that there is, behind it all, some singular deity. It creates, destroys, sets things into action. People see or otherwise perceive the consequences of these actions and say, ah, that must be "god".

But then, because of our varied cultures, someone in Athens says, ah! It's Athena, I shall worship her like this. Whereas someone in India may say, oh, it's Shiva, I shall worship her like this. etc...

Basically, the assumption is that the uniqueness that people ascribe to the different deities are actually just a result of their, and their cultures, views being placed upon this singular deity.

In that way, the fact that the Frosts rape children is not, in fact, the true desire of this deity, but the result of a corrupted message to the Frosts, for example.

Does that make any sense?  

[saint dreya]

i can see the possibility of the Frosts just getting a corrupted message across, corrupting it themselves, or even getting a message from a being that does not have a human's health and well being in mind; i can't quite agree with the initial stance, quoted below.

Ashley the Bee

He suggested that there is, behind it all, some singular deity. It creates, destroys, sets things into action. People see or otherwise perceive the consequences of these actions and say, ah, that must be "god".

it gets to be cyclical coming from that point to then "prove" that all divine beings are one.

while i can see different cultures perhaps coming up with differing names for something of the same deity or event (some Roman deities, not all, being of a different name from some Greek, being an example), i cannot reconcile the idea that within one culture there would be one deity construed in so many different manners (Skadi is definitely not Frigg).

so i remain a hard polytheist, 3nodding  

[Ashley the Bee]

saint dreya

it gets to be cyclical coming from that point to then "prove" that all divine beings are one.

hehe

saint dreya

while i can see different cultures perhaps coming up with differing names for something of the same deity or event (some Roman deities, not all, being of a different name from some Greek, being an example), i cannot reconcile the idea that within one culture there would be one deity construed in so many different manners (Skadi is definitely not Frigg).

Perhaps. If, though, a person truly desires, for whatever reason, for there to be multiple deities, then she can certainly create those ideas in her head, and filter the information she gets though that lens.

Right?

saint dreya

so i remain a hard polytheist, 3nodding

I'm so strange... I'm agnostic, but I also figure that, if there is a god, there would be many, and they would all be different.... so an agnostic hard polytheist?

I'm so strange >_<  

[Taliah]

There for a while I considered soft polytheism. At that time I had been reading Cunningham, and was under the impression that Wicca was also soft polytheist. But, I didn't feel anything significant, so that ended rather quickly.
That, and lurking somewhere in the ED, found Tea's point that certain gods hate each other and work towards killing them, and that left the "why would one facet of the same god try to kill the other facet?" thought.

Now I just claim agnostic, the kind that is open towards there being deities. I'm not the bitter type who thinks religion is the root of all evil, like I've seen in the M&R.  

[too2sweet]

Taliah

"why would one facet of the same god try to kill the other facet?"

Why do some of us have self-destructive tendencies? Why do we work so hard to contain/control certain aspects of personalities... now put that on a "God" level. sweatdrop

On the whole I'm not soft-poly, but those are things that come to mind.  

[aoijea23487]

too2sweet

Taliah

"why would one facet of the same god try to kill the other facet?"

Why do some of us have self-destructive tendencies? Why do we work so hard to contain/control certain aspects of personalities... now put that on a "God" level. sweatdrop

On the whole I'm not soft-poly, but those are things that come to mind.

i was thinking exactly the same, in terms of soft polytheism.  

[saint dreya]

Ashley the Bee

Perhaps. If, though, a person truly desires, for whatever reason, for there to be multiple deities, then she can certainly create those ideas in her head, and filter the information she gets though that lens.

Right?

i wouldn't doubt that some thought forms have come into existence because someone *wanted* to see something in such a way. the posits above give a better example about why i cannot confine myself to a soft polytheistic argument.

it might also come about in how one see's deity. i and my kindred do not see them as all powerful. they make mistakes, bleed, and in some cases die. they just have a lot more running in their court than mortals (special gear, talents, knowledge, etc.).

how could a being that is not all powerful, not all knowing, not all present be every single deity?

*note* i'm not trying to convince, but to explain my interpretation.

Ashley the Bee

I'm so strange >_<

sokay. different, if it works, is okay.  

[Kuroiban]

TeaDidikai

YHVH smites whole groups that do horrific things involving sex.
The god of Frostian Wica encouraged it.

Not even familiar with Frostian Wica or anything along those lines. From the sound of it, that's a good thing.

In any event, well thought out argument there Tea.  

[-X-Luciferin-X-Bandit-X-]

I'm a soft polytheist, but I make a point to never do these things to hard polytheists.

I worship individual aspects, in the form of Gods and Goddesses, though, and see no problem with worshipping a specific aspect of Deity.

Good points, though. Kudos.  

[TeaDidikai]

XxBangbang.im.a.banditxX

I'm a soft polytheist, but I make a point to never do these things to hard polytheists.

I worship individual aspects, in the form of Gods and Goddesses, though, and see no problem with worshipping a specific aspect of Deity.

Good points, though. Kudos.

An honest question then, how do you address the fact that your god endorses the rape of children?  

[patch99329]

TeaDidikai

XxBangbang.im.a.banditxX

I'm a soft polytheist, but I make a point to never do these things to hard polytheists.

I worship individual aspects, in the form of Gods and Goddesses, though, and see no problem with worshipping a specific aspect of Deity.

Good points, though. Kudos.

An honest question then, how do you address the fact that your god endorses the rape of children?

Is that not a human interpetation fo the divine?
What of the myths, are they simply human constructs? Or maybe the conflicts have underlying meanings?

Anyway, I am a hard polytheist/syncretist of sorts.  

[TeaDidikai]

patch99329

Is that not a human interpetation fo the divine?

Apparently not.

Here's the catch. If all these understandings are merely human projection onto a blank canvas that is "The Gods" or "The Divine", then there is no reason to assert that the deities others worship are actually the deities that soft polytheists say they are.

It would be more accurate to suggest that if it is merely a human construct attributed to The Divine, that other religious understandings are simply wrong.

If you pick and choose, you're clearly allowing your personal bias to dictate which is included and which is rejected, because each of these groups are claiming divine experiences and gnosis. You rest your argument on the notion that just because you dislike it, they suddenly can't actually be having divine experiences. Where does it stop?

Quote:

What of the myths, are they simply human constructs?

See above. If the myths are merely fiction, it's time to stop claiming that pagan gods are part of this overarching divine expression. If they are actually experiences, things that happened, then you have to address the second part of your question.

Quote:

Or maybe the conflicts have underlying meanings?

For meaning to exist, it has to be something that is comprehensible on some level- any level.

The notion that you can comprehend YHVH smiting Sodom, teaching Agape, while raping children is a complete paradox for a rational mind. That isn't to say deities can't create paradox, merely that if there is meaning, humanity has to be able to relate to it.

And before anyone tries to suggest it, this isn't a point of pride. It's a function of dynamic and relationship. If I walk up to CuAnnan, and speak a language that makes complete sense to me, but I know it has no sense to him, I'm not engaging him in a meaningful way, the meaning in my words is limited to my personal sphere, and doesn't touch him. That isn't an act of relationship- of friendship.

On a divine level, we're comparing the direct instructions and actions of YHVH to his followers and it being 100% at odds with the direct instructions and actions of the Frostian God with his followers.