|
Systems of Religious and Spiritual
Belief
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monotheism
and polytheism, the beliefs in
one god or many gods, are often thought of in rather simple terms; e.g.,
as a merely numerical contrast between the one and the many. The history of
religions, however, indicates many phenomena and concepts that should warn
against oversimplification in this matter. There is no valid reason to assume,
for example, that monotheism is a later development in the history of religions
than polytheism. There exists no historical material to prove that one system of
belief is older than the other, although many scholars hold that monotheism is a
higher form of religion and, therefore, must be a later development, assuming
that what is higher came later. Moreover, it is not the oneness of god that
counts in monotheism but his uniqueness; one god is not affirmed as the logical
opposite to many gods but as an expression of divine might and power. |
|
|
The choice of either monotheism, or
polytheism, however, leads to problems, because neither can give a satisfactory
answer to all questions that may reasonably be put. The weakness of polytheism
is especially revealed in the realm of questions about the ultimate origin of
things, whereas monotheism runs into difficulties in trying to answer the
question concerning the origin of evil in a universe under the government of one
god. There remains always an antithesis between the multiplicity of forms of the
divine manifestations and the unity that can be thought or posited behind them.
The one and the many form no static contradistinction: there is rather a
polarity and a dialectic tension between them. The history of religions shows
various efforts to combine unity and multiplicity in the conception of the
divine. Because Christianity is a monotheistic religion, the monotheistic
conception of the divine has assumed for Western culture the value of a
self-evident axiom. This unquestioned assumption becomes clear when it is
realized that for Western culture there is no longer an acceptable choice
between monotheism and polytheism but only between monotheism and atheism. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monotheism is the belief in the
existence of one god or, stated in other terms, that God is one. As such it is
distinguished from polytheism, the belief in the existence of a number of gods,
and atheism, the denial of the belief in any god or gods at all. The God of
monotheism is the one real god that is believed to exist or, in any case, that
is acknowledged as such. His essence and character are believed to be unique and
fundamentally different from all other beings that can be considered more or
less comparable; e.g., the gods of
other religions. The religious term monotheism is not identical with the
philosophical term monism,
referring to the view that the universe has its origin in one basic principle (e.g.,
mind, matter) and that its structure is one unitary whole in accordance with
this principle; that is, that there is only a single kind of reality, whereas,
for monotheism, there are two basically different realities: God and the
universe. (see also creation myth) |
|
|
God in monotheism is conceived of as the
creator of the world and man; he has not abandoned his creation but continues to
lead it through his power and wisdom; hence, viewed in this aspect, history is a
manifestation of the divine will. God has not only created the natural world and
the order existing therein but also the ethical order to which man ought to
conform and, implicit in the ethical order, the social order. Everything is in
the hands of God. God is holy--supreme and unique in being and worth,
essentially other than man--and can be experienced as a mysterium
tremendum ("a fearful mystery") but at the same time as a mysterium
fascinans, ("a fascinating mystery"), as a mystery approached by
man with attitudes of both repulsion and attraction, of both fear and love. The
God of monotheism, as exemplified by the great monotheistic religions--Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam--is a personal god. In this respect the one god
of monotheism is contrasted with the conception of the divine in pantheism,
which may also affirm one god or a divine unity. The god of pantheism, however,
is impersonal, rather a divine fluid that permeates the whole world including
man himself, so that Hinduism can say: tat
tvam asi, literally "that is you," where "that" refers
to the single, supreme reality or principle. (see also history, philosophy of, sacred
and profane) |
|
|
In monotheistic religions the belief
system, the value system, and the action system are all three determined in a
significant way by the conception of God as one unique and personal being.
Negatively considered, the monotheistic conviction results in the rejection of
all other belief systems as false religions, and this rejection partly explains
the exceptionally aggressive or intolerant stance of the monotheistic religions
in the history of the world. The conception of all other religions as " idolatry"
(i.e., as rendering absolute devotion
or trust to what is less than divine) has often served to justify the
destructive and fanatical action of the religion that is considered to be the
only true one. (see also toleration,
religious toleration) |
|
|
The symbolic language of the
monotheistic belief system has no proper terms of its own in speaking of God
that cannot be found elsewhere also. God as Creator, Lord, King, Father, and
other descriptive names are expressions found in many religions to characterize
the various divine beings; the names do not exclusively belong to the religious
language of monotheism. This common language is understandable because the
monotheistic conception of God differs essentially only in one respect from that
of other religions: in the belief that God is one and absolutely unique. Then,
consequently, God is regarded as the one and only Creator, Lord, King, or
Father. The conception of a divine Word is also to be found in a large number of
religions, in accordance with the widespread belief that creation takes place
through the word, or speech, of a god. |
|
|
|
|
|
The above is the basic monotheistic
view. There is, however, a wide range of positions between exclusive monotheism
at one extreme and unlimited polytheism at the other. A survey of the various
positions may serve to provide a more adequate picture of the complex reality
involved in the monotheisms and quasi-monotheisms. |
|
|
|
|
|
For exclusive monotheism only one god
exists; other gods either simply do not exist at all, or, at most, they are
false gods or demons; i.e., beings
that are acknowledged to exist but that cannot be compared in power or any other
way with the one and only true God. This position is in the main that of
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. While in the Old Testament the other
gods in most cases were still characterized as false gods, in later Judaism and
in Christianity as it developed theologically and philosophically the conception
emerged of God as the one and only, and other gods were considered not to exist
at all. |
|
|
There are two types of exclusive
monotheism: ethical monotheism and intellectual monotheism. In ethical
monotheism man chooses one god, because that is the god whom he needs and whom
he can adore, and that god becomes for him the one and only god. In intellectual
monotheism the one god is nothing but the logical result of questions concerning
the origin of the world. In many African religions the one god postulated behind
the many gods that are active in the world and in the life of man is little more
than the prime mover of the universe. He is the intellectual apex necessitated
by the system. In Christian theology, heavily influenced as it is by Greek
philosophy, both conceptions can be found, usually together. |
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, there is the extreme
position of unlimited polytheism as, for instance, in the classical religions of
Greece and Rome: each god has his own name and his own shape, and these are
unalienably his and cannot be exchanged with those of any other god (not
counting, of course, those cases in which gods are practically each other's
duplicate and only bear a different name). The number of divinities is large and
in principle unlimited. There are differences of status and power among the
gods, of function and sphere of influence, but they are all equally divine.
There is, in fact, an ordered pantheon. In unlimited polytheism, the number of
gods that are actually worshipped seldom exceeds a few hundred within one
religion, but in theory, as in India, millions and millions of gods may be
thought to exist (see above Polytheism ).
(see also Greek
religion, Roman religion) |
|
|
|
|
|
Between the extremes of exclusive
monotheism and unlimited polytheism are the middle positions of inclusive
monotheism and henotheism. |
|
|
|
|
|
Inclusive monotheism accepts the
existence of a great number of gods but holds that all gods are essentially one
and the same, so that it makes little or no difference under which name or
according to which rite a god or goddess is invoked. Such conceptions
characterized the ancient Hellenistic
religions. A well-known example is that of the goddess Isis in the
Greco-Roman mystery religion
that is called after her. In The
Golden Assof Apuleius, the goddess herself speaks: "My name, my divinity
is adored throughout all the world, in divers manners, in variable customs, and
by many names." Then there follows a number of divine names, and this
enumeration ends: "And the Egyptians, which are excellent in all kind of
ancient doctrine, and by their proper ceremonies accustomed to worship me, do
call me by my true name, Queen Isis." |
|
|
|
|
|
Henotheism
(from Greek heis theos, "one
god")--a belief in worship of one god, though the existence of other gods
is granted--also called kathenotheism (Greek kath hena theon, "one
god at a time")--which literally implies worship of various gods one at a
time--has gone out of fashion as a term. It was introduced by the eminent
19th-century philologist and scholar in comparative mythology and religion Max
Müller (1823-1900). Many later authors prefer the term monolatry--which
is the worship of one god, whether or not the existence of other deities is
posited--to the term henotheism. Both terms mean that one god has a central and
dominating position in such a way that it is possible to address this god as if
he were the one and only god, without, however, abandoning the principle of
polytheism by denying or in any other way belittling the real existence of the
other gods, as the above-mentioned forms of monotheism do. Henotheism as a
religious concept is at home in cultures with a highly centralized monarchical
government. It was especially prevalent in some periods in the history of
Babylonia and Egypt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The complicated relations that exist
between monotheism and polytheism become clear when pluriform monotheism is
considered, in which the various gods of the pantheon, without losing their
independence, are at the same time considered to be manifestations of one and
the same divine substance. Pluriform monotheism is one of the efforts to solve
the problem of the coexistence of divine unity and divine pluriformity
(multiplicity of forms), which was not recognized by an older generation of
scholars, although part of the material was already available. It seems, indeed,
that in many parts of the world and in many times religious thinkers have
struggled with the perplexing problem of the unity and the pluriformity of the
divine. |
|
|
The Nuer,
a Nilotic pastoral people of the eastern Sudan, venerate a being called Kwoth,
the Nuer term for "spirit" (also translated as "God"). He is
considered to be the spirit in or of the sky. Like all spirits Kwoth is
invisible and omnipresent, but he manifests himself in a number of forms. Each
of these manifestations bears a name of its own, but though they are addressed
and treated as separate entities, they are essentially nothing but
manifestations of the one spiritual being Kwoth and are themselves considered
spirits and called kwoth. A sacrifice
offered to one of these manifestations--e.g.,
a spirit of air, totem, or place--is not at the same time an offering to
another; but all sacrifices, to whatever spirit they are offered, are sacrifices
to the supreme Kwoth, or God. Nuer religion is certainly no clear monotheism as
it is understood in the Bible and in the Qur`an (the sacred book of Islam),
but neither is it polytheism in the popular sense of the word. (see also theophany) |
|
|
The case of the Nuer is not unique. The
related Shilluk people have
similar conceptions, and here again the idea of a kind of divine substance that
manifests itself in various shapes and under different names is encountered. To
give one instance, Macardit is God, but this pronouncement cannot be turned the
other way round--it is not permissible to say that God is Macardit. The divine
being Macardit represents the dire and fatal aspect of the divinity who orders
everything; that is to say, who also sends misfortune and death. In Macardit the
contradiction between the creative and constructive and the destructive forces
of the divinity is resolved. The positive function of this representation of God
lies in the fact that, without diminishing either the power or the justice of
the total divinity, it enables man to find an answer for the vexing question of theodicy--the problem of affirming divine justice
and goodness in the face of physical and moral evil. That this question is a
difficult one, indeed, becomes clear when the reactions of the tribes of
Patagonia in a case of death are compared. These tribes believe in a high god, a
supreme being, who rules everything and is also responsible for misfortune and
death. When someone dies they accuse their god of murder. |
|
|
Many other instances of pluriform
monotheism could be mentioned, and many more presumably still await detection.
An interesting pluriform system is that of the Oglala
Sioux of the United States, who venerate 16 gods divided into four groups
of four. Each group of four forms one god. Thus there are four gods, but these
four gods again are one god, Wakan Tanka--the Great Spirit or the Great Mystery. |
|
|
|
|
|
Some religions are in the main
dualistic; they view the universe as comprising two basic and usually opposed
principles, such as good and evil or spirit and matter. Insofar as the
conception of a god and antigod rather than that of two gods is encountered,
this kind of religion can be considered as another variation of monotheism. In
some Gnostic systems (ancient heresies based on esoteric knowledge and the
dualism of matter and spirit), Christianity came near to this idea: the demiurge
who created the world and man is considered as an evil being and contrasted to
the good god. The most important instance of a dualistic religion is the Persian
religion Zoroastrianism as
founded by Zoroaster (7th-6th century BC) in which Ormazd (the good god) and
Ahriman (the evil god) are each other's opposite and implacable enemies. Dualism,
the existence of two contrary and, as a rule, mutually inimical principles, must
not be confused with the notion of polarity, in which both principles are
mutually dependent so that the one cannot exist without the other. Within the
religion of Zoroaster, this notion is also found. In the Zoroastrian variation
known as Zurvanism, as it is called after the god Zurvan Akarana
(Limitless Time), good and evil proceed from one and the same source and in the
end they come together again (see above Religious dualism
). |
|
|
|
|
|
Pantheism
and panentheism are not
necessarily connected with the notion of either monotheism or polytheism. In
both cases the conception of the god or gods is impersonal, which tends, of
course, to the conception of one god, of one divine substance, like Spinoza's deus
sive natura, "god or nature." In pantheism god is immanent, in
monotheism god is mostly transcendent, but in polytheism the gods may be either.
Pantheism, however, is in most cases more a philosophical than a religious
category. Sometimes the term panentheism is used to distinguish between the view
that all is in God and that god is in all (see also Pantheism and panentheism
above). |
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with monotheism it is
necessary to mention the so-called high gods--the remote gods, usually sky gods,
found in many primitive and archaic cultures--because this type of divine being
has given rise to the theory of primitive monotheism (Urmonotheismus).
After the Scottish scholar Andrew
Lang (1844-1912) had drawn attention to these gods, the Austrian scholar Wilhelm
Schmidt (1868-1954) based on their existence in primitive culture and
beliefs the theory that the oldest religion of mankind had been monotheistic and
that polytheism as well as magic were later degenerations in the course of the
history of a pure primeval religion. This theory, defended with great skill and
an enormous mass of ethnological material by Schmidt and his collaborators, has
long since been proved unsound and was abandoned even by his own students. The
connection postulated between the high gods and monotheism has in most respects
obscured rather than illuminated the situation. It is true that in many cultures
the particular high god is considered as the creator, the founder of the order
of the world, and also in some cultures as the reigning god according to whose
will everything now happens, but such a god is rarely considered to be the one
and only god that counts. Exclusive monotheism is not to be found in either
primitive or archaic religions, according to present knowledge. The high god,
however, can become a god of exclusive monotheism when circumstances are
favourable, at least if he belongs to the active type of high god and not to the
intellectual type, which serves mainly as an idea to answer the questions
concerning the ultimate origin of things. (See the distinction above between
ethical and intellectual monotheism.) This transformation probably occurred in
the case of the Islamic god Allah. It seems to be more common,
however, even for the active type of high god gradually to disappear behind a
host of other, often minor, deities who are more concerned with the daily
affairs of mankind. (see also primitive
religion, prehistoric religion) |
|
|
The Deism
of the 17th and 18th centuries is often compared to the conception of high gods
as dei otiosi, "inactive
gods," who have created the world and put it into order but after their
work was done retreated from the world and left it to run in accordance with the
order installed at the creation (see below Deism
). Not all high gods, however, are inactive. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There may be some reason to speak of the
Old Testament conception of God as monolatry
rather than as monotheism, because the existence of other gods is seldom
explicitly denied and many times even acknowledged. The passionate importance
given to the proclamation of Yahweh
as the one god who counts for Israel and the equally passionate rejection of
other gods, however, make it truer to speak of the monotheism of Israel; as in
what became the Judaic
affirmation of faith, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord is our God, one Lord"
(from New English Bible)
(Deut. 6:4). The eminent Dutch Old Testament scholar Theodorus C. Vriezen
writes: "It is striking how the whole life of the people is seen as
dominated by Yahweh and by Yahweh alone. Even if one cannot speak of a strictly
maintained monotheistic way of thinking, it is yet clear that faith in Yahweh is
the foundation of life for the Israelite." Monotheism is not a matter of
mathematics--of opting for the number one as against other numbers--but the
conscious choice of a person or group committing himself or themselves to one
god rather than to any other ones and putting their faith in that one god;
Joshua proclaims: "But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord"
(Josh. 24:15). In Israel the ethical aspect was as important as the
exclusiveness of their one god; the prophets stressed the ethical elements of an
essentially exclusive God. The God of Israel was a jealous god who forbade his
believers to worship other gods. In this respect he differed from other gods in
the ancient Near Eastern religions who, as a rule, did not put such exclusive
obligation on their adherents. |
|
|
In later times--beginning in the 6th
century BC and continuing into the early centuries of the Christian Era--Judaic
monotheism developed in the same direction as did Christianity and also later
Islam under the influence of Greek philosophy and became monotheistic in
the strict sense of the word, affirming the one God for all men everywhere. |
|
|
|
|
|
Among the three great monotheistic
religions, Christianity has a
place apart, because of the trinitarian creed of this religion in its classic
forms, in contradistinction to the unitarian creed of Judaism and Islam.
The Christian Bible, including the New Testament, has no trinitarian statements
or speculations concerning a trinitary deity, only triadic liturgical formulas
invoking God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is true that Christianity also
has had its Unitarians, such as the 16th-century Italian theologian Faustus
Socinus, but this religion in its three classic forms of Roman Catholicism,
Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism acknowledges one God in three Persons: God
the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. According to Christian
theology, this acknowledgment is not a recognition of three gods but that these
three persons are essentially one, or as the dogmatic formulation, coined by the
early Church Father Tertullian (c. 160-after 220), has it: three Persons and one substance. This
conception was not accepted without contradiction as is proved by theological
disputes of the 3rd and 4th century. It is evident that trinitarian speculation
greatly resembles the way of thinking of pluriform monotheism. It is, of course,
unlikely that there are any historical connections between these phenomena;
both, however, try to solve what is more or less the same problem in more or
less the same manner. The main distinction is that Christianity as a
monotheistic religion restricts itself to three Persons, though primitive
religions have no reason to restrict the number of possible forms of the one
divine substance. Like other religions that cover a large territory and have a
long history, Christianity appears in a multitude of variations: there is
Christian pantheism, Deism, and even, paradoxically, Christian atheism, as
exemplified in the mid-20th-century Death of God theologies. (see also Trinity) |
|
|
|
|
|
No religion has interpreted monotheism
in a more consequential and literal way than Islam.
According to Islamic doctrine the Christian dogma of a trinitarian god is
a form of tritheism--of a three-god belief. There is no issue upon which this
religion is so intransigent as the one of monotheism. The profession of faith,
the first of the so-called Five Pillars of Islam (the basic requirements
for the faithful Muslim), states clearly and unambiguously that "there is
no God but Allah," and in
accordance with this principle the religion knows no greater sin than shirk("partnership"), the attribution of partners to Allah; that
is to say, polytheism, or anything that may look like it--e.g.,
the notion of a divine trinity. The Qur`an declares: "Say: He,
Allah, is one. Allah, the eternal. Neither has he begotten, nor is
he begotten. And no one is his equal" (112). This profession of faith in
Allah as the one god is encountered in a more popular form, for example,
in the stories of The Thousand and One
Nights: "There is no god except Allah alone, he has no
companions, to him belongs the power and he is to be praised, he gives life and
death and he is mighty over all things." In only one respect has the
uncompromising monotheism of Islam shown itself to be vulnerable; i.e.,
in the doctrine of the Qur`an as uncreated and coeval with Allah
himself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ptah, holding the emblems of life and power, bronze statuette, Memphis, c.
600-100 BC; in the. . .
By
courtesy of the trustees of the British Museum
|
|
|
|
Egyptian
religion is of special interest with regard to the
various topics treated in this article, for in it are found polytheism,
henotheism, pluriform monotheism, trinitary speculations, and even a kind of
monotheism. Especially in the time of the New Kingdom (16th-11th century BC) and
later, there arose theological speculations about many gods and the one god,
involving concepts that belong to the realm of pluriform monotheism. These ideas
are especially interesting when related to trinitarian conceptions, as they
sometimes are. In a New Kingdom hymn to Amon are the words: "Three are all
gods: Amon, Re and Ptah . . . he who hides himself for them [mankind] as Amon,
he is Re to be seen, his body is Ptah." As Amon he is the "hidden
god" (deus absconditus); in Re,
the god of the sun, he becomes visible; as Ptah (see photograph),
one of the gods of the earth, he is immanent in this world. |
|
|
Much attention has been given to the
reform of Egyptian religion as effected by the pharaoh Akhenaton
(Amenophis IV) in the 14th century BC. This reform has been judged in many ways,
favourably and unfavourably; it is, however, clear that Akhenaton's theology, if
not fully monotheistic, in any case strongly tends toward monotheism. It is even
possible to follow the gradual development of his ideas in this direction. At
first he only singled out Aton, one of the forms of the sun god, for particular
worship, but gradually this kind of henotheism developed in the direction of
exclusive monotheism and even took on the intolerance peculiar to this religious
concept. The names of the other gods were to be deleted. This un-Egyptian
intolerance was probably the main reason for the speedy decline of this creed. |
|
|
|
|
|
As far as is known, monotheism was
largely absent from Babylonian religion. There henotheism seems to have been
very important, since a person could choose one god for particular worship as if
he were the only god. |
|
|
|
|
|
The classic religions of Greece and Rome
were in the main purely polytheistic, but in later times tendencies arose,
partly stimulated by philosophy and later also by Judaism and Christianity,
toward inclusive monotheism. The hymn to Zeus by the Stoic philosopher Cleanthes
(c. 330-c. 230 BC) is the best known document of this process. It praises
Zeus as the essence of divinity in all gods, creator and ruler of the cosmos,
omnipotent, the giver of every gift, and the father of mankind. In the mystery
religions of the Greco-Roman world and in the religious philosophies of later
antiquity, such as Neoplatonism, Neopythagoreanism, and others, inclusive
monotheism was more or less the rule. |
|
|
|
|
|
The religions of India and China show an
astonishing multiplicity of form, but exclusive monotheism, unless imported or
stimulated by foreign influences, seems to be absent. All other phenomena
treated in this survey of monotheism, however, are to be found in their
religions. Inclusive monotheism and pantheism fit very well with the Indian
notions of religion, particularly in Hinduism,
as is witnessed by the reflections on Brahman, the self of the world, and Atman,
the self of individual man. As the Upanisads
say: "Truly, in the beginning existed this Brahman, that only knew
itself, saying: I am Brahman." Although in many cases one god, such as Shiva
(Shiva) or Vishnu, receives nearly all the attention of the faithful, this
emphasis never leads to a negation of other gods as such. Jainism does not
differ in this respect. Only the religion of the Sikhs, heavily influenced by
Islam, can be said to teach a kind of exclusive monotheism. |
|
|
Buddhism teaches in essence that there
are no gods in the full sense of the world. Gods are higher beings, but they
belong to the cosmos and are as much in need of salvation as man is. |
|
|
The ancient Chinese religion of the
heaven (Shang Ti T'ien) is comparable to the religions that proclaim a high god
as creator and ruler of the world, but monotheism has not resulted from this
conception. Neither has Taoism led to monotheism. (T.P.v.B.) |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
