Thread 96364684

How to best handle a conflict between a polytheistic and a monotheistic religion in a setting, in which polytheistic gods either objectively exist, or their followers clearly have god-given magic powers?
What is the incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?

>>96364684 (OP)
>What is the incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?
Convenience. Why many god when one god do trick?

>>96364684 (OP)
Look at history. Abrahamic religions didn't become monotheistic until around the 4th century. Look to the reason that they did. City-state gods only existed in their place. One of those gods got their place destroyed. A god based in a specific land no longer had the ability to exist in that land, but its worshippers hadn't been annihilated. Eventually got in with the conquerors and the conquerors used that language as propaganda for "nah it's ok that we're conquering you." Prior to the conquering why was it spreading? Well, in the 2nd century it's called a religion for "women and slaves." The "little people" are the ones it was popular with, who were getting nothing from the state cults and temples but were getting something from a secret fraternity that actually helped them out.

>>96364710
>Abrahamic religions didn't become monotheistic until around the 4th century.
This is patently untrue because Ezekiel and Isiah others calls all other gods the work of mans hands and that is the 6th century BC

>>96364722
Eh. Read up on it if you want. Not gonna debate an entire century of scholarship with you. There's some minor debate about "sometime between the 2nd and 4th century CE" but no, they didn't. You're referring to passages that denounce idols, not gods. The old testament is explicitly polytheistic.

>>96364684 (OP)
The incentive is the monotheistic god turns off the polytheistic magic powers once the heathens are told the truth. The rituals and relics will only work if they convert, even if they have to call beaver a kind of fish.

>>96364684 (OP)
Simple, the Monotheist God represents some form of philosophical enlightenment separate from the other gods. Why settle for Zeus who might accidentally torch your home with his awesome powers when there 'could' be a guy out there who is like, perfect man.

>>96364733
>You're referring to passages that denounce idols, not gods
bro, this is cope. It calls the gods of other nations idols. This "century of scholarship" is a desperate attempt at an Appeal to Authority and you are about 800 years early despite that. By the 8th century BC is when monotheism started taking hold among the Israelites. This is the actual current Scholarly consensus.

>>96364710
>Abrahamic religions didn't become monotheistic until around the 4th century.
By that metric, even secular history still references god-kings like Ramses and Caesar existing which the Church does not debate; before Christ the Jews had settled on narrowly defining worship as unconditional deference and decided that the only being worthy of said deference should be literally perfect.
Thus, while the Church believed that these supernatural entities existed, it was in the same fashion most people believed Gilgamesh existed even though 99% of what we know of him is all embellished to high-heaven.

>>96364766
That's alright, anon. I'm not interested in challenging your faith--just answering OP. Believe what you please.

>>96364684 (OP)
>"Yes grumsh can grant you great power but shor is beyond power, she is god of the world. See how lead turns to gold, not because of power, but because shor taught us the secrets of her creation. Shor wants this for you, study her teachings and see for yourself"

Or if its pesants do the classic
>yeah bro we're michaelists we worship the great wizard michael
>he gave a guy a ten inch peen once its true we all saw it
>pray every day and your teeth wont fall out swear on me mum

>>96364750
Im not taking advice from a guy who got arrested for sucking dick in a boat shed

>>96364733
>>96364767
>>96364766
>israelites
>ramses
>when did jews become monotheistic
Which fucking game are you faggots talking about?

>>96364792
Larpers and lunatics, 300 replies edition

>>96364768
I gotta admit, you-baiting is getting increasingly nuanced nowadays.

>>96364792
Uh oh guys, break it up--the board police arrived! Keep trying out, anon. I'm sure you'll make janny next season.

I too have struggled with this for months.
Religion is not a matter of belief nor faith, but fidelity and devotion in their truest Latin sense.
Religio, libamen, pietas, fidelitas, votum.

Religio, a correct rite, a 700 year-old formulae/prayer no priest can understand, but must utter exactly right. Show submission to the force of nature the cult worships on the holy day "dies feriae" or festus. Not only cult, but everyone in the city lest you be punished, taxed or banished. Pagani in the countryside may have even weirder gods. Special to their locations and needs, very often related to agriculture and husbandry.
They gather in the "lucus", a sacred grove or a "fanum", a temple dedicated to a god. While a city-state or a temple may honor one god, everyone knows all the gods are important and to all of them "victima", offerings are given by turns week after week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_festivals

Then comes the mystery cult, which offers the outcasts and poor a chance at redemption. A rebel society is born. They offer an easy way out. Join us and receive eternal salvation and life in the paradise. Truth is here, Mos Maiorum, sacred traditions of the forefathers be damned!

>>96364684 (OP)
Couple of options for conversion:
1. Spite, because worshipers of Zara and Damus burned my house down and I saw no punishment for their actions.
2. Ignorance, just because something is very objectively true means jack and shit to a guy who has never experienced or seen it
3. Principle, because the polytheistic religion could engage in behavior that the prospective worshiper finds unethical and abhorrent
4. Bet-hedging, because while you are willing to say the monotheistic god is unlikely, it seems possible to live in such a way as to not piss off anyone and be preserved against divine edicts against such things

As far as conflicts go, I imagine that a lot of it would be drawn around ethnic or regional lines, as areas that were introduced to this polytheistic faith later probably have more sympathy for the monotheists. Within polytheistic society, resentment against the institution is probably magnified if the gods are literally empowering people who hate you. While there is positive PR from granting power, there is easily as much or more negative PR from poor use of power.

>>96364684 (OP)
Obviously, the monotheistic priests get their own powers, but they're secretly pawns of a powerful evil deity planning to erode the power-bases of his/her/its rivals and become the supreme god.

>>96364684 (OP)
By not making shitty threads on a hobby board dedicated to playing games of pretend

>>96364684 (OP)

Since the obvious inspiration for this question is Christianity vs Paganism, you should know a few things:

- There's no reason from a Christian perspective to deny that the followers of the pagan religions have the ability to magically do things
- This is because they are empowered by demons pretending to be their false gods. Demons are happy to pretend to be whatever they want to your face, so long as they think you'll believe them, which is why they pretended to be pagan gods in ages past, and MLP tulpas in the modern day.
- However, if you read the hagiographies of Saints coming up against pagan magicians and such, or of Moses going up against the Pharaoh's court priests, the magicians and demons empowering them are simply outclassed by the power of the one true God and it's no contest.
- However, whether someone that isn't a Saint can be a vessel for God to completely BTFO demonic magic is a crapshoot, since sin opens you up to being under the metaphysical jurisdiction of demons, which enables their magic to work effectively on you in the first place

This is likely to not be what you're looking for for a custom tabletop RPG setting, But it could give you some further ideas. Like instead of the other false gods being just demons, they could be like the relation of the Ainur to Eru Illuvatar in Lord of the Rings, with Melkor being a fallen Ainur. Then you could possibly have various Your!Ainur either rebelling against or being in favour of Your!EruIlluvatar.

>>96364733
>>96364710

You're using, at best, an extremely idiosyncratic and strained definition of "monotheistic."

>>96364850

>offer the firstfruits of your harvest to the pagan gods at the sacred grove
>fanum tax

>>96364684 (OP)
Monotheistic religions are slave religions that are meant to centralize power in one ruler, who is "blessed" by "the one and only god". So you can have the monotheistic religion be backed by the corrupt ruling class who desperately wants to eliminate dissent and keep his declining country/empire together and under his rule. On the other hand, the polytheists should be more competent, since in polytheist mythology, the gods tend to favour and reward heroes for their displays of skill, strength and intelligence, instead of monotheist mythology that pushes submission, humility and meekness as a virtue.

>>96364684 (OP)
>incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?
I'm assuming the Polytheistic Pantheon has disunity. If you Worship the God of healing and life perhaps the god of Death can curse you and your family if you 'cheat' him of your death.

>>96364684 (OP)
>How to best handle a conflict between a polytheistic and a monotheistic religion in a setting, in which polytheistic gods either objectively exist, or their followers clearly have god-given magic powers?
Just treat it like how it was back in the day where if the two peoples came into conflict their gods would also fight each other which I bet is why the armies of Constantine and the like kicked so much ass vs the pagans. Or just say the gods don't get involved with petty conflicts or whatever.
>What is the incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?
That depends on the religion in question really since Christianity, Islam, the borderline monotheism of Isis worshipping Ptolemaic Egypt and the religions of the steppe had different paths.

I had a DM make a setting where the creation myth was that a single blinding light split into all of the gods and the world. My character worshipped the sun god believing it to be the remnant of that original light. His cult believed that the sun god, of its own mercy and love for creation, gave the other gods equal power to its own. This moment of love for the world inspired my cult to revere the sun god as the *true* god, and the others as its children

>>96364684 (OP)
Your gods bad, our god good
Any other stypid question?

>>96365832
>You're using, at best, an extremely idiosyncratic and strained definition of "monotheistic."
The term was invented in the 17th century to explain why Christianity was better than Islam. It has been retroactively applied to Abrahamic religions beginning with the first claim that there aren't other gods to come out of them, which happened some time between the 2nd and 4th century CE. No: the bible never denies the existence of other gods. Literally not once. Yes I know: the KJV has been mistranslated to present that as if it were true, based on a bad 15th century translation of a 15th manuscript based on an 11th century manuscript. But the fact is that the claim that "there's only 1 god" is a later addition to the bible. The old testament, for instance, has Chemosh actively defeating the armies of Israel at Moab. It explicitly recognizes 5 gods besides Yahweh, and that's not even getting into El. Jesus never once denies the existence of other gods. The first commandment, even if you do pretend it claims that "no other gods count" implicitly acknowledges other gods because if there aren't any, how can you put one in front of "yours?" You can make a pretty weak case that Paul doesn't think other gods have power over Christiants, but that's about as far as you can take monotheism in the bible itself.

>>96364684 (OP)
I think the general idea behind the mass conversion of the European world was that the Christian had a moral obligation to convert as many people as they could, whereas polytheists were like "Oh, I got another god to worship? Okay". You can bribe the nobility into going full Christian because your religious institution is getting some solid political grounds, but the average bloke who probably doesn't even know his own gods really well won't think twice if he's coherced into worshipping another god - unless he's planning to worship them all. Then it's up to you to educate the masses into re-wiring them to worship the correct™ religion.
The underlying truth of it all being, between the Christians and the religions they deemed to be "pagan", they're a lot closer than you think.

>>96364684 (OP)
Does the monotheistic religion also have objective proof their god exists and their followers also clearly have god-given magic powers?

I could just be having a brainlet moment but the question seems to be framed as if the polytheists are the only ones who know for sure their gods are real and the only ones who have clearly god-given magic powers.

>>96364710
>Look at history. Abrahamic religions didn't become monotheistic until around the 4th century.
wat
this stupid fuck has never read the ten commandments before

>>96368449
The decalogue wasn't formalized until the 5th century by Augustine, anon. Go read your bible and you'll find a lot more than 10 commands in it.

Bretonians are the answer you seek.
They all, without exception, worship The Lady. Sure they know other gods exist, they even recognize they're real. But they only worship one God.
Shalya gets a pass though cuz, ya know, goddess of healing.

>>96368491
Yeah, in Levitucs which is different than the Ten Commandments.

>>96369086
You're probably referring to Exodus. Exodus, properly translated, reads something like "you may not put other gods in front of my face." It's a command stating that idols other than the one of Yahweh can't be put in front of Yahweh's, in the temple. They must be next to or behind his.

At some point during the Babylonian Exile in the 6th century, that gets re-interpreted into "there aren't any other gods who are important in temples." This happens because, during the exile, they have no temple. So duh: they reinterpret rules about how the temple has to be ordered to mean something more relevant. This is when the people of Israel and Judah start dissing idols. Shockingly? It's 'cuz someone destroyed theirs and suddenly they claim "well we're better because we don't use them!"

Eventually the hellenistic period strikes and the notion of the "one-ness of god" is borrowed from the "prime mover" of greek philosophy, which starts to influence how the people of Judah reinterpret their religious books. Which is why the Septuigant contains a formulation of Exodus more-closely aligned with the decalogue that you think is in the bible but isn't.

Then some time probably after the destruction of the 2nd temple in the common era, Christians start reading it to mean "there aren't any other gods except for me." Because once again they're without a temple, so it can't be rule about a temple, right?

And then by the 5th century Christians formalize that reading when Augustine invents the decalogue.

That's a very simplified history, but you're welcome to go read about it and you'll discover that it's accurate. Monotheism simply isn't present, in the bible. It was invented in the 2nd to 4th century CE. The understanding you're appealing to didn't become Christian dogma until the 5th century CE.

>>96369162
>idols other than the one of Yahweh
Ah yes, the very famous idol of Yahweh that the Exodus-era (read: pre-conquest of Canaan, and by definition pre-construction of ANY Jerusalem temple, not to be confused with the Babylonian exile at the end of Kings centuries later) Israelites worshiped that has been described in far more detail than the likes of the tabernacle or ark of the covenant. Irrefutable evidence, my man. Reminds me of a comment I saw on youtube once.
>archaeological evidence shows that Yahweh was worshipped as part of a pantheon in the region of ancient Israel for centuries
>old testament prophets, sobbing: We know
As for monotheism in the bible in general, there are no fewer than three psalms that say that any idol is an empty husk for man to impose his own desires onto rather than a deity. Some verses use the translated term "gods" to refer to city/country leaders that have deified themselves, or even the dead spirit of the prophet Samuel. Even in regards to the Egyptian gods, the fact that Hebrew God is able to run completely roughshod over "their" country is supposed to suggest and symbolize that any power they had is ultimately false if it can be so thoroughly trounced in their center of power.

>>96370081
I am unclear what point you think you're making.
>As for monotheism in the bible in general, there are no fewer than three psalms that say that any idol is an empty husk for man to impose his own desires onto rather than a deity.
Correct.
>Some verses use the translated term "gods" to refer to city/country leaders that have deified themselves, or even the dead spirit of the prophet Samuel.
Sure, which is why I said "at least" 5. You can argue about whether some of them were supposed to be deified leaders. But Asherah? Chemosh? Baal? Not so much.
>is supposed to suggest and symbolize that any power they had is ultimately false if it can be so thoroughly trounced in their center of power.
No, that's what you're misreading into it. That their gods exist and have power is explicit within the text. There isn't any debate about that. Those gods exist and have power. Explicitly. Yes: the god of Israel is (usually) portrayed as stronger (although he gets beaten a few times). But that you're claiming it therefore means those other gods don't exist? That's one heck of a wild misreading you've got there, anon.

>>96364684 (OP)
The monothesitic god became the new head of the pantheon.

>>96364684 (OP)
>How to best handle a conflict between a polytheistic and a monotheistic religion in a setting, in which polytheistic gods either objectively exist, or their followers clearly have god-given magic powers?
Read the fuckin' Bible, retard:

>8 The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, 9 “When Pharaoh says to you, ‘Perform a miracle,’ then say to Aaron, ‘Take your staff and throw it down before Pharaoh,’ and it will become a snake.”
>
>10 So Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did just as the Lord commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a snake. 11 Pharaoh then summoned wise men and sorcerers, and the Egyptian magicians also did the same things by their secret arts: 12 Each one threw down his staff and it became a snake. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staffs.

The Supreme God is stronger than the local gods.

>>96364710
Get out of here with that nonsense. Instead of that little story that exists only in your own head how about you provide us with examples from scripture that condone the worship of any person or thing or "god" other than YHWH.

>>96364684 (OP)
>why would you join this team or that team?
The question. C'mon, OP.

>>96364733
Christianity acknowledged that there are small g gods. It's just that they arent the real creator. They're powerful spirits that exist with a hold over a people or place. Whether they're placeholders before the true savior or malevolent beings that lead people astray, or one that became the other at some point, is the point of contention.

Christ's resurrection essentially broke their power. It's why the idea that the Oracle went silent after christianity came is haunting from a religious context of the time.

>>96364733
It's not explicitly polytheistic, but sections are written in a way where it seems they could've been written in a time of change in their wider religious philosophy. Sometimes it seems that God isn't the only one, that their enemies have Ba'als of their own. Yes some of the many names for God were names for existing Canaanite/Israelite gods, but that's a question of how long were the two identified as one being. Ultimately though the perspective that you're supposed to read the Old Testament through is that there is one God that created everything. Saying "Are there other gods in the Old Testament?" is a valid question, but saying that the Abrahamics themselves had multiple gods that're explicit in their writings? That's not true. The religion that preceded them was polytheistic, but that was before everything was codified & written down.

>>96364792
>When did Jews become Monotheistic?
This is actually a good question though, or at least a fun one, that could be used in world building too. Like many scholars I think the Monotheism is partly due, or at least somewhat influenced by Persians who were Zoroastrian & thus Dualist in religion. One Good, One Evil. Fertile Crescent cultural contact causing these ideas to spread from the world's biggest Empire at the time.

>>96364684 (OP)
Just do what Fading Suns did.

>>96364710
I love religiom threads on /tg/ because it pulls all sorts of patently retarded people out of the floorbords that just say shit.

>>96364710
>Abrahamic religions didn't become monotheistic until around the 4th century.

AD? Subtract about a thousand years you moron.

>>96364733
>There's some minor debate about "sometime between the 2nd and 4th century CE"

No, there isn't you dumbass. Jews were true monotheists by the 5th century BC and the Babylonian captivity.

>>96364684 (OP)
Traditional games?

>>96364684 (OP)
>What is the incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?
The people in charge want you to and will to reward compliance or punish dissent.

>>96364684 (OP)
>What is the incentive to convert to the monotheistic religion?
assuming faithfulls believe empowers them, monoteistic god can gather more faithfull as no one in Pantheon to share

>>96364684 (OP)
>incentive to convert to monotheistic religion
The monotheist god and his followers are much more organized and have a hierarchy that allows them to practice statecraft at a much more advanced level with less friction, at least at first. The pagans are a disparate fucking mess of political conflict throwing fireballs at each other wayyyy more often. The monos are able to subsume the polys slowly, one by one, and leverage their conflicts much better.

You could also have there be a devil figure in the mono that is presented as the lord of the pagan gods as a means to weaken their influence and strengthen the faith of converts, who are a primary weapon against polys, as they can speak the language of pagan cruelty a lot better.

Purity of Faith

>>96364684 (OP)
>their "gods" are merely powerful spirits who may or may not have ulterior motives in pursuing their faith
>our god is existence itself; they are just worshipping a part of our god incorrectly