First, let's make the distinction between hard and soft polytheism. Hard polytheism says that there are many gods and they are separate and distinct, like different people; soft polytheism says that there are many gods, but there is an underlying unity behind them. Soft polytheism is best represented by Hinduism and hard polytheism is best represented by Greek mythology where the gods descended from chaos. To most pagans, they don't care if you are soft or hard polytheist, they are tolerant and open and see no problem with either. Some pagans know that monotheism is a problem, but even more don't.
What is the problem with monotheism? Monotheism usually means moral absolutism, there is one god with one will and one law, and he or she or it wants everyone to follow them. There are no other gods to object, there is no new cult that can take over society, it is one god, immutable, forever. This is the death of moral relativism. Polytheism (at least hard polytheism) maintains moral relativism; soft polytheism makes morality a little more flexible, but there are underlying universal values, such as those found in Hindu dharma.
We know Hindus, especially right-wing Hindus, are accepting Noahidism. They are soft polytheists, this is called "shituf" in Judaism; some Rabbis say it is permissible, some say it is not. For now, the Hindus are being told they are safe from the blade and can enter the Noahide World Order (the World To Come as it is called in Judaism) as they are. First of all, this is not exactly true, as the Rabbis have said that Noahide-compliance relies upon Hinduism being defined as at least soft polytheism, but better monotheism. Secondly, while Hinduism is not idolatry in theology, it is idolatry in practice... things such as astrology and divination are idolatry. Hindus kinda know this, but go along anyway.
The problem is that soft polytheism is actually monotheism in disguise, if push came to shove, most Hindus would call themselves monotheists, and most actually do. Part of the acceptance of Noahide Law is about negating the idea that the Noahide Laws are bad. Most pagans, like Hindus, are going to see that if they reject the Noahide Laws they will be labeled anti-semitic. Having their religion bashed is better than being seen as a Jew-hater. But it is more than this. The soft polytheists, like all liberal movements these days, want to copy the monotheists and have universal values, like human rights. Most pagans would disagree with banning monotheism, they view freedom of religion as an unalienable value that none have the right to overturn. Hopefully, hard polytheists can see that it is not wise to allow religions that call for the death penalty for hard polytheists. Why do the Noahides call for the ban of polytheism? They know if they allow it opposition will arise to their universal values system, for Noahides and Jews it is not smart to allow hard polytheists to live.
But who will most of the pagans side with? The hard polytheists or the Jews? Even some hard polytheists will go Noahide in order to placate the Jews and cries of anti-Semitism. If push comes to shove, the soft polytheists will admit they are actually really monotheists and reject moral relativism because it would bring into question their views on universal liberal values, like freedom of speech, which the Noahide Laws don't allow (no blasphemy). The soft polytheist defection will be led by Hindus. Since the average pagan would not dare blaspheme the pagan-hating god of Israel, they really don't care about this provision, and so are willing to destroy their own universal values for the sake of the Jews.
Most pagans will accept the Noahide Laws and clammer, like the Hindus, for Noahide status. None of the hatred for hard polytheists will be reviewed or criticized, and the more vitriolic the Noahides become, the more the soft polytheists (and some hard polytheists) will apologize for them. Pagans are going to come to hate other pagans and call them anti-Semites just because they want to protect themselves and moral relativism (to keep people safe from megalomaniacal gods). A war is coming between pagans, and that is a good thing, finally, we can separate the pagans into soft and hard polytheists (the soft polytheists are really montheists) and flush the pagan community out of traitors.
What is the problem with monotheism? Monotheism usually means moral absolutism, there is one god with one will and one law, and he or she or it wants everyone to follow them. There are no other gods to object, there is no new cult that can take over society, it is one god, immutable, forever. This is the death of moral relativism. Polytheism (at least hard polytheism) maintains moral relativism; soft polytheism makes morality a little more flexible, but there are underlying universal values, such as those found in Hindu dharma.
We know Hindus, especially right-wing Hindus, are accepting Noahidism. They are soft polytheists, this is called "shituf" in Judaism; some Rabbis say it is permissible, some say it is not. For now, the Hindus are being told they are safe from the blade and can enter the Noahide World Order (the World To Come as it is called in Judaism) as they are. First of all, this is not exactly true, as the Rabbis have said that Noahide-compliance relies upon Hinduism being defined as at least soft polytheism, but better monotheism. Secondly, while Hinduism is not idolatry in theology, it is idolatry in practice... things such as astrology and divination are idolatry. Hindus kinda know this, but go along anyway.
The problem is that soft polytheism is actually monotheism in disguise, if push came to shove, most Hindus would call themselves monotheists, and most actually do. Part of the acceptance of Noahide Law is about negating the idea that the Noahide Laws are bad. Most pagans, like Hindus, are going to see that if they reject the Noahide Laws they will be labeled anti-semitic. Having their religion bashed is better than being seen as a Jew-hater. But it is more than this. The soft polytheists, like all liberal movements these days, want to copy the monotheists and have universal values, like human rights. Most pagans would disagree with banning monotheism, they view freedom of religion as an unalienable value that none have the right to overturn. Hopefully, hard polytheists can see that it is not wise to allow religions that call for the death penalty for hard polytheists. Why do the Noahides call for the ban of polytheism? They know if they allow it opposition will arise to their universal values system, for Noahides and Jews it is not smart to allow hard polytheists to live.
But who will most of the pagans side with? The hard polytheists or the Jews? Even some hard polytheists will go Noahide in order to placate the Jews and cries of anti-Semitism. If push comes to shove, the soft polytheists will admit they are actually really monotheists and reject moral relativism because it would bring into question their views on universal liberal values, like freedom of speech, which the Noahide Laws don't allow (no blasphemy). The soft polytheist defection will be led by Hindus. Since the average pagan would not dare blaspheme the pagan-hating god of Israel, they really don't care about this provision, and so are willing to destroy their own universal values for the sake of the Jews.
Most pagans will accept the Noahide Laws and clammer, like the Hindus, for Noahide status. None of the hatred for hard polytheists will be reviewed or criticized, and the more vitriolic the Noahides become, the more the soft polytheists (and some hard polytheists) will apologize for them. Pagans are going to come to hate other pagans and call them anti-Semites just because they want to protect themselves and moral relativism (to keep people safe from megalomaniacal gods). A war is coming between pagans, and that is a good thing, finally, we can separate the pagans into soft and hard polytheists (the soft polytheists are really montheists) and flush the pagan community out of traitors.
No comments:
Post a Comment