Types of theism in a fantasy setting

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:01 am

Ok, I'm going to try and get people on the same page as to what kinds of theism would likely exist in a fantasy setting, and explain conditions necessary for some that require specific conditions.

I don't claim all of these exist in meatspace, but most probably do, in one way or another, though possibly in very low percentages.

EDIT: I need to put some more info into some of the theisms here. Mostly it'll probably refer to the second post of theisms.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pantheism
According to Wiki, this isn't what I always understood it to mean (pagan pantheon constructs, etc.) but rather the belief that "the universe/nature and god are one" or that the only thing deserving of worship is the Universe.
Supposedly derived from the greek 'pan' (all) and 'theos' used as a general term for belief or worship, so it is supposed to literally mean "belief/worship of all". Technically that's not parsed correctly, but, whatever.

I actually know people like this in real life, and some people think this is what atheists believe (pro tip, it's not.) A pantheist is someone who believes that the world or universe is a quasi-sentient entity capable of action, whether directly or indirectly. As far as beliefs go... eh, it works, I suppose.

A pantheistic cleric would worship "the universe" and get power from it. Technically this would manifest as being able to pick probably just about any domain, possibly aside from ethical/moral ones, ie: alignment domains.

Pantheists in a fantasy world would probably see the followers of other faiths as deluded ("Pelor is just an aspect of the universe!") or flat out wrong ("There is no Pelor! You should worship the universe!"). Alternatively you could get some hippie pantheists that are cool with what ever you believe because "the universe is all, so if you worship something, you're worshiping the universe, just in another guise." Again, there are totally people that are like that, and they can either be really frustrating, or pretty cool.

Pantheism has a variation, Panentheism.
Panentheism is the belief that in addition to the cosmos being inherently awesome, there is a god or gods attached to it which are superior to the material universe. It's like Soft Poly-Pantheism.

Animism
Animism is the belief that everything has a spirit, and that all spirits are, more or less, equally worthy of respect, whether that respect is born of fear or love.

This can get really weird if you analyze it too much. I mean, sure, the Himalayas have a spirit, and you could conceivably say each individual rock and pebble, and patch of grass and so on have their own spirits. But take it further. Everything has a spirit. The slurpee I'm drinking has a spirit. Possibly the individual water molecules in it have their own spirits. The coaster I just tapped it on has a spirit (did it mind being struck with a slurpee cup? Does it get along with the spirits of the slurpee, the slurpee's cup, and my desk?). The computer I'm typing on has at least one spirit (does it mind what I use it for? Is my computer's spirit a prude?). Now, take it even further. You have a spirit. But your body could be seen as a separate concept from you, does your body have a spirit of it's own? What happens to the spirit(s) of the cheeseburger you just ate? Do they become shit spirits?

I'm really not sure how actual animists deal with these concepts. I'm nominally an animist, but an agnostic one, and I just largely don't worry about them, probably as an instinctual defense mechanism against the paranoia and over-concern that would develop if I cognitively believed that my chair and bed have spirits that might be watching me.

An animist cleric probably "represents" a specific spirit. But this spirit could be anything from Amaterasu, the sun spirit, to the spirit of their childhood dog, to the spirit of the big boulder their hometown was built around. Or hell, it's possible that even concepts have spirits. So you could represent a spirit of theft. Or hell, Animism is, itself, a concept. If concepts have a spirit, then there is literally a spirit of animism that a cleric could represent. I have no clue what domains they would be able to pick.

In practice, in a game, this can lead to really cool territory (a fighter awakening the spirit of his sword and armour to enchant them, or the spirit of a sword actually being a playable character, walking around in it's dead owner's armour, wielding it's physical self.) and it can lead to really weird territory (the idiot player that you sometimes question your friendship with wanting to be a cleric of the spirit of shit).

As far as attitudes between the animist and the other theists, it's really going to depend on the character, but it could be anything from the vaguely passive aggressive jab ("You know, Pelor is really just a different name for Amaterasu... Oh, and she doesn't have a beard. And she wears a dress.") to live and let live stuff like the pantheist, to crusading for people to realize everything has a spirit ("Did you perform the proper rituals when you killed that deer so it's spirit doesn't become a horrible brain eating monster that comes to kill us all for disrespecting it?" "...no..." "You've doomed us all.")

Polytheism
Polytheism is the belief that there are a lot of gods and you need to be aware of all of them. Yes, all of them. Even Priapus. Not only that, but you need to appease a lot of them on various occasions, and that you can appeal to different ones for different stuff. (Priapus was seriously employed as a magic lawn gnome protection against theft with the threat of buggery.) Granted, in a polytheistic society, you rarely get priests of "all the gods." There's usually some specialization (gotta love priestesses of Aphrodite. Especially if you're a soldier of Ares.), but there's also often a chief god of some description and a priest of, say, Zeus, may well have some knowledge of and power with the other gods of the Pantheon.

Yes, Pantheon. This is where things can get confusing. Pantheon is the term for a group of related deities. So you've got the Greek Pantheon, the Roman Pantheon, The Egyptian Pantheon, etc. This is really simplifying things, but it works for our purposes. In reality who's in and who's out of a Pantheon depends by region, time, town, etc. So in D&D a group of elves that know nothing about the drow probably aren't going to recognize Lolth. A group of drow who have never had a CG member, or who kill all CG drow probably don't know about Elistree, or they consider her a perversion or heresy.

A cleric of a Pantheon is probably going to directly represent a specific god, so yes, you'll have clerics of Pelor. But they're actually clerics in the larger "Human Pantheon" or something. They represent Pelor, but also the entire pantheon of their region and race. Or worse, they represent the custom pantheon that grew within a multi-cultural area (so the PHB pantheon).

I'm really not sure what the attitude of a pantheon cleric would be towards theists of other pantheons or theologies. They could get along, or they could be at each others' throats.

Inside of Polytheism, there are some subtypes.
These include:
Henotheism and Monolatrism (see below)
Kathenotheism the belief that there are many gods, but only one is ever worshiped at a time, possibly at specific times.
There's also Hard Polytheism and Soft Polytheism.
Hard Polytheism is the belief that the different gods are distinct entities, like in the Greek model. Soft Polytheism is the belief that the distinct gods are subsumed into a greater whole, like in Hinduism (or some forms of it, I guess), or possibly even some forms of Buddhism, depending on one's view of Nirvana, I guess.

-------------------------------------------------------------
I'll add more a bit later but those are some basic ones. What I'll add later gets a bit crazier.

jadagul · Post by **jadagul** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:29 am

Don't forget monolatry, which is the one that at least the people I hang out with are least likely to have heard of.

Monolatry
Monolatry is the belief that many gods exist, but that you should be loyal to one particular god. The Old Testament has a really interesting and really clear shift from monolatry to monotheism about halfway through. In the Pentateuch (the first five books--Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) people are always talking about the God of Abraham because they really believe they need to distinguish between him and, say, the God of the Egyptians or the God of the Canaanites or whatever, who definitely exist but totally aren't as cool as our god. (It goes "Thou shalt have no other gods before me," not "I'm the only one, you idiot").

A monolatrous cleric would worship exactly one god. He believes that other gods exist--after all, someone is granting the prayers of that heathen Cleric of Lloth--but he thinks their worshipers are heathens, or infidels, or just stupid or unlucky in their choice of deity. After all, Pelor is obviously bigger and stronger and cooler than any of the other gods.

Depending on the particular religion, a monolatrous cleric could probably feel anything from disgust to contempt to amused condescension to those who worship other deities. Some might want to evangelize and spread the worship of their favored deity; some might want to purge the world of heathen; and some are just pretty insular. The fact that the elves think the God of the Elves is a really cool dude doesn't mean they want the dwarves to worship him. They'll just relax, secure in the knowledge that their god is bigger.

Oh, um, hi, I'm new here. *waves* Been reading for a while but hadn't worked up the nerve to post.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:32 am

awesome, thanks jadagul. I'd probably have forgotten that one, but monotheism is going to be mentioned at some point, along with the other forms of theism that are technically valid opinions, but make little to no sense. ...even if it's the one that makes the least.

jadagul · Post by **jadagul** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 1:38 am

Welcome. Like I said, monolatry is the one I always see people forget, even though there's a lot of potential there. I mean, you don't want Pelor and Tharizdun in the same pantheon; no one's worshiping both at the same time. Well, at least not seriously--the commoners could totally be tossing a couple coppers in whichever basket is relevant to them at the time. But the priest of Pelor also doesn't believe that Tharizdun doesn't exist. He just doesn't like the dude.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:14 am

I hate how D&D turned into many mono-latry religions, and nothing else. It got really boring.

-Crissa

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:28 am

I'm curious what the term for a culturally-acquistive Monotheism is? Like how in coming out of the Dark ages into medievalism the Roman and Russian Orthodox catholic churches maintained a doctorine of one supreme god but then due to the necessities of politics and drama added oddles of patron saints in a quasi-polytheistic manner.

Crissa · Post by **Crissa** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:46 am

It's called hypocrisy.

-Crissa

Josh_Kablack · Post by **Josh_Kablack** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 3:48 am

It's called hypocrisy.

No.

It's quite a bit narrower in scope.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:07 am

Prak_Anima wrote: Animism
Animism is the belief that everything has a spirit, and that all spirits are, more or less, equally worthy of respect, whether that respect is born of fear or love.

This can get really weird if you analyze it too much. I mean, sure, the Himalayas have a spirit, and you could conceivably say each individual rock and pebble, and patch of grass and so on have their own spirits. But take it further. Everything has a spirit. The slurpee I'm drinking has a spirit. Possibly the individual water molecules in it have their own spirits. The coaster I just tapped it on has a spirit (did it mind being struck with a slurpee cup? Does it get along with the spirits of the slurpee, the slurpee's cup, and my desk?). The computer I'm typing on has at least one spirit (does it mind what I use it for? Is my computer's spirit a prude?). Now, take it even further. You have a spirit. But your body could be seen as a separate concept from you, does your body have a spirit of it's own? What happens to the spirit(s) of the cheeseburger you just ate? Do they become shit spirits?

I'm really not sure how actual animists deal with these concepts. I'm nominally an animist, but an agnostic one, and I just largely don't worry about them, probably as an instinctual defense mechanism against the paranoia and over-concern that would develop if I cognitively believed that my chair and bed have spirits that might be watching me.

They don't. Actual religions that are characterized as animist don't follow your dictionary definition. Firstly, in every animistic religion I've heard of, all spirits are not equally worthy of respect. This is why in, say, Shinto, certain rocks/trees/etc are ritually adorned and worshiped. Those natural features are worth of worship. The tree in your backyard is not (although depending on the religion it might deserve some modicum of respect).

How do animist religions deal with the fact that water molecules have 'spirits'? Hardly any of them do, because they never even included the concept of water molecules. If they acknowledge it, it's probably to indicate some kind of underlying 'universal spirit' (see Pantheism). Animist religions don't normally believe that everything has a spirit; more likely they believe that anything you anthropomorphize has a spirit.

PoliteNewb · Post by **PoliteNewb** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:18 am

Crissa wrote:I hate how D&D turned into many mono-latry religions, and nothing else. It got really boring.

-Crissa

When exactly did it? Because I always played it polytheistic...the average guy on the street prayed to Pelor for sunshine and good harvests, to Ehlonna or Fharlanghn when he was lost in the woods, to Heironeous to give him courage in battle, and to Wee Jas to ward off the boogeyman. The various churches all had axes to grind, but the clerics of Pelor didn't go around telling people not to worship Heironeus because he was a punkass.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:22 am

I don't think the Pantheist "deity" is even required to be sentient. Tis just a celebration of the awesomeness of everything.

+1 to Polite Newb. Many campaigns I have played in had characters paying respect to many deities. Often they do have a favorite patron deity but not to the exclusion of all others.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:09 am

@Catharz: Ok, I never really got any official or "real" instruction or teaching about animism, just hearsay and a basic gist, but I did, specifically say "respect" to hedge my bets a bit.

Yeah, I've always tended towards treating D&D as being polytheistic.

As far as Pantheist, yeah, I only got the basic gist, again. I'll be more in my element when I write up the oddball stuff like misotheist (the idea that god is an asshole and you hate him because of it).

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:26 am

erik wrote:I don't think the Pantheist "deity" is even required to be sentient. Tis just a celebration of the awesomeness of everything.

Sort of like a universal Gaia hypothesis.

Count Arioch the 28th · Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:32 am

Prak_Anima wrote: As far as Pantheist, yeah, I only got the basic gist, again. I'll be more in my element when I write up the oddball stuff like misotheist (the idea that god is an asshole and you hate him because of it).

Would misotheism be similar to the concept "throw virgins into the volcano to appease it so it doesn't destroy you"? Or would misotheist oppose such a deity on general principle?

The last standard D&D game I ran was pantheistic. The human nation had adopted the draconic deities for so long that they no longer remembered that they were originally draconic. Clerics generally followed one deity exclusively, but where subordinate to the clergy of Io in important matters, and Io's priests made damn sure that every draconic deity war represented. So there literally was a shrine dedicated to Falazure in the basement of the temple of Io, which had a priest and regular followers. This wasn't considered abnormal, and a lot of the PC's quests involved being distretely being hired by the high priest of Io to take down various factions that had gotten too powerful.

TheFlatline · Post by **TheFlatline** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:44 am

I'd say the volcano/virgins thing wouldn't be pantheistic since you're trying to appease the volcano in that specific scenario, not the universe at large. That's almost worshiping the volcano itself.

Now if you threw virgins into the volcano as a sacrifice in order to simply prevent bad stuff from happening, and the volcano made it easy, then that would probably be pantheistic.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 9:05 am

Henotheism
Henotheism is monolatry's less arrogant cousin. Henotheism is the belief that many gods exist, but you only want to worship one. You're not technically saying that, say, Hextor, isn't worthy of worship in general, in fact you can probably totally see why someone might worship him, but he's not right for you, you don't like pressing your belief on others, or you don't like scrubbing the blood out of your tunic, or you'd much rather worship Obad Hai, and just chill under a tree while nymphs and dryads listen to your stories offering back rubs and cuddle up next to you because it's "cold".

Henotheism, like agnosticism further down, probably really pisses some other theists off. You're not saying your monolater brother is wrong, except in his belief that only his god is worthy of worship. You're cool with him making his own choice and just want him to respect yours.

Monotheism
Monotheism is really simple. It's the belief there is ONE (all) powerful entity, and only HE(more rarely she) is worthy of worship. This doesn't pop up in fantasy a lot, mostly because fantasy worlds usually have more than one god, so the people who believe in only one are... kind of deluded/dumb.

It is entirely possible to run a fantasy world with only a single god. But where are enemy spellcasters going to come from? In the real world model, enemy "spellcasters" are seen as worshiping the True Gods almost as powerful nemesis, or nemeses. This of course leads to very good questions about really dumb things like, why the all powerful, or at least certainly supposed to be more powerful, god doesn't wipe his enemies out, or why the world is such a shit hole.

In a more standard fantasy world, there is practically no way for a monotheist to get along with other theists. Even the nicest monotheist personally thinks that all the other theists are heathens and need to turn from their false gods. And this is understandably going to get on a lot of other theists' nerves. More usually, the monotheist is protrayed as a massive asshole who wants to smack some "sense" the other theists and get them to convert.

Atheism
Atheism is hard to swing in a world where priests run around calling down divine retribution. Atheism is the belief that there are no gods/higher powers. The closest you're going to come to actual atheism in a fantasy world is one of several cases:

The belief that the clerics running around slinging hellfire and heaven's light are channeling some universal force, and deluded themselves into thinking they get it through prayer. This could be true, or it could be the crack pot theory held by an insane few (again, we're talking fantasy here). It's supported in 3.5 by the fact that you can just be a cleric of a cause or philosophy. Technically, it's entirely possible to be a cleric of atheism. (on the other hand, believing clerics get their power from a universal force is more a form of pantheism)
The belief that, yes, clerics get power from powerful beings called gods. But the gods aren't inherently special, they're just powerful mortals with followers. (the closest thing to true atheism in a D&D setting. and even then, it has problems)
The lack of faith in the gods. Ie, you don't have faith in Pelor, whether or not you've seen him. You know he exists, which is not at all the same as having faith. It's actually quite hard to have faith in something that you know because faith implies belief in spite of a lack of evidence, or in face of contradictory evidence.

An atheist in a fantasy world is probably going to come off as a real asshole. He's not just saying your god is false, he's saying that the entire concept of gods in general is wrong. While a polytheist is saying "Well, the human pantheon's a joke, but Correlon is totally real, you should come worship him and his buddies," a monolater is just chuckling and saying "well, you guys can go on worshiping your gods, but mines the best!" and a monotheist is saying "you're both idiots, but if you come with me, I'll smear some funny oil and shit on you, and you'll be saved by Heironeious!" and the Animist and Pantheist are both just fucking laughing at these three while they have a little debate about whether there's one universal spirit or many smaller ones, the Atheist whips his dick out, smacks them all in the face with it, pisses in their cheerios and says "and there's no santa, either!"

Agnosticism
Agnosticism is the belief that the gods are unknowable. Whether due to magnitude, inscrutability, plain nonsense or something else, the Agnostic holds that the human(oid) mind just cannot comprehend them.

Agnostics really kinda... perplex theists. Because technically an agnostic isn't denying that the gods exist, he's just saying "we can not know them." A monotheist technically has no right to get pissy with an agnostic, at least on grounds of belief in the existence of a god.
Agnostics that go adventuring probably won't stay agnostic for long. They'll likely come to "know" the gods in one form or another.

Naytheism
The naytheist. Now we're getting into tropes. The Naytheist is someone who doesn't deny that gods exist, he just refuses to believe in or worship them. There can be a lot of reasons for this, he could believe they are unworthy of worship due to not being powerful/moral/extreme/"human" enough. He could believe the gods are just mortals that got powerful. He could believe that people made the gods, rather than vice versa, and as such, the shoe should be on the other foot, the gods should be thanking us. Maybe he doesn't see it as possible for any being to be the most powerful, and thinks power just kind of keeps going, or goes cyclically (ie that there are beings more powerful than the gods, and beings more powerful than that and so on, but eventually you find something that's more powerful than everything below it except flatworms, or disease, and so is at the mercy of that.
Basically, the naytheist just sticks his tongue out at the gods and says
"nope, you're not worth it."

Naytheists may be the logical conclusion of an atheist for whom the matter is belief. A line quoted from Terry Pratchett:

Lords and Ladies wrote:"I don't hold with paddlin' with the occult," said Granny firmly. "Once you start paddlin' with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you're believing in gods. And then you're in trouble."
"But all them things exist," said Nanny Ogg.
"That's no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages 'em."

When you know something exists, you don't have to believe. The logical conclusion of this in a fantasy world* is that if you know something exists, there's no reason to believe in them. They exist, you know it, lets move on, no sense in holding a point of view despite evidence when you actually have evidence.

Misotheism
This is kind of a personal favourite of mine. The misotheist believes in the gods, but hates them. For whatever reason, the person has forsaken his gods, rather than, or perhaps in response to, the all too common occurrence of the gods forsaking a man.
It's pretty simple, really: "God exists, and I hate that asshole."
Other theists respond in a lot of different ways, depending on theism and personality, everything from a cleric of hextor's "*laugh* yeah, I talked to him, the feeling's mutual!" to a really benevolent theist's "I'm sorry you feel that way, perhaps the priests can talk to you and show you that there's no reason to hate Pelor" to a monotheist's sputtering disbelief.
There are plenty of Misotheists all over reality and even some in myth. Nordic folk lore actually had a term for men who forsook the gods and believed only in the strength of their own bodies and minds, "goðlauss" (godless). Hell, I'm a misotheist on rare occasions where I actually consider the possibility of the existance of a god. Bruce Almighty is all about a man who goes from christmas/easter christian, to misotheist, to GOD, to benevolent knowing athiest/humanist (ie, he knows god exists so doesn't have to believe, and just focuses on being good to his fellow man)

Dystheism and Maltheism
Dystheism is the belief that god is, or the gods are not good. Maltheism is the belief that god/the gods is/are evil (or that he's a smuggler jerk with a heart of gold in a western themed sci fi show).
In the standard D&D setting a dystheist is probably at least somewhat right, and a maltheist is probably about half right.

Apatheism
Apatheism is the stalwart belief that whether god exists or not, whether it's Heironieous or Hextor, it just doesn't matter. People in the real world may earnestly hold this belief, and they'll likely receive no small amount of ridicule, but in a fantasy setting, there's a bit of a quandry: Clerics get spells, and there's the possibility of having a swarm of outsiders on your ass saying they were sent by Kord. However, given that, in the basic setting for D&D, clerics can represent a cause or ideal and receive spells, and that high enough level clerics seriously can send solars after you, clerical spells and outsider crusades are not true evidence of the existence of gods, nor the idea that it matters who exists.

...huh, thought that was all. ok, Wiki shows more theisms:

Eutheism
Eutheism should be really familiar to anyone who grew up with relatively decent christians who didn't pay too much attention, or mention, the squickier parts of the bible. It's the belief that god is inherently good. A monotheist who believes in Yondolla is probably going to be a eutheist, because there is nothing threatening or morally reprehensible about a female halfling who makes sure everyone's fed, everyone's protected, and everyone's cared for.
...really Eutheism is the belief that god is you sweet elderly neighbour who always calls the police when there's trouble, stands up for people, comforts you when you're in a shitty mood, bakes you an apple pie for your birthday, and is nice to everyone, even the junkie down the hall, because he reminds her of her grandson and she just wishes he'd quit the drugs and clean his life up so he could settle down with a nice girl.
and honestly, I wish I could believe this in real life.

Antitheism
Antitheism is kind of...strange. It's the antithesis of theism, but is generally more directed at belief than the gods themselves. Basically, in a fantasy setting, the antitheist knows the gods exist, and wants you to know it too, and stop having faith. It's like running into someone in the real world who simply has faith in gravity, rather than actually knowing that it's a scientific theory in good standing, and you want to prove it to them so they don't sound stupid, or something.
Theists are probably going to think antitheists are bonkers, because people who believe tend to think that's the same as knowing, and there isn't anything really mutually exclusive about the two.

Misoligare
This is a really obscure term coined by Micheal Owen Vaughan-Albert. Misoligare...ism? is the hatred of religion, rather than it's participants or even gods. Generally a Misoligare-ist believes that religion is inherently harmful, and thinks people should just individually worship the gods they find worthy without codifying it in oppressive and restricting rules.

Post-theism
Post-theism is really pedantic. It's the belief that, during a certain stage of human development, theism is valid, but that in a further stage of development, it's unnecessary and superfluous.

Dualism
There are certain forms of dualism which state the god worshiped is an evil impostor and there is a different, benevolent deity that is worthy of worship. I'm not sure I've ever actually seen this in a game, but it'd be interesting to explore. Honestly it would technically be a form of monotheism/monolatry, but it could be a super-type for a lot of other theisms. Technically there's no reason you couldn't believe an entire pantheon was evil impostors and there's another, unknown pantheon that's benevolent and worthy of worship. Or for that matter be a dualist pantheist, it's totally possible, just... odd.

---------------------------------------------------
*starts looking at other wiki pages for more theisms*...what the fuck have I gotten myself into here?
---------------------------------------------------

Deism
Deism is the belief that there is a supreme being or beings that created the universe, but that they do not alter the divine plan, or the world in anyway. They are completely hands off at this point. Usually it rejects "supernatural" events, or in the case of a fantasy world, the idea that prophecy and omens and all that shit as being caused by the gods. There's technically no reason a Deistic fantasy world couldn't have prophecy and such, it just wouldn't be the gods' doing.
Within Deism there is Pandeism, the belief god created the world but now is equivalent to it, Panendeism, the belief that the universe is a part, but not the whole, of a hands off deity (so god doesn't masturbate, I guess), and the term Polydeism is the specific belief in many gods in a deistic setting.

Autotheism
Autotheism is the belief that, whether also external or not, divinity is within oneself, and that it is one's duty to become perfectly divine. This may be selfish, egotistical, or wilful, but it can also be benevolent and selfless "following the implications of statements attributed to ethical, philosophical, and religious leaders such as Jesus,[11][12] Buddha, Mahavira, and Socrates" (Wiki)
------------------------------------------------------------

Those are the highlights. I'm going to go seriously consider a drink now...

Danchild · Post by **Danchild** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:04 am

Pluralism. More cultural than theistic in many cases. It is interesting to note that the fall of ancient Rome was preceded by the shift away from Pluralism (which may not have caused anything, it may just have been a symptom of a greater problem facing the empire).

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:10 am

what is pluralism though? isn't it just Polytheism?

jadagul · Post by **jadagul** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:49 am

Oh, the comments on monotheism reminded me of another really important one:

Manicheanism
Manicheanism is the belief that there exist exactly two equal and opposite gods. So the answer to "why does God, who is good, not fix all these problems" is that he's exactly opposed by the Devil, who's evil and just as influential, and they balance each other out. And the world is essentially a battlefield between the two.

A lot of theoretically monotheistic religions wind up looking pretty Manichean in practice. So pretty much any Christian theologian will tell you that God is all-powerful, and Satan is subservient to him and part of his grand plan. A war between Satan and God is a silly idea, because if God were actually trying to destroy Satan he'd just, you know, do it. Because he's God. But in popular culture, Satan is an enemy, a figure who tries to defeat God in a battle between good and evil. (in Christianity that's formally known as the Manichean heresy, but the term has spread to cover basically any theology that sees a more-or-less equal war between Good and Evil).

This is the setup for pretty much one of the most classic plots ever. "We're Good, and we serve the Good God. They're Evil, and they serve the Evil God. Let's go beat them up." If this is an accurate description of the world, it pretty much forces a reductive moral setup, since Good and Evil have clear and objective definitions.

And any manichean believer in your world will look on other religions, or philosophies, or whatever, and try to figure out which side they're on--it's a very "white hat, black hat" kind of set up. But if you want to play a game of the white hats against the black hats, it's pretty much perfect.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 5:06 pm

Forgotten Realms is mandatory Monolatral/Henotheistic. There are lots of gods, you can see them walking around and shit, but you are require by immutable law to have one and only one patron god and failure to abide by those rules results in divine punishment beyond concept or measure.

-Username17

Count Arioch the 28th · Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:13 pm

Can't resist, sorry

Danchild · Post by **Danchild** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 6:54 pm

Prak_Anima wrote:what is pluralism though? isn't it just Polytheism?

No. Ever wonder why the Greek and Roman gods were so alike? As I understand it, it is because they were expressing cultural sensitivity toward each other. Finding common ground and adapting their belief system in a sympathetic manner. Zues and Jupiter are interchangeable. The male Roman god Pallas (edit: Minerva, thanks for the correction) and the Greek Athena less so, but they are both deities of wisdom.

It is part of the reason the ancient Greeks and Hebrews has a falling out. They exchanged a lot of cultural and technological ideas. The Hebrews even started translating their religious texts into Greek. On a fundamental level they were never going to fully integrate though. One of the larger obstacles to the relationship of the two cultures was religion.

Roman society was at times, very culturally sensitive. New or foreign religions were brought into the empire all of the time. The only major taboo was that in order to worship your own strange, foreign god, you also had to pay respect to the Roman gods as well. When in Rome...

Early Christianity used a bastardised version of Pluralism in order to attract worship. Many pagan gods were transormed into the early Christian saints. I can recall an ancient statue of the Madonna at a pilgramage hostel in Turkey was in fact a pre-Christian statue of the Egyptian goddess Isis.

Needless to say, Monotheism and Pluralism can seem to be antithetical. That does not neccesarily make a Pluralist a Polytheist though, nor does it make a Polytheist a Pluralist. I am not American, but I believe that the US constitution has a freedom of worship clause. That is not strictly Pluralism, but it is very much a Pluralist ideal.

Mind you, this is just my poorly informed opinion. I may very well have some facts wrong or have drawn some false inferences due to my poor education and general ignorance. Take it for what you will.

schpeelah · Post by **schpeelah** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 7:54 pm

I'd like to point out Agnosticism does not actually work quite like that. Agnosticism is defined by the belief that god(s) is/are unknowable, in other words nobody could ever know anything about them for sure, making it sort of anti-antitheism (since antitheism know, don't believe). For example Planescape's Athar are misotheistic towards the regular gods, but agnostic towards the "real god" The Great Unknown. They still believe in it and worship it, but they also believe you can't actually find out anything about it or even confirm its existence. Again, the distinction between believing and knowing.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:34 pm

Danchild wrote:
Prak_Anima wrote:what is pluralism though? isn't it just Polytheism?
-stuff-

In that case, pluralism doesn't really seem quite so much like a theism but rather a way of handling theisms of other people.

schpeelah wrote:I'd like to point out Agnosticism does not actually work quite like that. Agnosticism is defined by the belief that god(s) is/are unknowable, in other words nobody could ever know anything about them for sure, making it sort of anti-antitheism (since antitheism know, don't believe). For example Planescape's Athar are misotheistic towards the regular gods, but agnostic towards the "real god" The Great Unknown. They still believe in it and worship it, but they also believe you can't actually find out anything about it or even confirm its existence. Again, the distinction between believing and knowing.

Ok, so I slightly over simplified.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 11:05 pm

Danchild wrote:The male Roman god Pallas and the Greek Athena less so, but they are both deities of wisdom.

???

The Gaming Den

Types of theism in a fantasy setting

Types of theism in a fantasy setting

Re: Types of theism in a fantasy setting