Is Christianity Polytheistic?

Christianity is not polytheistic. Perhaps you are painting with a rather wide brush here. There is a huge difference between polytheistic religions and Christianity. I'll try to sum it up as efficiently as possible:Monotheism:
The worship of the one, true Supreme Being. God is one as to the divine essence or nature, Jesus Christ's "deity" is due to that direct connection to this essence/nature. He is still not a true "God" just reflection of his essence and nature in human form. The Holy Spirit is also not a "deity" just the representative manifestation of his divine will and influence.Confusing and being misleading through the representation that Virgin Mary, Satan, angels/demons, etc are deities is simply a false statement. Nowhere is it stated that they are divine in nature or action. They are simply another being created by and subject to God's will and judgement. Those that live within his spirit are "divine" through his grace, not independent authority as is common practice in polytheism. Put quite simple there is only one God, to which all are religiously and morally accountable.

quote:

---

"For even though there are those who are called "gods" whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many "gods" and many "lords", there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him, and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are..." (Corinthians 8:5)

---

Free will of his creations and their inherent spiritual power and gifts is where people get confused. Just because Satan, Lucifer, etc have expanded spiritual power and knowledge in no way makes the divine just supernatural in influence. The Trinity is simply three different manifestations of his being, not three different dieties to be worshiped. Even Jesus is not to be worshiped just acknowledged for his sacrifice (taken as your mortal saviour) and an example to emmulate not worship directly as stated above.Polytheism:
It attempts personify the various forces of nature (e.g., the sun, moon, stars, fire, air, water, fertility, love, death, war, etc.) worships each as a independent deity independent of judgement and subjection to a higher authority. This was/is developed from the concept of pantheism, the notion that, ultimately, everything possesses the god nature which is simply a false belief. Polytheism attempts to cling to man’s basic religious instinct, i.e., the need to believe in some higher power, but rejects the one, true deity to whom man must be religiously and morally accountable.

quote:

---

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things (Romans 1:22-23).

---

The gods of the ancient pagan world were heterogeneous. They were vicious, warring beings, characterized by utter immorality. They mated and produced new gods (and demi-gods ie nephilim through breeding with humans); they brutally fought and destroyed one another. They were diverse in temperament and nature.Conclusion:
There is therefore a vast difference between the deity of the Scripturesthe one, eternal, perfect-nature being, manifested in three personsand the discordant, temporal, factious and fictitious gods that were fabricated in the digressive imaginations of a rebel humans and fallen beings.Edited by Practical Prodigy, : No reason given.Edited by Practical Prodigy, : SpellingEdited by Practical Prodigy, : another spelling error found, lolEdited by Practical Prodigy, : No reason given.

---

Perhaps if you read my post you would see the difference. I tried to break it down into key points where they are different.Christians worhip one God, through which everything else is manifest. To acknowledge other beings as non-human and supernatural in no way confers them Godhood. To acknowledge demons, angels, etc exist in no way is giving them deity status as you keep repeating. You are confusing awareness and acknowledgment with belief and worship respectfully.Christians are not to worship Jesus Christ, Virgin Mary, or any other being besides the one true God. Anything else is polytheism you are correct in that statement, and is where organized religion usually stick its human based ideas and other falsehoods into the matter. No where in the Bible does it say to worship Jesus or any other being so unless that changes your argument falls on that premise and is quite poor with all due respect

---

Nice post. With my above post should sum this thread up quite nicely Edited by Practical Prodigy, : spelling

---

Omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnibenevolence mainly should I go on? Any also self-proclaimation is far from confering Godhood. Just because you adopt a name for yourself doesn't mean that you are recognized as such, thats like saying if you decided to call yourself President of the United Sates that it would make it true. Basic circular reasoning and a poor logical argument to say the least. A title confers no definition unless it is acknowledged, confirmed, and used by others, thats with any name or title. I fail to see how that is even relevant to your argument, and if that is your basic premise then this discussion is basically mute. Seems you are confusing worship and veneration. God alone is worshiped. Jesus, Virgin Mary, Holy Spirit, saints, etc are venerated.Worship (adoration towards a diety) - Adoration, which is known as latria in classical theology, is the worship and homage that is rightly offered to God alone. It is the acknowledgement of excellence and perfection of an uncreated, divine person. It is the worship of the Creator that God alone deserves.Veneration - Veneration, known as dulia in classical theology, is the honor due to the excellence of a created person. This refers to the excellence exhibited by the created being who likewise deserves recognition and honor.Hope this clears it up for you...

---

Very good complimentary post to what Blue Jay and I posted, Kudos

---

Well considering you avoid the points most of us make and instead resort to semantics to prove your point is why your having so much trouble understanding the discussion. We might as well be talking to a brick wall.Like the point I made about the differences between worhip (adoration) and veneration. or the point we made about naming yourself President or Queen, or trying to compare an atheistic and theistic definition/concept of god with circular reasoning. Your position is also based on a number of fallacy concepts; argument from, bare assertion, conjunction, denying the correlative, necessity, false dichotomy, homunculus argument, nirvana, and package deal. You have so many logical holes in your argument it is hard to even address them in one post without taking up entire page.Perhaps we need to attack these fallacies one by one and we can make some progress. If you understood these most basic concepts this discussion could make some progress instead of you just repeating yourself ad nauseum ignoring the logical explainations you've been given.

---

Firstly your quote/reply was to wrong post than you claimed and replied to, you also ignored all the points in between the post you pulled that from and the one you claimed to be quoting and replying to at bottom of both that post and your subsequent post. Quite sad when you cant even get that straight, no wonder you are so confused and over your head Secondly, instead of randomly ranting on and you repeating yourself how about you address all the logical fallacy concepts I pointed out. Or the point about the differences between worship (adoration) and veneration. Or the point we made about naming yourself President or Queen or any other title, or the point of trying to compare an atheistic and the theistic definition/concept of god with circular reasoning.Your not God, because you did not create the Universe, life, or the countless other glories that would make that title appropriate. Your "conceptual criteria" is majorly flawed, the reasons have been pointed out repeatedly in this thread. Your refusal to even have a meaningful discussion and instead resorting to one red herring after another is bordering on lunacy. You refuse to even address the vast majority of points that blow holes in your position and wild assumptions.I have pointed out several conceptual criteria, as you say, that states where your position doesnt hold any water and is actually quite poor, Whether or not you choose to address or accept them is beyond my control. Edited by Practical Prodigy, : SpellingEdited by Practical Prodigy, : Rephrase

---

LOL. I addressed every point and you defelcted with a red herring once again. You select one sentence that was basically a joke making fun of your lack of understanding and avoid the meat of my post once again. Alas, I'll stop trying to school you of your errant ways since you will just avoid the issues and continually deflect and ignore the real logical fallacies of your argument.Perhaps when you address the real issues I posed we can continue the dialogue when you have some remote grasp of the weakness of your argument.

---

That was not my argument, was simple one of the many examples I used to show the logical fallacy of his argument. Perhaps if you actually bothered to read some of the posts I made instead of quote-mining from someone who deflects with red herrings and avoids 90% of the points you raise, you would get the whole picture instead of making yourself look dumb by joining the bandwagon with someone who doesnt know how to even post a proper position that is not full of multiple fallacy concepts. Perhaps you would care to address the many points I have made as to why his position is utter rubbish?Edit:By the way the trinity does not condone polytheism unless you have some twisted version of it. It simply explains the different forms God can take; true form, human form, and essence (spirit). Not hard to understand roughly equivalent to; gas, solid, liquid of a said element. You wouldnt call them a different element just due to fact the changed form, Kudos.Edited by Practical Prodigy, : ExpandedEdited by Practical Prodigy, : spelling

---

Quote-mining is where you take a small part of a post out of context. Which either you did intentionally, or what I hope is the ther answr, simply requoted someone else who took it out of context.If you wanted to address my post you could have addressed the heart of the issue not a poke of fun at someone with a head harder than granite. I have repeated myslef ad nauseum to explain why his postion is laughable and have yet to get a serious reply just one red herring after another, its quite comical.Heresy you say? Please expand...

---

Well nowhere did you provide a supposedly non-heretical explaination. Also the fact you say it is heresy means very little, it is what was said by God that there is only one. Anything else is heresy and blasphemy. To say that God is one and has different contets that he applies his essence is not polytheistic. It is still the same spirit and essence, and Jesus/Holy Spirit are not deity in themselves just manifestations of God as is everything else in the Universe.Edited by Practical Prodigy, : No reason given.

---