Talk:Monolatry

I have moved the following section here until such time as there is something that makes it of value:

"The Apostle Paul indicated that although there are gods many and lords many, to Christians there is but one god (cf. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6). This appears to be a proclamation of monolatry rather than monotheism."^[1]

"Jews at the time of Jesus were not monotheists, that is, only believed in the existence of one god, but were instead involved in monolatry, that is, the worship of one god. The distinction is important. In many places, the Bible tacitly acknowledges the existence of more than one deity, but does not sanction the worship of more than one god."^[2]

First of all, the editor has quoted a book review. The book review is not a statement about LDS beliefs, but a critique of an article that a critic of the LDS Church attempts to describe the concepts of Christology in the Book of Mormon, part of the LDS canon. Second, it seems unhelpful to quote the article, but then say nothing; as if the quotes are self explanatory. I find them insufficient. Third, the topic is monolatrism and this section should explain why it belongs or how it is applicable to the topic. Does anyone have any ideas? --Storm Rider ^(talk) 18:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Citing the book itself would seem better. However, since Monolatrism is in contrast to Monotheism and others, I see no reason to question its value to the article. In fact, I think these are pretty significant vs. the Monotheism that is tended to be taught today among many Christian groups. I'd like to see this information put back in but with citations of the original maybe backed up by the review. Misty MH (talk) 00:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The amount of discussion of Mormonism is arguably disproportionate to its relevance to monolatry. The insinuation that Mormonism is monolatrist is contentious. Statements are made to give the impression that Mormonism is monolatrist without openly arguing such. What would be more appropriate is to summarize and cite research on the question and note that the inclusion of Mormonism in this article is controversial. Contributors shouldn't assume that their point is self-evident from the selected bits of info given. Biogenicsilica (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I think it's absolutely relevant to explicitly look in the article at whether the Shema, the most prominent declaration in Jewish practice of the Oneness of God, is compatible with Monolatry rather than out-and-out Monotheism.

But at the moment I am not clear what exactly thesis Rashi's comment

The Lord, who is now our God and not the God of the other nations-He will be [declared] in the future “the one God,” as it is said: “For then I will convert the peoples to a pure language that all of them call in the name of the Lord” (Zeph. 3:9), and it is [also] said: “On that day will the Lord be one and His name one” (Zech. 14:9).

is being used to support.

A quote in the article claims "there is no clear and unambiguous denial of the existence of gods other than Yahweh before Deutero-Isaiah in the 6th century B.C." Then we blithely continue "This was recognised by Rashi..."

But as somebody wrote above, "Acknowledging other people worshipped other gods, ... is not necessarily an endorsement of those faiths or a belief in their gods. The rhetorical character of the translated passages can be argued either way, and this should be reflected in the article".

Different readings I guess are:

"YHVH is our God, YHVH alone"

"YHVH is our God, YHVH is the only [God]"

"YHVH is our God, YHVH is unlike any other" ?

I'm not sure that Rashi is incompatible with (2).

IMO it would indeed be good to look at this example more closely, and at what various commentators (particularly those not necessarily just "teaching the party line") have had to say about the Shema, if [[WP:RS]s can be found. Jheald (talk) 18:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

"However, due to lack of understanding of the original text, most points are considered invalid and not congruent with Jewish teachings."

This sentence is biased, because it looks like it implies that the points are considered invalid because they are incompatible with Jewish teachings.

Considered invalid by whom? By Jewish teachings? Of course they are. Biblical criticism is a scientific approach, Jewish teaching is a religion.

I think the author should add WHO considers those points invalid and also separate that from the fact that they are incompatible with Jewish techings.

Yingele (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Monolatry is being treated as one of the -isms. It is NOT and the correct article should be at Monolatry, not monolatrism. The 'isms' all deal with belief, not practice. So if the opposite of theism is atheism, then one could say the opposite of monolatry is idolatry . So to say that someone who practices monolatry worships only one god, but believes in te existence of more than one god is reading more into the statement than is there. Consider the examples below:

• Adam believes in one god and worships him (or her).
• Brian believes in more than one god, but worships only one.
• Charlie isn't sure if there is a god, but worships God out of faith.
• David believes in God, but really doesn't practice any faith.

So given the examples above, Adam, Brian, and Charlie all practice monolatry (that is they all worship one god) even though Adam is monotheistic, Brian is henotheistic, and Charlie is some sort of theistic agnostic. David; like Adam, is monotheistic but doesn't practice monolatry because he is irreligious.

Bottom Line: Monolatry = single worship greek: mono(single) + latreia(worship). I do acknowledge that monolatry is often used to refer to those who believe there may be (or are) more than one god (because monolatry is a 'weaker' term than monotheism), but this article needs to acknowledge the differences. VictorianMutant (talk) 22:11, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure what you are getting at, and what is the real quibble. If Monolatry is the worship of one, it might also imply a belief or major belief in one. But that's fine if you think that someone can BELIEVE IN maybe more than one while worshiping only one. Was it reworded at some point to reflect this? Apple Dictionary defines it as: "monolatry... the worship of one god without denial of the existence of other gods." I thought the article now indicates that in the first line. Maybe it was changed after your comment. :) Misty MH (talk) 01:01, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a random section on Christianity? It doesn't really add anything to the article on monolatry. Shouldn't really be there. ArdClose (talk) 07:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

And why is there even a random section on Egypt and Israel? Why no Asian religious beliefs? The Christianity section ONLY discusses the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints which is barely mainstream Christianity. If this article is even on Wikipedia, then Catholicism and mainstream protestant beliefs should be included. Frankly I'm not sure why this page exists. Seems it is taking an opportunity for a little bit of proselytizing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonnigfreitag (talk • contribs) 17:43, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I take offense to your definition of "mainstream Christianity."

Many early writings from the time just after Christ have been lost, and many things have been interpreted in ways that are unproven and indeed, non-provable as to the degree to which he (Jesus Christ) would agree. There's a problem with making claims about which group is "mainstream", when the earliest writings we have that quote Jesus were written **THIRTY** years after he was crucified. The Athanasian and Nicean councils didn't take place until 362 and 325 CE respectively. If we define what is mainstream by things that happen hundreds of years after an event, then I guess I can say that certain things supersede councils of men.

The comments about the Jehovah's Witnesses and the New World Translation indicate a stong POV that is unencyclopedic. 75.201.3.191 (talk) 04:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I second the above. There needs to be a flag inserted there indicating that a citation is needed. --Sierkejd (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I came onto this talk page solely to see what was up with that JW section. I'll be bold and delete it--even if it's true, the article gives us no reason to believe such. Discuss here. --Mrcolj (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

The current iteration of the "In Christianity" section refers to Monolatry and Monotheism but, in my opinion, is from a personal POV interpretation without citation. It argues for a certain interpretation of a translation that is already a translator's or publisher's interpretation. While I do think it's important to include Christian ideas in the article, there is very little there. Some early Christians believed in varying kinds of theism, or even something not exactly like theism. Some Gnostics might have, for example, believed in good gods vs. evil gods; some might not have thought of some (or all?) of them as "gods" at all. There is a LOT of history there missing. I have seen some references to this in other articles, but which those were are not coming to mind at the moment, or I might include some of that here myself. Today, there are a bazillion different permutations of theism among those who call themselves Christian. Relatively few might be Monolatrists, but are some. I'd like to see references to actual Monolatry within Christianity throughout the ages. :) Misty MH (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Christianity is a monotralous religion (according to the verses Psalm 82:1 and 82:6-7; Psalm 86:8; Psalm 95:3; Psalm 138:1; Judges 11:24; 1 Corinthians 8:5-6; Deuteronomy 10:17; Exodus 15:11; Daniel 2:47). In 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 it is says: even though there are so-called gods in heaven and on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, but for us there is only one. Egon20 (talk) 14:20, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

It is clear the bible dopes not refer to any "other Gods" It speaks on the topic clearly by saying "gods" to refer to the blindness induced by sinfullness. It uses it as a sort of distinguisher between the one true God, and those which are a figment of mans sinful puzzle-lie formations. TO say that ancient Israel supported many gods as in the same category of the one true God is incorrect. The topic is discussed by the Apostle Paul as well as by Moses and the word of God himself in the Old testament.^[1]</ref>http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/8-6.htm</ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.249.65.78 (talk) 17:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Monolatry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106075405/http://www.myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/god/Overview_About_God/God_Monotheism_Tigay.htm to http://www.myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/god/Overview_About_God/God_Monotheism_Tigay.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:25, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

I am not happy with the MOVE to "Monolatry" from "Monolatrism".

Monolatry smacks of reference to the word idolatry, and therefore seems like some religion's preferred term to dismiss other forms of theism.

When I first encountered this article, I just took the word monolatrism to refer to a theological word for another form of theism, comparable to the words monotheism or pantheism, etc. Now, as monolatry, it seems more like an opinion that relegates the belief or practice to a form of idolatry.

Don't like it at all.

We are not likely to find the finer distinctions (or words) like this in TYPICAL dictionaries. They aren't theological dictionaries! And as we see from the discussion in October 2017,† each of these words might not even be found in such a dictionary! Both words were missing from some!

† I just today read the short Discussion, which only included a few editors, no discussion among theologians, and no references whatsoever to theological dictionaries (that I noticed in the discussion). Everyday dictionaries aren't good enough on this topic.

Whether intended or not, the move – to what is being taken here as the same word in a different form – seems to be a move to a more sectarian designation, possibly referring by sectarians to idolatry, rather than a theological word referring to an important type of theism.

I strongly urge that this word be changed back until we (or someone) can do further research among theological dictionaries and such, rather than relying on everyday-dictionaries.

Please.

Suggestions for theological dictionaries are welcome. But let's move the page back for now (someone who knows how to do that).

The move details from View History: "10:57, November 6, 2017‎ Jenks24 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (19,535 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Jenks24 moved page Monolatrism to Monolatry: per requested move discussion, see talk) (undo | thank)"

Misty MH (talk) 02:06, 11 September 2018 (UTC) Misty MH (talk) 02:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

The lead states that "monolatry is distinguished from henotheism", but I think the article completely fails to show how the two are distinct from each other. Who can work that out? Cheers, Arminden (talk) 06:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Hum from what I understand a Henotheist only worship one god, believes there are others and are ok with others worshiping those other gods (in other words, those other gods are not evil incarnate, just not their god, but those other gods are equally valid for others to worship. :Monolatry on the other hand is believing that there's more then one god out there but worshiping another god is wrong.

At least that's what I understand from the answer to this question on Quora, that said, we'll need a proper source before we can say that for sure... Luredreier (talk) 15:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Nothing has been done yet. Guessing or applying to Quora is not ideal ;) Still needs to be clarified/reworded with the DIFFERENCES put into focus. Arminden (talk) 08:50, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

I saw this youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Kpkp2vxX3I That kind of addresses this topic. And sure, it can't be used as a source, and heck, its sources are books etc that can't be used as a source either directly. But perhaps someone digging deeper can find more sources about this topic by going down that rabbit hole? Things like online references to the books used as sources or even the books themselves being online somewhere? Or perhaps there's something else that would qualify as a source? Anyway, just thought I should let you all know about the video and the sources mentioned in the description field as it might be a good starting point for beefing up the source section of this article a bit if anyone is willing to go to the effort of looking through it all. Luredreier (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

In this article one reads about henotheism, a religious system in which the believer worships one god without denying that others may worship different gods with equal validity., whereas in the article Henotheism it says: Henotheism (from Greek ἑνὸς θεοῦ (henos theou) 'of one god') is the worship of a single, supreme god while not denying the existence or possible existence of other lower deities..

This seems like an open contradiction. Which article is right? --♦ Xarioti (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

My intent is to delete the entire LDS section in its current state per my edit summary my detailed edit summary. @Nathantibbitts13579: reverted me and posted on my talk page with summaries and comments that reinforce my point, that the section cites no sources mentioning monolatry in any sense, that it cites almost entirely WP:Primary sources, and that its extrapolation of monolatry is WP:Original research.

As there are not many people watching this page, and this seems like a brick wall argument, I am referring this to the No original research noticeboard. SamuelRiv (talk) 02:59, 10 September 2024 (UTC)