Are monotheistic religions just an excuse for attacking other people just because they have other gods...

Are monotheistic religions just an excuse for attacking other people just because they have other gods? Why doesn't this happen with polytheistic religions?

boooooy you best get up on outta here with that stupid shit

>Nigger meme

So your contention is that monotheistic societies attack other societies more readily, and that polytheistic societies attack other societies less?

A world with only polytheistic civilizations would be more peaceful in other words?

What are you actually saying. State your position more clearly. What sort of reasoning leads to this conclusion. What is your research and sources? Explain yourself sir or leave this board forever.

I think he likely left within seconds of posting

Monotheistic societies attack other societies with the excuse of not having the same gods while polytheistic don't (they attack other societies, but not because they have other gods)

Rome, China, and Christian Countries all had pantheons and they were imperial

>wars are not actually about resources/trade
>religious maymays arent convenient spooks to rally the plebs

but not because >muh special god´
my point exactly. But my questions is why polytheistic civs don't say "hey let's attack that other country because they don't worship the true gods"? Only monotheistic ones use this argument.

>Are monotheistic religions just an excuse for attacking other people just because they have other gods?

no, its a exuse to tell your own people what to do so you can use them to attack other people among other

> Why doesn't this happen with polytheistic religions?

it does

a lot

Wars between polytheist states have occured of times in the antiquity and iron age, t b h

HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THEY DID IT FOR GOD AND NOT FOR RESOURCES

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
*inhale
AHAHAHHAAHHAAHHAHAHA

*plenty of times

give me examples of polytheistic nations attacking other nations for the sole purpose of converting them into their religion.

Didn't have to be with the goal of converting the other. The sumerian city states kept attacking each other with the goal of stealing others protector god's statues. The Babylonians struck back at the Elamites to get their marduk statue back. Cambyses persecuted the egyptians because they worshiped animal gods. The romans persecuted the jews of palestine and destroyed their temple because they believed monotheism was antithetic to their imperial values.

However I fully agree that proselytization wars are a feature of monotheist states.

I thought the Romans BTFO the Jews because of all the [autistic screeching] and revolts over the Roman religion.

>Rome, China, and Christian Countries all had pantheons and they were imperial
What.
>Rome
Did two things:
-Hey your gods are similar to ours. This guy looks like our Mars. We gon call him *insert your god's name*-Mars.
-Hey your religion's pretty cool. Mind we adopt it? We Mithraists now

>China
-You have gods, we have gods. Heaven is just like the earthly realm where gods have their own countries desu.
Or
-*Syncretism intensifies.*

The only time Romans and the Chinese had problems with religion is when said religious group are filled with psychos bent on rioting and rebelling.

Because it didn't make any fucking sense to because the religions are entirely different. That doesn't make one more peaceful then the other, it just changes how they approach their gods.

Most polytheists of the ancient world were more then willing to believe that a foreign people's gods existed, so they were in a sense more "tolerant". They did not frequently have wars with the primary goal of conversion, because their gods were their gods, and the enemy's gods were the enemies. It was a tribal concept.

This could result in a tolerant sentiment, because you're not going to kill them for worshiping the "wrong" gods, but it just as often led to an intolerant standpoint. Namely because, your gods were giving you full sanction to go beat the shit out of them.

Do you know how many ancient kings boasted of invading foreign lands and tearing down their temples and casting down the statues of their gods? Because its a fucking lot.

A monotheistic God teaches that their is only one God for all mankind, and thus opens the way for wars over philosophical truth, because that is the nature of the ideology. It also closes off the notion of beating up the foreign gods just for being the foreign gods.

Its the same reason atheists don't have religious wars, because their ideology doesn't make sense for it to. That doesn't make them more peaceful, they just fight over politics or ethics instead.

>Why doesn't this happen with polytheistic religions?
>what is syncretic religion?

Fuck off back to riddit.
Nonsense, they attack under that guise. Fucking dope.
Name one example of a monotheistic nation attacking another for the sole purpose of converting them.

Oh wait, no such thing exists.

Not him but the Byzantine-Sassanid war of 602-628 was waged with the intention of destroying Christianity turning the Hagia Sophia into a Zoroastrian fire altar and forcing the Romans to worship Ahura Mazda.

That's not conversion, that's power.

Technically the zoroastrians are not monotheists, they are "dualists".

How is that fucking relevant.

Well then they are polytheists, and they were clearly waging a religion war.