I Guess AI Has Converted Me From Agnosticism To Monolatrism
Based on pure logic and reasoning, as well as analyzing between different religions and spiritual affiliations. I assumed I was leaning towards being a henotheist, but turns out being a monolatrist is what allows me to have my cake and eat it too. Or more specifically, I can believe that a supreme creator exists alongside lesser deities, without it being shirk, idolatry, or paganism and also still be monotheistic adjacent. It being the reverse (believing lesser deities and worshipping them, yet also believing but not worshipping a higher power) is illogical to me as that would still be classified as polytheism or paganism. For any monotheists out there, monolatrism is believing and worshipping in a single deity, but also acknowledging other deities exist, unlike henotheism where one is skeptical of other deities existing.
Just like some Greek philosophers back then and some neo pagans today, I just believe the gods and goddesses are personified metaphors of real universal forces, psychological/subconscious archetypes, and/or literal beings that were falsely assumed to be divine. Of course, my beliefs may change later in life as I was Buddhist when I was younger, then became Christian adjacent (so never fully converted), then became an atheist, and then settled as an agnostic for over a decade until a few days ago. I used Perplexity and Meta AI to help me convert from being an agnostic to monolatrist, although ChatGPT would probably spit out the same reasoning as the two. For now, I'll loosely follow the Abrahamic faiths; however, I'd also embrace paganism in a secular way, so anything that clearly violates monotheism regardless of intent/context I'd avoid (temples, shrines, altars, idols, sacrifices, praying, invoking, etc).
To me, monolatrism makes the most logical sense because it resolves the logical inconsistencies with merely just believing monotheism or polytheism. Of course I'm sure everyone knows the limitations of fully believing in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent deity that can defy all natural laws and exists outside of reality. Y'all should also know how believing in many lesser deities itself results in many contradictions and doesn't explain the original cause to everything. Monolatrism or henotheism both merge the 2 together in a way that allows for the benefits of both and leaves out the risks of accepting either. I'm aware that there's a lack of empirical evidence for any religious or spiritual system, although faith by definition is believing in something without that. Doesn't mean one necessarily has to blindly believe in something; therefore, it doesn't hurt to have faith.
Just like some Greek philosophers back then and some neo pagans today, I just believe the gods and goddesses are personified metaphors of real universal forces, psychological/subconscious archetypes, and/or literal beings that were falsely assumed to be divine. Of course, my beliefs may change later in life as I was Buddhist when I was younger, then became Christian adjacent (so never fully converted), then became an atheist, and then settled as an agnostic for over a decade until a few days ago. I used Perplexity and Meta AI to help me convert from being an agnostic to monolatrist, although ChatGPT would probably spit out the same reasoning as the two. For now, I'll loosely follow the Abrahamic faiths; however, I'd also embrace paganism in a secular way, so anything that clearly violates monotheism regardless of intent/context I'd avoid (temples, shrines, altars, idols, sacrifices, praying, invoking, etc).
To me, monolatrism makes the most logical sense because it resolves the logical inconsistencies with merely just believing monotheism or polytheism. Of course I'm sure everyone knows the limitations of fully believing in an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent deity that can defy all natural laws and exists outside of reality. Y'all should also know how believing in many lesser deities itself results in many contradictions and doesn't explain the original cause to everything. Monolatrism or henotheism both merge the 2 together in a way that allows for the benefits of both and leaves out the risks of accepting either. I'm aware that there's a lack of empirical evidence for any religious or spiritual system, although faith by definition is believing in something without that. Doesn't mean one necessarily has to blindly believe in something; therefore, it doesn't hurt to have faith.
26-30, M
