why there is only one god
Answers
Monotheism is the belief in one god.A narrower definition of monotheism is the belief in the existence of only one god that created the world, is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, and intervenes in the world.
A distinction may be made between exclusive monotheism, and both inclusive monotheism and pluriform (panentheistic) monotheism which, while recognising various distinct gods, postulate some underlying unity.
Monotheism is distinguished from henotheism, a religious system in which the believer worships one god without denying that others may worship different gods with equal validity, and monolatrism, the recognition of the existence of many gods but with the consistent worship of only one deity.[8] The term "monolatry" was perhaps first used by Julius Wellhausen.
The broader definition of monotheism characterizes the traditions of Bábism, the Baháʼí Faith, Balinese Hinduism, Cao Dai (Caodaiism), Cheondoism (Cheondogyo), Christianity,Deism, Druze faith,Eckankar, Hindu sects such as Shaivism and Vaishnavism, Islam, Judaism, Mandaeism, Rastafari, Seicho no Ie, Sikhism, Tengrism (Tangrism), Tenrikyo (Tenriism), Yazidism, and Zoroastrianism, and elements of pre-monotheistic thought are found in early religions such as Atenism, ancient Chinese religion, and Yahwism..
mark brainlist and follow me
Answer:
Going to go with the assumption that there is a God.
With my deductions and some Sikh beliefs, I was able to conclude that having multiple Gods would be inefficient.
In Japji Sahib, there's mention of Waheguru having thousands (more or less) forms, but not one form.
That, to me, makes sense if you'd want to be seen and be in different places at the same time in a visually recordable way. Kind of like how God was like a fly and sat on top of the hot iron rod, which Prehlaad noticed and later touched, and then was something else that killed his father through that flaw he had in his certified wish by Shiva. Or I guess one could argue that the same case was held with the Gurus and how two would live simultaneously with one only being the Guru (father/son, etc).
Other than just rivalry, if you're going to have people follow you (or lay out some guideline that supposedly works), you'll want something simple and distraction free.
The way Sikhi does this, is through Naam Simran. No rituals or much money needs to be spent, all you need to get started is basically reciting/meditating on the Lord's name. Just one name.
Kabir, raised as a Muslim, touched someone's feet. He said, "Raam Raam" (not to be confused with the king) and that's what Kabir meditated on for practically the rest of his life. It's crossplatform (he used the words a Hindu usually would) and worked.
With multiple Gods, this make it easier for pseudo-religious people to take advantage of others and run all sorts of schemes, with remedies, rings, etc (let the irony of my post sink in, I guess).
One could argue that it'd be nice to have multiple Gods or divine beings (Krishna & Radhika, etc) as they'd be relatable, but when it comes to God, being anywhere close to one is out of the question. Gendered gods just make things worse by (perhaps unintentionally) inducing sexism, gender-roles, and out-casting those in the the inbetween or mix of, and so on.
You could have two or so gods that are exactly the same, but if both are everything, then they're essentially the same thing. I'm having a hard time in a seeing a point to multiple gods, other than fancy artwork and shareholders.
Ik-Oankar, as Gurbani says...a lot.
Anyhoo, those are just my two cents. I apologize for how this is written and my rambling(s), as I haven't been answering questions enough lately.
Explanation: