236 Job Y. Jindo
Polytheism and Monotheism: Two Diff erent Worldviews
Kaufmann points out that the Bible displays no cognizance of what he
regards as fundamental to all polytheistic literature — namely, the notion
of a primordial nature or causality that limits or conditions everything in
the universe, including the divine sphere. He calls this category the “meta-
divine.”23 It is “the womb of all being, contains the roots and patterns of all
nature, and out of which the gods themselves have emerged.”24 Th at is, in
the polytheistic system, deities contend not only with each other but also
with a transcendent order, to which they themselves are subject. In biblical
monotheism, what shapes the destinies of all beings in the universe is not
preexistent causality but the absolute will of one supreme deity. Accord-
ingly, for Kaufmann, the monotheistic statement “YHWH is one” signifi es
not only the numerical oneness but, more essentially, the absolute suprem-
acy of the sovereign deity as one and only.25 Kaufmann thus conceives the
diff erence between polytheism and biblical monotheism not only as quan-
titative or arithmetic (i.e., one deity or many) but, more fundamentally,
as qualitative and ontological (i.e., diff erent conceptions of divinity alto-
gether). Th e decisive diff erence involves worldview and lived experience.
According to Kaufmann, this fundamental diff erence between two reli-
gious systems gives rise to two diff erent attitudes toward the world and life.
Consider, for example, the apprehension of misfortunes, such as untimely
death or natural calamities.26 For the polytheistic mind, which perceives
the world as an ordered entity operating independently of human exis-
tence, such enigmas or misfortunes could appear to be part of the process
of a preexistent system, independent of human responsibility. Th at is, al-
though there is a polytheistic notion of divine retribution for human injus-
tice, not every enigma of life may be perceived in terms of sin, that is, mo-
rality. It then comes as no surprise when the polytheistic mind minimizes
the purposeful and moral quality of such misfortunes.27 On the other hand,
for the monotheistic mind, which perceives the unfolding of the world as
manifestations of the absolute will of a moral and just deity, misfortunes
would not happen without cause. Th is mind could thus assume divine in-
tent in calamities and identify their origin in the realm of morality. It then
comes as no surprise when the monotheistic mind displays a tendency to
maximize the providential and moral quality of the enigmas of life and at-
tributes them to human responsibility.
Kaufmann also asserts that most advanced polytheistic systems display
a tendency on the part of humans to be self-reliant. Th is tendency stems,