http://www.bloomington.in.us/~lgthscac/monotheism.htm
http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Culture/Monotheism.html


I was just reading through these two links...

And would like your thoughts on them.

If possible links to other similar articles will be highly appreciated.

Thank you in advance.. :)

Historian Dr. Albert Hyma wrote, I believe, in Streams of Civilization I: “According to many present authorities, the Sumerians were originally monotheistic in their belief, for the most ancient written records state clearly that they believed in only one God. This is a very important fact to note, because until very recently (1937) a large number of historians believed that mankind originally was polytheistic and that gradually as human beings became civilized, they formed a higher conception of the deity.”

It started with Adam. Was Adam (the father of humanity) monotheist ? YES.. So his religion is the first religion.

It started with Adam. Was Adam (the father of humanity) monotheist ? YES .. So his religion is the first religion.
Lol

Historian Dr. Albert Hyma wrote, I believe, in Streams of Civilization I: “According to many present authorities, the Sumerians were originally monotheistic in their belief, for the most ancient written records state clearly that they believed in only one God. This is a very important fact to note, because until very recently (1937) a large number of historians believed that mankind originally was polytheistic and that gradually as human beings became civilized, they formed a higher conception of the deity.”

I have always believed in monotheism being the original religion since the beginning of human life in this world.
It is good to find archeological findings which support it,though my belief does not change even if there were no archeological evidence of it. I did always believe that the more research is done into the origin of religions,the more people will realise that all religions lead to one source.We are from the same source and unto the same source we will return.

I also believe that the universal laws that people find similar to the 10 commandments came from this very source.Which is why although one may not be a believer,they have certain values in them to discern right from wrong.
Of course there are those who uses their free will to do wrong even when they know it is not right.

"Finally, Dr. Wilhelm Schmidt, an Austrian, set out in the 1920's to compile every "alias of the Almighty" discovered by explorers around the world. It took Schmidt an amazing six volumes totalling 4,500 pages to detail them all! A minimum of a thousand more examples have come to light since then. An approximate 90 percent or more of the folk religions on this planet contain clear acknowledgment of the existence of one Supreme God! Schmidt's classic "Der Ursprung der Gottesidee" (The Origin of the Concept of God) was finally published in 1934."
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a393151a5332f.htm
Also from the above link.
"They had thoroughly debunked all pretensions about the supernatural origin of religion. Religion, they claimed, evolved mentally just as biological forms evolved physically.

Back on the Kalahari Desert, in the Ituri forest, and innumberable other locations, however; the young anthropologists were getting down to a deeper level of questioning. They would ask the animists: "By the way, who made the world?" and were startled to hear them respond, often with a happy smile, by naming a single Being who lived in the sky.

"Is he good or bad?" was a usual second question. "Good, of course", was the invariable reply. "Show me the idol you use to represent him", the researcher might ask. "What idol? Don't you know that he must never be represented by an idol?"


It started with Adam. Was Adam (the father of humanity) monotheist ? YES .. So his religion is the first religion.

I agree with you on this.

From the appearance of the first human on earth and all the descendants from then were aware of the existence of an Almighty God,but then humans being humans have found their own interpretations of the guidace given to them and branched off into different beliefs in nature and the universe.

Hinduism, considered one of the oldest religions,it is mentioned in their books that there is non comparable to the One (Brahma).They have One God,but the priests of the same religion,thought that it will be hard for the commoners to understand and communicate with the One,they started worshipping nature and people as manifestations of the One,or worship through these objects to get to the One God.

My take which I'm sure most of you won't want to hear but I give it anyway.

The first article is based on work by Dr. Clifford Wilson who has an impressive list of degrees except for one small problem his degree in archaeology is an honorary degree which means he never studied archaeology.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but the second article seems to say that the temple was first used by polytheists then monotheists meaning the articles contradict each other.

My take which I'm sure most of you won't want to hear but I give it anyways.

The first article is based on work by Dr. Clifford Wilson who has an impressive list of degrees except for one small problem his degree in archaeology is an honorary degree which means he never studied archaeology.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but the second article seems to say that the temple was first used by polytheists then monotheists meaning the articles contradict each other.

Could be true.

My take which I'm sure most of you won't want to hear but I give it anyways.

The first article is based on work by Dr. Clifford Wilson who has an impressive list of degrees except for one small problem his degree in archaeology is an honorary degree which means he never studied archaeology.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but the second article seems to say that the temple was first used by polytheists then monotheists meaning the articles contradict each other.

Thanks for correcting that,I don't really know Dr.Clifford Wilson.

Yes the second article does say that the temple was polytheistic before monotheistic,which is what was being said by most people that polytheism came before monotheism.
I do not agree with it.The temple may show polytheism came before monotheism,but the temple could have been built after the people became polytheists.

I think that polytheism was what people followed later,they changed their beliefs of monotheism over time and found their own versions of belief.
This is where the messengers had to be sent as reminders to help guide people to the right path.

I would also like to know why people believe that polytheism came first?

I have read an article which said that the "primitive" societies found their way to monotheism.Primitve I think might be only technologically(as compared to the present),but otherwise there must have been great thinkers,and builders even in those times.

Because archeological evidence shows that most civilizations BC believed in polytheism, mayans, aztecs, egyptians, greeks, romans, babylonians, assyrians, all polytheist.

I actually think that it's the other way around, many gods was too hard to understand so they dumbed it down into one almighty god who controlled everything.

Because archeological evidence shows that most civilizations BC believed in polytheism, mayans, aztecs, egyptians, greeks, romans, babylonians, assyrians, all polytheist.

I actually think that it's the other way around, many gods was too hard to understand so they dumbed it down into one almighty god who controlled everything.

"BC" as in Before Christ?

Yes. A fairly arbitrary line to draw, I know.

Didn't the Jews come before Christ?Were they not already following a single deity before the arrival of Christ?

Sure. They aren't "most civilizations" though.

Polytheists predate the jews by quite some time.

Please do elaborate!

Horus, the Sun God of Egypt is reckoned to be from around 3000 BC he is the sun, anthropomorphized, and his life is a series of allegorical myths involving the sun's movement in the sky; while the roots of the Jewish religion go back some 4,000 years in history…The Jewish people are descendants of an ancient, Hebrew-speaking branch of the Semitic race. (Genesis 10:1, 21-32; 1 Chronicles 1:17-28, 34; 2:1, 2) close to 4,000 years ago, their forefather Abram immigrated from the great city of Ur of the Chaldeans in Sumeria to the land of Canaan, of which God had stated: “I will assign this land to your offspring.” (Genesis 11:31–12:7) He is spoken of as “Abram the Hebrew” at Genesis 14:13, although his name was later changed to Abraham. (Genesis 17:4-6)

From him the Jews draw a line of descent that begins with his son Isaac and his grandson Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. (Genesis 32:27-29) Israel had 12 sons, who became the founders of 12 tribes. One of those was Judah, from which name the word “Jew” was eventually derived.—2 Kings 16:6.

Horus, the Sun God of Egypt is reckoned to be from around 3000 BC he is the sun, anthropomorphized, and his life is a series of allegorical myths involving the sun's movement in the sky; while the roots of the Jewish religion go back some 4,000 years in history…The Jewish people are descendants of an ancient, Hebrew-speaking branch of the Semitic race. (Genesis 10:1, 21-32; 1 Chronicles 1:17-28, 34; 2:1, 2) close to 4,000 years ago, their forefather Abram immigrated from the great city of Ur of the Chaldeans in Sumeria to the land of Canaan, of which God had stated: “I will assign this land to your offspring.” (Genesis 11:31–12:7) He is spoken of as “Abram the Hebrew” at Genesis 14:13, although his name was later changed to Abraham. (Genesis 17:4-6)

From him the Jews draw a line of descent that begins with his son Isaac and his grandson Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel. (Genesis 32:27-29) Israel had 12 sons, who became the founders of 12 tribes. One of those was Judah, from which name the word “Jew” was eventually derived.—2 Kings 16:6.

Are there any records or similar names found in any older (older than the Jewish faith) of the Messengers before Abraham(alaihi salaam)?Like Enoch,Noah,etc(peace be upon them all) and the ones that came after Abraham (alaihi salaam)?

I'm a bit unsure of the question… Scientific claims that man has been on this earth for hundreds of thousands or even millions of years cannot be substantiated by written records as Biblical events are. The dates given to “prehistoric man” are based on assumptions that cannot be proved. Actually, reliable secular history, together with its chronology, extends back only a few thousand years.

As Sir Isaac Newton, an eminent as a critic of ancient writings said, after examining with great care the Holy Scriptures. 'I find,' says he, 'more sure marks of authenticity in the New Testament than in any profane [secular] history whatever.

Professor R. D. Wilson writes in A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament, pages 213-14: “The chronological and geographical statements are more accurate and reliable than those afforded by any other ancient documents; and the biographical and other historical narratives harmonize marvelously with the evidence afforded by extra-biblical documents.”

I would also like to say that it is not an easy task to find answers from civilisation long ago.Those who knew the facts are dead,but then artifacts from ancient civilisations have been analysed and conclusions made whether they are right or wrong only time will tell.

Saying that the older civilisations were not advance enough to think for themselves cannot be true.Just by looking at the structures built at different times show proof that they were advanced even though they did not have what we call "technological marvels"

As a firmbeliever in my own faith, I also believe in the other monotheistic religions being part of my history as a believer.Jews, Chrisitans,Muslims maybe the only currently existing group of people who do have their beliefs based on monotheism,but I am sure they are not the first group to believe in monotheism and accept it as their faith,or follow monotheistic teachings.

Monotheism could not have suddenly sprung out of nowhere in the middle of polytheistic tribes unless,someone tried to spread the message of monotheism(which would point to a messenger) or they already had something from their ancestors which linked to monotheism in their past.

I think atheism had more chance of springing out of nowhere than monotheism,because if all the polytheistic idols got to be too much for someone to follow or it got confusing it is more likely they will want to reject all of it than follow One deity and this too at the cost of being rejected by their tribes.

Someday,some archeologist will find something that might bring to light the true origins of monotheism.
As the speculation right now is the Jews got their beliefs from an Egyptian King which some historians speculate does not really ring true,as the Egyptian single deity was the sun and that they did not seem to share their beliefs outside their territory.http://www.usu.edu/markdamen/1320Hist&Civ/chapters/10AKHEN.htm

Do any of you monotheists believe that it suddenly sprang out of polytheism?

I'm a bit unsure of the question… Scientific claims that man has been on this earth for hundreds of thousands or even millions of years cannot be substantiated by written records as Biblical events are. The dates given to “prehistoric man” are based on assumptions that cannot be proved. Actually, reliable secular history, together with its chronology, extends back only a few thousand years.

As Sir Isaac Newton, an eminent as a critic of ancient writings said, after examining with great care the Holy Scriptures. 'I find,' says he, 'more sure marks of authenticity in the New Testament than in any profane [secular] history whatever.

Professor R. D. Wilson writes in A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament, pages 213-14: “The chronological and geographical statements are more accurate and reliable than those afforded by any other ancient documents; and the biographical and other historical narratives harmonize marvelously with the evidence afforded by extra-biblical documents.”

You are right.. it is a hard thing to prove scientifically or historically without actually being there when the event happened.

For me it isn't hard to believe it,it only takes faith from my end to believe.It must be harder for those who don't follow a monotheistic faith.

Jews came before Chrisitianity yet they believe and follow monotheism.Where did the Jews find their concept of monotheism?

I believe that the mythological Gods and demi Gods from human and animal kind were created by different groups of people after the messengers who preached monotheism passed away.

The belief in One Almighty even among many Gods is not uncommon in many ancient communities.They seem to have an idea that a Supreme being exists,but the people have found ways to accommodate demi gods or worship natural objects or man made objects as Gods along with a supreme being.

I was just thinking of Jesus(alaihi salaam) when I saw an answer on the Christianity thread regarding similarities between Horus and Jesus(alaihi salaam).This got me thinking and I realised that the same thing must have happened to other messengers and Prophets(before Jews and Christians) that after the Messengers(pbu them all) left this world people mixed their true beliefs with something of their ancient beliefs and came up with a new belief.

Like how Jesus(alaihi salaam) is depicted as divine and part of the trinity,and this is similar to an ancient mythology which believed in demi gods.

....

I was just thinking of Jesus(alaihi salaam) when I saw an answer on the Christianity thread regarding similarities between Horus and Jesus(alaihi salaam).This got me thinking and I realised that the same thing must have happened to other messengers and Prophets(before Jews and Christians) that after the Messengers(pbu them all) left this world people mixed their true beliefs with something of their ancient beliefs and came up with a new belief.

Like how Jesus(alaihi salaam) is depicted as divine and part of the trinity,and this is similar to an ancient mythology which believed in demi gods.

All you are doing there is speculating. The belief in Jesus is firmly based on the Gospels which are the eyewitness testimony of the contemporaries of Jesus.

If we compare for instance, the evidence of the Gospels to the evidence for Islam, we find that Mohammed did not provide any evidence for having seen an angel. Or if he did it was the weakest form of evidence since it was not independently witnessed by anyone else.

1. If Mohammed saw an angel, he alone saw it. His testimony boils down to an unsupported claim. No evidence at all.

2. Since Mohammed taught that lying is a good practice in many instances, he would be considered of weak moral character and when this is factored in to his testimony, it becomes even weaker.

However, unlike most religions, within Islam there are certain provisions under which lying is not simply tolerated, but actually encouraged.
Islam Review - Presented by The Pen vs. the Sword Featured Articles . . . Islam: the Facade, the Facts The rosy picture some Muslims are painting about their religion, and the truth they try to hide. (http://www.islamreview.com/articles/lying.shtml)

On the other hand,

1. Three eyewitnesses wrote down the life and times of Jesus Christ after having lived with Him for 3 years and observing His miracles as well as participating in many of them. The fourth gospel was written by a person who witnessed His resurrection and interviewed many eyewitnesses.

2. The four testimonies are by witnesses who are considered of the highest moral character and unlike Mohammed, they taught that lying is a sin.

So, if you are speculating that the doctrine of Jesus' divinity is an ancient myth, you are doing so against the evidence which is of the highest quality. Evidence which is stronger than the evidence which exists for the religion in which you believe.

Sincerely,

De Maria

De Maria,

I would just like to say that I am not good at debating and do not wish to get into a debate where I might unknowingly slander the name of Jesus(alaihi salaam) or any other messenger or even the Almighty.
I do not like debating for the sake of debating just to prove one is right or wrong.
I rather like exchange of information on what one thinks is true or knows to be true.

That way we get to understand what each one believes.

The other thing is that you and I know that no matter what anyone says or implies you will be firm in your belief as I will be in mine.I will believe in my beliefs and you will believe in yours as long as we know it to be the truth.
So lets not turn one against the other for a statement I have made or a statement you have made.
Yes, I agree my post was speculation,but it is nearer to what I believe to be true which may not be as you see to be true.


Regarding Muhammad(pbuh),during his lifetime until the revelations started even those who became his enemies later never doubted his word,they always believed he would be just and truthful in his decisions when it came to settling disputes between people.
The one thing even then enemies never doubted was his(pbuh) word except his word regarding monotheism,which they claimed was false as they did not believe in this belief or wished to accept it.


I try my utmost not to rile up anyone or to make someone defensive of one's beliefs,but to increase my knowledge of what people believe to be true.
This new knowledge is there for my reference which does not mean that such information is going to make even a tiny ripple in my belief in the Almighty and His message to mankind.I am firm in my beliefs and wish to know more and understand more as time passes.To be true in faith to the Almighty not to a human being who may think my belief is wrong or to adjust my beliefs to fit what another thinks is right.

I do hope you don't take offense to what I say and continue to debate,just to prove you are right,because I know you believe you are right and I believe I am right.Lets leave it at that.

1. Three eyewitnesses wrote down the life and times of Jesus Christ after having lived with Him for 3 years and observing His miracles as well as participating in many of them. The fourth gospel was written by a person who witnessed His resurrection and interviewed many eyewitnesses.

Who were these eyewitnesses? Are you claiming that Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John were eye witnesses to the life and times of Jesus? The earliest gospel was written some 60 years after Jesus' death. The 4th, John, was written almost 100 years after His death!

I was just reading through these two links ... Thank you in advance..:)
Earliest religious views were based on questions of vital interest people than had, for which at that time no answers did exist.
Gods of the eartquake, volcano, lightning, stars, moon or solar eclipses, flooding, harvest, furtility and reproduction, etc. etc.
Still today many multi-theism based beliefs exist. Hinduism is a prime example.
Mono-theism beliefs are mainly : Judaism , Christianity, and Islam.
So although today most religious believers follow mono-theistic religions, the origin of religion were multi-theism beliefs

De Maria,

I would just like to say that I am not good at debating and do not wish to get into a debate where I might unknowingly slander the name of Jesus(alaihi salaam) or any other messenger or even the Almighty.

I understand. No problem.


I do not like debating for the sake of debating just to prove one is right or wrong.
I rather like exchange of information on what one thinks is true or knows to be true.

I prefer that myself. But remember, if you want to speculate aloud and say that:

I was just thinking of Jesus(alaihi salaam) when I saw an answer on the Christianity thread regarding similarities between Horus and Jesus(alaihi salaam).This got me thinking and I realised that the same thing must have happened to other messengers and Prophets(before Jews and Christians) that after the Messengers(pbu them all) left this world people mixed their true beliefs with something of their ancient beliefs and came up with a new belief.

If you want to make these type of judgements based on specious and circumstantial evidence,

And if you agree with anti-Christians on this website who are making the same claims.

firmbeliever agrees: I believe the trinity and demi god status of Jesus(alaihi salaam)maybe borrowed concepts from mythology since his ascension to Heaven!

Then I feel it my duty to inform you exactly how good the quality of the evidence for the life of Christ really is and to compare it to the quality of the evidence for that which you claim to believe.



Like how Jesus(alaihi salaam) is depicted as divine and part of the trinity,and this is similar to an ancient mythology which believed in demi gods.

Again, that judgement of yours is based on specious and circumstantial evidence. If you continue repeating that opinion of yours, you will have a debate whether you want it or not.


That way we get to understand what each one believes.

That particular judgement of yours is not part of your Islamic faith. I have studied Islam on my own and when I want to learn more about Islam, I might ask you on the Islamic board.

Now, if you continue repeating that unsupported and speculative claim, I will consider it an attempt to proselytize and I will respond to it with vigor.


The other thing is that you and I know that no matter what anyone says or implies you will be firm in your belief as I will be in mine.

True. But the reason I post is for people who are yet forming their belief.


I will believe in my beliefs and you will believe in yours as long as we know it to be the truth. So lets not turn one against the other for a statement I have made or a statement you have made. Yes, I agree my post was speculation,but it is nearer to what I believe to be true which may not be as you see to be true.

No problem. If you had made it clear you were speculating in the first place, I wouldn't have jumped all over it. But you said and I quote:

I was just thinking of Jesus(alaihi salaam) when I saw an answer on the Christianity thread regarding similarities between Horus and Jesus(alaihi salaam). I realised that the same thing must have happened...


Regarding Muhammad(pbuh),during his lifetime until the revelations started even those who became his enemies later never doubted his word,they always believed he would be just and truthful in his decisions when it came to settling disputes between people.

That is not what I have read even from Muslim documents. In fact, the Islamic belief in the appropriateness of lying comes, according to Muslims, from Mohammed himself:

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu'ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them). (Sahih Muslim, Hadith number 6303-05; see also Sahih al-Bukhari 3.857)
USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/032.smt.html#032.6303)


The one thing even then enemies never doubted was his(pbuh) word except his word regarding monotheism,which they claimed was false as they did not believe in this belief or wished to accept it.

I highly doubt that. Please read this. I know the information is from a source hostile to Islam, but I find their scholarship above reproach. I've never known them to rewrite or misuse any Islamic documents as I've been able to find them verbatim on Islamic sites.
The Bani Quraytha Jews - Traitors or Betrayed? (http://www.answering-islam.org/Muhammad/Jews/BQurayza/treaty.html)


I try my utmost not to rile up anyone or to make someone defensive of one's beliefs,but to increase my knowledge of what people believe to be true.

I'm not "riled up"
Definitions of riled on the Web:

* annoyed: aroused to impatience or anger; "made an irritated gesture"; "feeling nettled from the constant teasing"; "peeved about being left out...
Wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

But I'm always ready to meet any challenge to those things which I believe.


this new knowledge is there for my reference which does not mean that such information is going to make even a tiny ripple in my belief in the Almighty and His message to mankind.I am firm in my beliefs and wish to know more and understand more as time passes.To be true in faith to the Almighty not to a human being who may think my belief is wrong or to adjust my beliefs to fit what another thinks is right.

That is fine.


I do hope you don't take offense to what I say

I don't.


and continue to debate,just to prove you are right,because I know you believe you are right and I believe I am right.Lets leave it at that.

Sure. Thanks for clarifying that you are only speculating.

... I agree my post was speculation...

Sincerely,

De Maria

Who were these eyewitnesses?

Matthew, the Apostle
Mark, the disciple and secretary of Peter. Mark actually wrote Peter's sermons, but tradition identifies him as John Mark, the young man who ran away and left his coat behind in Mark 14:51-52. Therefore, he is also an eyewitness.
John, the Apostle.
And Luke the Doctor who identifies himself as a gentile, but who traveled with Paul and Barnabus and interviewed many eyewitnesses.


Are you claiming that Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John were eye witnesses to the life and times of Jesus?

Mark, Matthew and John. Luke was a later disciple who interviewed them and others.


The earliest gospel was written some 60 years after Jesus' death. The 4th, John, was written almost 100 years after His death!

I believe both Fr. Chuck and I have already posted information which disproves those estimates.

Sincerely,

De Maria

That is not what I have read even from Muslim documents. In fact, the Islamic belief in the appropriateness of lying comes, according to Muslims, from Mohammed himself:

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of 'Uqba b. Abu Mu'ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them). (Sahih Muslim, Hadith number 6303-05; see also Sahih al-Bukhari 3.857)
USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/032.smt.html#032.6303)

De Maria,
That hadeeth is true,but it just shows that lying is restricted to just certain circumstances.

I know you will come up with something else to make it seem like I am wrong and you are right,but this is it for me,I am not going to continue to go back and forth posting because I know you already believe what you believe and I believe what I believe.

As I said I am not here to prove I am right or you are wrong.I am just here to provide information and it is not in me to debate.

Just linking you to some reading material.
Islam Question and Answer - The importance of being truthful (http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/2424/circumstances%20for%20lying)

I would like to leave it at that without further discussion on who is right or wrong.

Thank you.

Getting back to the original theme before it was hijacked by pro christian propaganda, I do not believe that man was initially monotheistic. Greek, Roman and Norse mythology all are based on polytheism. Many ancient peoples believed in multiple gods that were responsible for various aspects of life.

But then I don't believe in organized religion, period. Religion, In my opinion, was created by man to explain things he couldn't explain. Why did the sun rise and set? Because a god dragged it across the sky!

De Maria,
That hadeeth is true,but it just shows that lying is restricted to just certain circumstances.

If you'd like to discuss this with me on a separate thread sometime, I'd be delighted. The reason being that the supposed restrictions leave no gaps in between, in times of war and in times of peace? What's left? Nothing.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Polytheism most definitely came first. As a general rule, though, there are, as always, exceptions, peoples in forested areas tend to polytheism, and those in desert, monotheism. (One might call ancient Egyptians an exception, except their origins are most likely forest of farther south in Africa or when Nile delta was wetter - before the Sahara existed.) The monotheistic religions also tend to be more authoritarian.
And scholarship is far from decided on authorship of the Gospels. Most sources agree that, at best, they are from oral tradition and not actually written until 60-100 years after Jesus' life.