>>1071037
>Would we be better off with old world polytheism

Polytheism is a fascinating system. You either interpret foreign gods as your own or allow foreigners to have foreign gods. And although certain cults got persecuted for being dangerous, a set of new gods was seen as an opportunity. Plus diversity of faith worked very well with European society that never took to consolidated empire after Rome fell.

Basically we wouldn't see religion be a major conflict source, barring some minor dangerous cults here and there.

>>1071061
Don't most old world religions state that their rulers are gods? wouldn't that cause tension?

>Would we be better off with old world polytheism?

Almost certainly yes. Decentralized religion has almost all of the advantages of centralized religion, with little to none of the disadvantages

>>1071121
> with little to none of the disadvantages
I would like an explanation

>>1071146

If disorder hits a large organization, it sustains more damage than it would if it's a small organization. Because of cascades, shocks almost always damage larger organizations more, because they're more complex and harder to keep in one piece. You don't have this problem with small and frugal organizations

>>1071113
Claim of divinity is standard, Persian Kings and Egyptian pharaohs were living gods, Roman Emperors claimed ancestry from Jupiter and divine post-mortem and even the old Greek Kings were also the chief Priests of their states.

That being said it had more to do with legitimizing their rule in their state, more propaganda then anything.

>>1071187
What about charity?

>>1071365
What about charity?

>>1071670
Christianity has a long history of using charity. did the Romans have something similar?
could small organizations even keep up?