One of the interesting trajectories, in my view, is that of how religions were used in a conflict within tribal society. The implementation of christianity and islam as 2 umbrella elements within which tribal divisions could live peacefully, perhaps illustrates the adaptive process of religions with adaptable gods, and using them to implement a rather more peaceful life among groups of people.
This perhaps illustrates the attraction such monotheistic creeds offer?
Where as, for example, Greek religion was linked to specific gods that might have had correlation with Roman religion – both religions required exact links to be who, how and what they are. Ironically, the very flexibility of polytheistic faith, makes it inflexible for other gods to be within it. They can be included, but if there is a conflict, eg, i have the sea god, and you have one to – which is the true sea god? – creates a bit of a problem.
A specifically less specific religion can absorb the local faiths and cultured. eg in islamic africa, dress codes are slightly different in various societies, and christianity is easy about local gods being made saints, angles, etc.
In the above sense, monotheistic creeds seem to operate as abstracts. They seem to allow multiple otherness to operate peacefully while being dependant upon that very diversity to justify its being an abstract. In that way, this seems like a sequence of co-dependency.
Via historical experience though, we know that such religions, once eliminating the co-dependency and create a certain social uniformity, turn towards other groupings to inflict violent exchanges. (indeed, perhaps this can be said to other not necessarily religious groupings..)
However, being religions, the very operation of religions is based on power to deliver revelational narratives, enforce behavioural codes, rituals, customs and beliefs that support the narrative. These specificities reveal non-abstractive practices which fail the premise of being abstract. These show the monotheistic process to be a generalised one – as in placing a group of people/subjects/issues/elements under a category/roof which the general sense can be applied for – rather than being the promised abstract god.
The abstract, like numbers, can be applied to other sub-groups for specific sequential co-dependency, and at the same time, that application is co-dependent sequentially on the very number being able to have its own character Independent of that very application.
Yes, not just numbers, colours and vibrations are abstracts. Notice Abstracts rather than abstractions..(??)
Historically, I think, it can be illustrated that the perception of ultimate hard co-existence between generalised creeds is inevitable. I hope that the Liberian case will be different, an exception – unlike, for example, Nigeria, Egypt, Germany during reformation, England Vs France periods, India Vs Pakistan, Islamic State (specific sunnies) Vs anyone else who isn’t, and indeed the Iberian wars between islamic and christian oriented populations.