We've been developing a novel theory about the origin of monotheism and why certain qualities are emphasized in its later development.
This theory does not have a model off of which it builds with small variation. Consequently, to test it, we need to apply it to multiple contexts.
Monotheism is a consequence of a material contest that it participates in at the margins of power. Its dedication to a singular authority and its own future vindication–from the authority of the external social-political world–is the result of its desire to correct this original peripheral status.
Traditional starting point: monotheism is the product of a cultural-religious (no real distinction in this in ANE) group on the margins of power.
It is a group that wants authority but does not have the material or economic influence to acquire and maintain it.
Anxieties are heightened on the margins of power since one cannot control the productive forces of stability but are always subject to forces outside one's control.
Thus, one feels as though the ordered world was being given over to chaos or lawlessness.
We all like to know that if we order a #1 supersized Extra Value Meal at McDonalds, we will always get a Big Mac, large fries, and a drink large enough to drown a squirrel.
Stability. Consistency. They're human nature. They are the aim of our "world-building" activities (in which we are all participants).
Constructing a normative order (including its nomos) is also about creating a plausibility structure: the institutionalized set of meanings and expectations against which something is measured as either "making sense," being "orderly," or the threatening antithesis.
EX: In Academia, the value and meaning of grades "make sense"--they are taken "for granted"--because of they have been fully integrated within the educational institution, which takes on the role of plausibility structure.
What if you received a "Z" on your grade report?
The reality of the Christian world depends upon the presence of social structures within which this reality is taken for granted and within which successive generations of individuals are socialized in such a way that this world will be real to them. When this plausibility structure loses its intactness or continuity, the Christian world begins to totter and its reality ceases to impose itself as self-evident truth. (P. Berger)
Consequently, religions seek to prevent the collapse of their "worlds" by integrating them within (or within them) the dominant normative order (that regulates the social world).
Demonstrating the relevance of their worlds is a defensive act.
So to this point:
Anxiety (YIKES!) > World-Building Activities (Defense!) > Plausibility Structures (Make sense!) > Stability (Ahhh!).
But recall, early monotheistic groups did not have material or physical power, initially. So, the basis of their "worlds" emphasized supernatural appeal through three "pillars":
Each of these pillars is "privatized" by (claimed as the personal property of) each monotheistic tradition.
A fully stabilized world requires complete control over its plausibility structure and the capability of fending off any possible threat (or doing away with them altogether).
As monotheistic traditions develop, they do not create new paradigms but build off their original ones.
The more "mainstream" a monotheistic tradition becomes, the more supported by the surrounding dominant social order, the less it tends to emphasize radical revision of the social-political world.
Instead, it tends to focus on moving society "the rest of the way" (e.g. the more moderate variations of the Christian Right). We're almost there! Just a few changes and we're good!
But the further on the margins a group is, the more it tends to emphasize radical revision in support of its own idealized vision.
So, while modern forms of monotheism do not always reflect their original anxieties, their institutional structures still rest upon that "genealogical heritage."
When anxieties increase, every monotheistic tradition retreats to its "fundamentals."
Cults and extremist groups, as we've seen, appear more radical (but also more fundamental) in their positions because they are further outside the mainstream than their dominant monotheistic counterparts.
Anxiety > World-Building Activities > Plausibility Structures > Stability.
Stability = (Legitimated and established by) Revelation + Law + Restoration.
Monotheistic dichotomy/"Other": a consequence of and supported by collective prejudices whose expressions are legitimated as effective ways to preserve the boundaries of the community.
Monotheistic identity, therefore, is preserved through discourses of resistance that engage the larger social body, the “other.” Monotheistic identity cannot persevere without its “other,” which it excludes in the very articulation of its own self-identity. Divine law codifies these discourses, situates them within the context of divine revelation, and affirms itself as a constructive ideal toward which the created world must strive.
The cohesive community = the symbolic manifestation of monotheism's three pillars.
Why monotheism? The appeal by a single community to a singular ideal--its vision of an ideal, stabilized world/order--articulated in terms of the supernatural produces a belief system based on a single collective identity and its central, shared symbol (its highest vision of itself).
That symbol is "God."
[T]he idea of an absolute, solitary God depends upon the outward expression of a community self-identifiable through its attitude of exclusion. In other words, a monotheistic God is the product of a self-awaredly exclusionary community.
The name, Davidian, deriving from the name of the king of Ancient Israel, accrues to this Association by reason of its following aspects: First, it is dedicated to the work of announcing and bringing forth the restoration (as predicted in Hosea 1:11; 3:5) of David's kingdom in antitype, upon the throne of which Christ, "the son of David," is to sit.
Second, it purports itself to be the first of the first fruits of the living, the vanguard from among the present-day descendants of those Jews who composed the Early Christian Church. With the emergence of this vanguard and its army, the first fruits, from which are elected the 12,000 out of each of the twelve tribes of Jacob, "the 144,000" (Rev. 14:1; 7:2-8) who stand on Mount Zion with the Lamb (Rev. 14:1; 7:2-8), the reign of antitypical David begins. (Shepherd's Rod)
Are the following quotations consistent with our theory, especially that constructing a stabilized order is one goal of monotheism?
God is a God of order. Everything connected with heaven is in perfect order; subjection and thorough discipline mark the movements of the angelic host. Success can only attend order and harmonious action. God requires order and system in His work now no less than in the days of Israel. All who are working for Him are to labor intelligently, not in a careless, haphazard manner. He would have His work done with faith and exactness, that He may place the seal of His approval upon it. -- Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 376.
'God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.' He requires that order and system be observed in the conduct of church affairs today, no less than in the days of old. He desires His work to be carried forward with thoroughness and exactness, so that He may place upon it the seal of His approval. Christian is to be united with Christian, church with church, the human instrumentality co-operating with the divine, every agency subordinate to the Holy Spirit, and all combined in giving to the world the good tidings of the grace of God. -- The Acts of the Apostles, p. 96.
David Koresh practiced "spiritual marriages."
Recall our assertion that cultic leaders used "radical" acts to confirm allegiance (outside of any stable, regulating law or institution).