An Outsider Test for Polytheism

On Twitter:

Ben Watkins:

That any particular religious belief is geographically and temporally predictable based on local facts about culture and familial relations is more likely given naturalism than theism. Despite the insistence of some apologists, this likelihood judgment is not a genetic fallacy.

Ocean:

This would very much be a monotheism objection. With polytheism one would expect localized variations.

Loftus:

Polytheism might be true, but we'd still have to figure out which gods and goddesses represent the true gods and goddesses. So until someone can effectively argue for the true gods and goddesses, without deferring to one's own culture, there's no reason to believe in polytheism.

Ocean:

Why would one just differ to your own culture? As a polytheist, I can just hold that there are many Gods and that reciprocity with them is a good way of exploring that. We can build off of that exploration collectively.

Loftus:

So you believe in an unorganized polytheism without a pantheon or a common origination or a head god? That sounds like an ad-hoc hypothesis meant to save a belief from refutation. 

Loftus:

Why don't these different cultural deities interact with each other, marry each other, or go to war with each other, until local human cultures clash?