Skip to main content

Creating gods

An ancient writer once wrote that if horses had gods, they would look like horses. Likewise, in the various religions of the world, when people create their own gods or idols, they look very human like. The ancient Greek gods were scoundrels and perverts. So were the gods of the ancient Near Eastern religions - Molech, the various regional forms of Baal, Ashtoreth / Astarte, and such. When people invent their own religions, they can only create gods in their own image - or in the image of animals and people, with human (a)moral characteristics. No man-made religion was created in which its god or gods were not created in man's image, in the likeness of humans, with human limitations or human-like nature.

However, the God of the Bible is completely different. He is always shown to be a loving, holy, just, and even wrathful God, equally in both Old and New Testaments (those who claim otherwise either don't know the Bible well enough, or are reading it thru their own cultural filter). But the Bible goes much further. He is revealed from the very beginning as a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. Furthermore, he is a God who is to be feared, because he is so holy and glorious, so other-worldly and beyond human understanding (e.g., "my ways are not your ways"). He is totally not like us, nor like anything we can imagine.

This is emphasized in different ways. As the almighty creator and Lord of everything, who made and runs everything by himself. As the God who identified himself to Moses as "I am" - which emphasizes the fact that he is eternal God, not created, but self-existing. He simply exists by himself, in eternity past and future, which we cannot fathom. He is always referred to as holy [Hebrew qadosh], which emphasizes that he is not only morally and spiritually pure and perfect beyond what we can grasp, but also that he is just different - different from us or anything we know, as well as separate and transcendent above all creation. The Hebrew word glory [kavod] is also used to describe him, which means literally "weight" - i.e., profundity, gravitas, seriousness, worthiness. The divine name 'Yahweh' [written usually in Hebrew in consonants as YHWH, hence the name tetragrammatron] was a name that captured his holy essence such that God-fearing Jews would not utter it out of fear and respect of God. Instead, they created a different pronunciation by changing the vowels for a more "pronounceable" name Yehovah, or Jehovah as transcribed in Western languages. In so many ways he is depicted as a God who is totally not like us.

Thus, this God was no invention of people, of imaginative religious Jews seeking to justify their religion or their Jewish nationalism. Humans could not have created such a God. No people, ancient or modern, could have created such a God who is beyond the universe, beyond our comprehension, beyond anything we could know, and worthy of fear. This is clearly not a God created in a human image with human characteristics, but a God who was revealed, i.e., who revealed himself to us. (If you think this is intended as an apologetic argument, you are correct.)

Jean ("John") Calvin said that the human heart is an idol factory. We create idols all the time. Desires that we elevate above our desire for God, above his will, above submission to him, are idols. These idols that our hearts create daily are made in the image of our desires and our sinfulness. Thus, the psalmists recognize this and pray, "Teach me your way, O LORD, and I will walk in your truth; give me an undivided heart, that I may fear your name" (Psalm 86.11). And God says, "I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh" (Ezekiel 11.19).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mystical & charismatic Christianity

As a person with charismatic leanings, I have come to prefer Catholic / Anglican / Episcopal forms of charismatic Christianity. As mentioned in my last post, charismatic Catholicism goes way back to the early church, under the rubric of Christian mysticism. The reason I prefer these forms is because they are more balanced. Protestant charismatics and Pentecostals greatly overemphasize things like speaking in tongues, which are really a minor gift. Tongues have been practiced throughout church history, and there is no historical or scriptural basis for the claim that tongues and other charismatic gifts ever ceased*. But they have never been considered "a big deal" or in any way a sign that a person is more spiritual than another who doesn't do tongues or such gifts. Only with the advent of modern charismatic movements did such an extreme emphasis get put on tongues and charismatic gifts. St. Paul commanded us to desire the better gifts - in that context, he was referring t...

Apologetics site

A good scriptural apologetics site I found recently is www.christian-thinktank.com , which provides explanations for difficult biblical passages and issues. I can't vouch for everything yet, but one article I liked gives a good explanation for the ordered attacks and killings of Canaanites and Amalekites in the Old Testament, and similar OT controversies.

Evangelicalism's gradual demise

The term "evangelical" was popularized by Martin Luther ("evangelisch" in German), which meant a follower of the gospel. The term was originally a very good and useful term, as it referred to someone who believed in a religion based on faith and following the teachings of Christ, rather than man-made religious rules. It was meaningful enough but also broad enough to encompass a general theological orientation and religious lifestyle. It could include and accommodate somewhat different views or interpretations of Christian belief, including those who focused more on the grace, spirituality and lifestyle of Christ. As such, it was not the exclusive property of one religious group or theological orientation. The meaning has been generally positive in modern church history. However, in recent decades the term has been hijacked by fundamentalists who insist on a narrow interpretation of the term, insisting on a set of specific theological beliefs, while ignoring the C...