Idolatry

[everbecoming2007]

If you are a liberal Christian what do you believe constitutes idolatry?

Do you believe that worshipping say, Hindu deities and images that are considered literal embodiments of gods are acts of idolatry? Or do you reinterpret those concepts and take such scriptural prohibitions with a grain of salt?

I am asking because I am interested in how taking a pluralist approach to religions as some liberal Christians do affects your concept of idolatry.

 

[archer75]

How do you mean "literal embodiments of gods"?

 

[everbecoming2007]

How do you mean "literal embodiments of gods"?

In some people's belief an image can become a living entity. I believe this is the case for some Hindus, and the psalms are emphatic that images are not living.

Among some neo-pagans there is a belief that with certain rituals an image can become an embodiment of a god. That image becomes a part of what the god is. If the image is destroyed something in that god is lost. The image is not the entirety of what the god is, but it is the god 100%, not merely a part of what the god is. I am unsure if this is how some Hindus see the issue.

 

[archer75]

I'm interested, but can't contribute much. Thank you for explaining.

 

[hedrick]

If you are a liberal Christian what do you believe constitutes idolatry?

Do you believe that worshipping say, Hindu deities and images that are considered literal embodiments of gods are acts of idolatry? Or do you reinterpret those concepts and take such scriptural prohibitions with a grain of salt?

I am asking because I am interested in how taking a pluralist approach to religions as some liberal Christians do affects your concept of idolatry.

There's a whole set of problems here. One is what you mean by liberal Christian. In CF it tends to mean anyone who doesn't believe in inerrancy of either the Bible or the Pope. If that is the definition, liberals are typically inclusivist, but not necessary truly pluralist. That is, most of us think there is one true God and he sent Jesus, but that God likely accepts some non-Christians. A true pluralist would say that Christianity has no better idea of God than other religions. I'm not sure what idolatry would mean in that kind of system. But I think that's uncommon among what in the US are called liberal Christians.

Obviously the prophets would call any worship of God through images to be idolatry. That's a separate question from whether some Hindus may be accepted by God. (Note by the way that idolatry is just one issue for non-Christians. In principle you could be a polytheist without idolatry.)

However Christianity, even traditional Christianity, came to understand idolatry more broadly, to include putting anything other than God in the place God should be. It could be a political cause, sex, what have you. I would consider that more serious than someone who uses images to represent God but understands that they are images. I'm not sure whether anyone truly thinks images are gods. My suspicion is if you pushed them they'd acknowledge that the images represent God or are vehicles for him (them?) to be present. If someone really did, that's not so much a religious offense (though it is) as insanity.

 

[ubicaritas]

I don't think Hindus are necessarily idolators just because they have statues. It really depends on how they understand what they are doing.

And really, I don't even feel its my place to judge Hindus at all. They are my neighbor and I'm called to love them and I think respect is part of that too.

 

[everbecoming2007]

I'm not sure whether anyone truly thinks images are gods. My suspicion is if you pushed them they'd acknowledge that the images represent God or are vehicles for him (them?) to be present. If someone really did, that's not so much a religious offense (though it is) as insanity.

There are some, though, and I don't think they are insane. They have their own worldview and explanations of these things.

 

[everbecoming2007]

I don't think Hindus are necessarily idolators just because they have statues. It really depends on how they understand what they are doing.

And really, I don't even feel its my place to judge Hindus at all. They are my neighbor and I'm called to love them and I think respect is part of that too.

I'm not asking you to judge Hindus. But you can judge what you think of an action or a practice.

 

[ubicaritas]

I'm not asking you to judge Hindus. But you can judge what you think of an action or a practice.

It's part of another person's religion, though, one that most Christians don't really understand well. There has only been limited dialogue between Hindus and Christians.

Why not ask a Hindu what their religious practices mean to them? That would be fairer.

 

[everbecoming2007]

It's part of another person's religion, though, one that most Christians don't really understand well. There has only been limited dialogue between Hindus and Christians.

Why not ask a Hindu what their religious practices mean to them? That would be fairer.

Do you just not have an opinion on whether the worship of foreign gods is idolatry? That is the matter I am trying to understand from a liberal perspective.

 

[ubicaritas]

Do you just not have an opinion on whether the worship of foreign gods is idolatry? That is the matter I am trying to understand from a liberal perspective.

I really have no opinion and even if I did I don't think it would be the right thing to discuss it.

That's just my perspective. Generally people at my church do not speak of other non-Christian religions, especially to denigrate them. We might criticize Christian denominations we are familiar with in a mild manner, but ones we are not familiar with we generally do not.

 

[baryogenesis]

Torah is pretty clear on what idolatry is. Christianity's stance on idolatry is based (like many, if not most other doctrines), on Judaic Law, history, theology, etc.

I've come to the point in my evolving understanding of my Faith in God that even the image of the Cross can be, and often is, an idol. Same with the RCC Eucharist, among other things. Some forms of idolatry are obvious, while others are so casually a part of everyday life we barely notice them at all in that context. For idolatry, it has a lot more to do with what you think of the thing than the thing itself.

("Liberal" certainly has different connotations among "liberal Christians," let alone how conservatives and Fundamentalists think of us.)

 

[Martinius]

To me, idolatry is simply making someone or some thing other than God your god. Many people worship wealth and power, and place those before God or their supposed faith. This can apply to people of any faith, and there are many, many examples of Christians who put their faith in something other than God (the prosperity Gospel, for example).

 

[everbecoming2007]

To me, idolatry is simply making someone or some thing other than God your god. Many people worship wealth and power, and place those before God or their supposed faith. This can apply to people of any faith, and there are many, many examples of Christians who put their faith in something other than God (the prosperity Gospel, for example).

Do you think this applies to foreign gods as well as wealth and power?

 

[Martinius]

Do you think this applies to foreign gods as well as wealth and power?

I'm not sure what you mean by "foreign god" since our understanding is that God is above and beyond nationality and ethnicity. God is god of all, not of a particular group.

When is a belief idolatrous? Who defines that, and decides who is and who isn't? If someone who lives in India, for example, believes in and worships a Hindu god, that is not idolatry, since that is part of their culture. Are Christians in India idolatrous, since they believe in a "foreign" Judeo-Christian god, and not in the deity of the majority in that country?

 

[everbecoming2007]

I'm not sure what you mean by "foreign god" since our understanding is that God is above and beyond nationality and ethnicity. God is god of all, not of a particular group.

When is a belief idolatrous? Who defines that, and decides who is and who isn't? If someone who lives in India, for example, believes in and worships a Hindu god, that is not idolatry, since that is part of their culture. Are Christians in India idolatrous, since they believe in a "foreign" Judeo-Christian god, and not in the deity of the majority in that country?

I believe the term in scripture is "strange god."

I am interested in why you would say that because something is a part of one's culture it is therefore not idolatry. What is the reasoning behind that?

If you read the psalms and other scriptures on idols non-literally how do you do it?

I have been researching concepts of idolatry and how they differ between groups, so I do not have an agenda here other than to gather some liberal perspectives.

 

[hedrick]

Do you think this applies to foreign gods as well as wealth and power?

The reaction here seems pretty non-traditional, though given the forum I can understand that.

In the OT Israel is to worship only the God of Israel. The gods are false gods. In the NT, Gentile Christians are grafted into Israel, and of course Jesus repeats the shema. So that connects us with the God is Israel. But in the OT it seems that the writers thought other gods actually existed. They just weren't the One God.

To my knowledge Christians don't think there's more than one god. Other spiritual entities might be angels or devils, but there's nothing similar to God.

That opens us to the possibility than when other traditions talk about their god, they're reflecting experience with the One God, since unlike the OT, because there are no competing gods. (Some Christians, of course, believe that all other religions are connected with demons.) There are hints of that in Rom 2 and Acts 17:22 ff, but just hints. Of course if other religions have experienced God, their understanding is bound to be incomplete without Christ.

 

[Martinius]

I believe the term in scripture is "strange god."

I am interested in why you would say that because something is a part of one's culture it is therefore not idolatry. What is the reasoning behind that?

If you read the psalms and other scriptures on idols non-literally how do you do it?

I have been researching concepts of idolatry and how they differ between groups, so I do not have an agenda here other than to gather some liberal perspectives.

I suggested that the idea of a "strange" or "foreign" god was relative. I gave an example, pointing out that in India and many other places with a minority Christian population, that the Christian god may be considered "foreign" to the majority of the people. What is "strange" or idolatrous depends on point of view.

The authors of scripture are talking about idolatry in terms of their own beliefs and practices, and those are special to their time and place.

As far as idolatry in our own time and in our own cultures, read the beginning of the commandments and ask yourself how we are doing. Moses and his people were told not to have other gods before the god of Israel (who for most of the OT was clearly viewed as a local or national god). They were told not to make idols or images of anything on earth or in heaven, and to not bow down or serve them. So how are we doing in that regard? There are many idols and gods that people, even so-called Christians, bow down to and serve; many things, both earthly and heavenly, that we have made into idols. Images everywhere, even in churches.

Most tragically, we spend much of our time in worshipping and praise and little in actually loving and serving God, and by commandment (both OT and NT) loving and serving others. We have in essence created an idol of the God of all.

 

[Arcangl86]

The reaction here seems pretty non-traditional, though given the forum I can understand that.

In the OT Israel is to worship only the God of Israel. The gods are false gods. In the NT, Gentile Christians are grafted into Israel, and of course Jesus repeats the shema. So that connects us with the God is Israel. But in the OT it seems that the writers thought other gods actually existed. They just weren't the One God.

To my knowledge Christians don't think there's more than one god. Other spiritual entities might be angels or devils, but there's nothing similar to God.

That opens us to the possibility than when other traditions talk about their god, they're reflecting experience with the One God, since unlike the OT, because there are no competing gods. (Some Christians, of course, believe that all other religions are connected with demons.) There are hints of that in Rom 2 and Acts 17:22 ff, but just hints. Of course if other religions have experienced God, their understanding is bound to be incomplete without Christ.

Well I also think you can see a difference in the OT. The early books definitely imply to me that the Hebrews were henotheists and there was at some point a shift to pure monotheism, probably during the exile.

 

[13paxi34]

I take the "have no gods before Me" to mean that it is entirely fine and acceptable to have other gods, so long as we realize that they can only be a part of the whole. If I took a cup and filled it with the Atlantic Ocean I could say "this cup contains the Atlantic Ocean" but I could not say that the entirety of the Atlantic Ocean resides in this cup. So I see it as there is one source and in that sense, one God with many manifestations and representations of that God, that we find in all of the gods.
The biggest threat of idolatry is when a person thinks of themselves as the final authority. It is important to recognize that we are all divinity while also realizing that each of us only represents a very small aspect of who and what God is.