In the phrase "the heathen followers of the god Baal," "god" is clearly understood to refer to an entity (called "Baal") whom the said followers believed to exist (and to affect their lives in various ways, and even to deserve, if not demand—on some pain or other, to be worshiped)—even though we all agree now that such an entity did not exist (except in the imaginations of said followers). As Richard Dawkins reminds us,
We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in.But many still believe in the monotheistic god of the Abramaic religions, variously labeled "Yahweh," "Jehovah," "Allah," or simply "God." And non-denominational (or New Age) labels like "Creator" seem to have the same reference, but without most of the Talmudic, Biblical, and Koranic baggage. They're atheists too about some of the theological attributes, but theists about the imagined deity's active concern for the planet.
I guess there are still polytheists on the planet, but both notheists (atheists) and monotheists have in common that they are both atheists about Baal and other "heathen gods."
Many of the Bible writers draw a distinction between the “true God,” (Yahweh or Jehovah) and “false gods,” the “gods of the nations,” or “gods of wood or stone.” An example is in that Elijah passage of mine you've linked to.
ReplyDeleteAs you know, peoples back then had gods that were unique to them, almost “national” gods, which they followed, not unlike the way in which modern peoples follow the national flag.
Today, the popular view is that we (believers) all worship the same God, but we worship him in different ways. But we (JWs) think the OT distinctions are more fitting. For example, the God we worship has vastly different attributes than the God worshipped in, say, fundamentalist churches. That God routinely sends/abandons people into hell, where they are tortured for all eternity. Our God could never conceive of such a thing. So it’s a little like when you and a friend are discussing someone whose Christian name and surname you know. But you soon realize, when the attributes don’t line up, that you are speaking of two separate people who happen to share a common name.
Tom, your sort of internationalist perspective suggests a yet more embracing perspective, one, say, taking in the whole galaxy. From this perspective, we (believers) are Earth-bound folks, and Yahweh or Jehovah (or Allah) is unique to them, [a planetary or solar-system] god, which they follow, not unlike the way in which [they] follow the United Nations or other international body trying to solve problems that threaten everyone on their tiny planet?
ReplyDeleteA still more embracing perspective could take in the Universe or even all of the many Universes some think quantum theoretically possible....
I wonder what of "false god" and "true God" is common to "god/God"? I suggest that it is the imagination and the parochial point of view of the believers who pronounce them "true" or "false."
ReplyDelete