In his letter to the church in Ephesus, Paul does distinctively single out someone guilty of being greedy, a mental sin that might or might not be acted upon outwardly, as guilty of being idolatrous. He declares that something other than strict worship using idols, or by extension the making of an idol, amounts to idolatry.
Ephesians 5:5—"For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure, or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God."
Setting aside Paul's non-subtle admission in this verse that Jesus is not God to focus on the issue of idolatry at hand, it is apparent that the verse equates something that does not involve the literal creation or use of physical idols with genuine idolatry. The Old Testament never does this, nor does it follow logically from any idea it does present that idolatry is any broader than the design/use of actual idols and secondarily the explicit worship of something other than Yahweh, such as a demon (Leviticus 17:7), a ruler, a nonexistent deity or pseudo-deity (Exodus 22:20, Deuteronomy 13:6-18, 17:2-5), or the cosmos (Deuteronomy 4:19, 17:2-5).
Certain other behaviors and intentions might be wicked or directly disrespectful towards God, but being evil does not make them idolatrous in particular. Again, neither Old Testament statements (including the precise moral revelation in the Torah) nor the purely logical ramifications of the ideas expressed therein affirm that idolatry is linked to anything outside of idols. There is no way to know ahead of Ephesians 5:5 that Christianity entails idolatry is more than strictly the act of fashioning or using an idol for religious worship, even of Yahweh, which would egregiously misrepresent his nonphysical nature and direct focus to what is likely an altogether inanimate mass of wood, stone, or metal.
This broader scope of nonliteral idolatry mentioned by Paul does not contradict what the Old Testament proclaims. While it does not intrinsically follow that the likes of greed are idolatry of the heart as opposed to otherwise wicked, the New Testament does clarify that this is the case. There are other ways one could regard God trivially or something lesser as greater than or equal to God, so why would Paul focus on greed when he calls someone an idolater for a sin besides idol use?
It is very difficult for someone psychologically attached to their wealth or the subjective allure of obtaining more wealth for its "own" sake (it is really still in part about some sort of egoistic satisfaction or perhaps fitting into an asinine cultural mold) to have any part in the kingdom of God and of Christ. Because no one can serve God as he deserves while serving money as if it is equal to the deity or greater (Matthew 6:24), the greedy person has done something that is less directly, literally idolatrous but still ethically devastating. He or she has trivialized the nature of God or lived for secondary or invalid things like money or something it facilitates access to as if their nature is remotely comparable to God [1].
In this sense, any sort of sin or even amoral thing that personally derails or thwarts someone's commitment to Yahweh is indeed pursued in an idolatrous manner. It need not involve bowing down to a physical object like a sculpture to be treasonous towards the supreme being. One is unlikely to find the most direct manifestation of idolatry in my country, save for the practices of those who purposefully live out some sort of pagan philosophy. The looser kind addressed by Paul in Ephesians 5:5 is far more abundant and can be far more subtle. But it is not minor.
[1]. Because logic is inherently true, it is more foundational than God, making it erroneous to regard the truths of reason as lesser than or secondary to him. However, money is far from this status. To regard wealth, people, personal fulfillment, and so on more highly than God is idolatrous in the extended sense. It is not idolatrous to think anything is greater than God, or else one would be obligated to have illogical beliefs or priorities that ignore the real nature of logic. Logic is fundamentally different than all else.
No comments:
Post a Comment