Monotheism: a path to Godlessness? (Jesus, ritual, Moses, evolution)

[Jayhawker Soule]

I've share the following elsewhere. Perhaps some of you will find value in it. It comes from a somewhat uneven little book by Douglass Rushkoff titled Nothing Sacred: The Truth About Judaism ...

Iconoclasm leads to the conclusion that any God must, ultimately, be a universal and nameless God. The natural result of settling for an abstract and unknowable deity is to then focus, instead, on human beings and life itself as the supremely sacred vessels of existence. There's no one around to pray to, so one learns to enact sanctity through ethical behavior. Iconoclasm destroys all man-made symbols and leads to abstract monotheism, which in turn leads to an ethos of social justice.

< -- snip -- >

Jewish community became the new temple. The emerging talmudic law stressed that God was experienced differently by everybody. Accordingly, the Israelites who witnessed him "directly" at Mount Sinai each saw a different image of God. Likewise, wherever Jews prayed together, the spirit of God was present even though each person experienced him personally and uniquely. There was no longer any official doctrine on what God was. His name could no longer be pronounced; his meaning could no longer be conceived.

From then on, most Jewish thinkers have understood God more by what he is not than by whatever he is. Medieval philosopher Moses Maimonides developed what is now called "negative theology." God is not a creature. God has no hands, and neither does God have emotions. Since any positive attribute of God is "inadmissible," he can be referred to only in the negative. If we are to appreciate God, we must do so by contemplating the underlying order of the natural universe. God is in the beauty of the logic, the details. Maimonides understood that any fixed conception of God must also be a form of idolatry. Negative theology prevents Jews from going backward and reducing their abstract God to a particular image, concept, or icon. But what happens when one moves forward from there?

Let's push the envelope just a little further, along with the existentialist philosophers of the twentieth century: If God cannot be conceived in any way, if his existence is utterly out of reach of human systems of belief and intellect, then for all practical purposes he does not exist. The evolution of God -- from Abraham's fire-breathing warmonger through Moses' righteous savior and Isaiah's compassionate father to Philo's allegorical character in the human drama -- is from real, to the ethereal, to the inconceivable. This is why the spiritual crisis of the twentieth century, precipitated by the success of the scientific model and rationality that came with it, need not threaten one's spiritual foundations. As long as faith finds its foothold in something other than the authority of God or the testaments of those who claim to have encountered him, logic and spirituality are not at odds. God is just not something Jews are suppose to worry about.

In this light, abstract monotheism is not the process by which a people find the one true God, but the path through which they get over the need for him. Whether he exists or not, he is beyond human's perceptual reach or conceptual grasp. He is increasingly inaccessible and rendered effectively absent. This is no cause for sadness. Our continuing evolution beyond the need for a paternal character named God doesn't mean we have to become atheists; we might just as likely become pantheists, learning to see God in everything and everyone. For at each step along the way, the Jews' focus on an external master whose hunger they need to quell or whose edicts they need to obey is replaced by an emphasis on people's duty to one another.

There is far more here than meets the eye, including an implicit critique of Chritianity which I believe to be fully warranted. But first and foremost is the wonderful observation that ...

abstract monotheism is not the process by which a people find the one true God,
but the path through which they get over the need for him

[Sunstone]

Rushkoff put a lot of thought into this. I don't recall ever having come across these exact ideas before. Thank you, Jay! This is one post I'll be re-reading.

[Feathers in Hair]

That is incredibly fascinating! Thanks for posting that, Jay!

[Jayhawker Soule]

An interesting question, at least to me, is the extent to which Paul's Christianity and its deification of "Christ" represents a repudiation of this abstract monotheism and, as such, a philosophically reactionary/retrograde worldview.

[Karl R]

Interesting essay.

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

An interesting question, at least to me, is the extent to which Paul's Christianity and its deification of "Christ" represents a repudiation of this abstract monotheism and, as such, a philosophically reactionary/retrograde worldview.

Rushkoff ties this trend to the destruction of the temple.

Paul's christianity began while the temple still stood. It's difficult to react to a circumstance before it happens.

However, if you're correct and this is a reactionary trend which is preemptively repudiates a coming trend, it opens up some extremely interesting questions.

[Sunstone]

I don't know enough about the Gnostic writings to make more than a guess here, but weren't some of those writings at least close to pantheism? If so, would they reflect the progression of abstract monotheism along its natural line of logic, while Paul reflects its regression in the deification of Jesus? Or, should I go back to sleep this morning and think about it all later when I'm rested?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Karl R

Rushkoff ties this trend to the destruction of the temple.

Nonsense. The 'trend' is clearly apparent as early as Genesis 2:1-3; see Heschel.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

I don't know enough about the Gnostic writings to make more than a guess here, but weren't some of those writings at least close to pantheism?

Gnosticism had nothing to do with Pantheism. The latter takes the physical world and reframes it as God, while the former takes the physical world and denigrates it as evil which can be exposed and deposed only with the aid of esoteric knowledge.

[Ody]

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

abstract monotheism is not the process by which a people find the one true God,

but the path through which they get over the need for him

Hasn't been the case for me.