Money Isn't a False God

Psalm 20:7 presents horses and chariots as alternatives to God. Perhaps "substitutes for God" or "substitute gods" would be more accurate terms than "false gods." We can quibble about the semantics, but I believe this is what many people mean by "false gods."

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert EinsteinI am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

quote:

---

I wasn't making this about the god of any particular religion. I'm just talking about where our heart is. If it's all wrapped in money and power then I still maintain that we are serving false gods. In this case the money is the road to the power.

---

It doesn't matter what religion we're dealing with.IMO, serving and worshiping are not the same. We can't serve money or power. They aren't entities.Our hearts are wrapped up in survival. That's what we do on a daily basis. Money is necessary for survival. How is being "wrapped up" in money any different than being wrapped up in hunting for food or growing food. We are wrapped up in survival and survival of our families.Show me how someone worships or serves money today. Give me a real example.

Everyone loves money even god isn't there a story in the bible where a king counted the people and do to some bible law forgot he cant count something that is not his and as a reprimand forgot to pay god 6 shekels (even though got told him to count the people i think) and that made god angry and he let loose a plague.God was pissed for not getting payed so money is a good thing.

quote:

---

Psalm 20:7 presents horses and chariots as alternatives to God. Perhaps "substitutes for God" or "substitute gods" would be more accurate terms than "false gods." We can quibble about the semantics, but I believe this is what many people mean by "false gods."

---

I disagree. It's a song that emphasizes the Hebrews had a powerful god on their side besides their own strength. Like I said, the Hebrews would still have prepared mentally and physically for battle and part of that is attitude.Money is not a substitute god. Show me how people today consider it a substitute god. We have to get past the catch phrases and the creative writing and look at reality.One can love their god all they want, but they can't just sit on their bums and not do anything. They have to work at survival.

I'm not talking money for "survival". I'm talking about accumulating money in order to gain power and influence, or accumulating money just for the point of seeing rich you can become.Money for survival, or money to help those that need help is a good thing.Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

Can you please clarify what you disagree with? Certainly you don't disagree that these are presented as two alternatives? Here again is Ps 20:7

quote:

---

Ps 20:7 Some trust in chariots and others in horses, but we depend on the LORD our God.

---

Notice the wording. It doesn't say "and we also depend on the LORD our God." Rather, it says "but we depend on the LORD our God." The word "but" is functioning as an adversative, "implying opposition or contrast." The text says they were depending on God instead of chariots and horses.Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert EinsteinI am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

quote:

---

I'm not talking money for "survival". I'm talking about accumulating money in order to gain power and influence, or accumulating money just for the point of seeing rich you can become.

---

It doesn't matter. Accumulating anything just for the sake of having it doesn't make that thing a false god. It doesn't mean that one's heart isn't with the god of their choice.There is nothing wrong with having power and influence. A selfish person is selfish whether they have a ton of money or not.Money cannot be accurately likened to a deity or false deity.

quote:

---

Money for survival, or money to help those that need help is a good thing.

---

Starting a business that creates jobs can help those in need. There are many ways to help those in need besides handing them money.You haven't shown me that money is anything like a false god. There's no worship of it or serving it.

quote:

---

Can you please clarify what you disagree with? Certainly you don't disagree that these are presented as two alternatives?

---

I disagree that the song presents the chariots and horses as substitute for a god. It's a song to inspire the Hebrews not provide facts.

quote:

---

Notice the wording. It doesn't say "and we also depend on the LORD our God." Rather, it says "but we depend on the LORD our God." The word "but" is functioning as an adversative, "implying opposition or contrast." The text says they were depending on God instead of chariots and horses.

---

Again, it's a song. Limited wording. Like I said in Message 11: The Hebrews would still have prepared mentally and physically for battle.Even this commentary doesn't assume the Hebrews didn't prepare and doesn't imply the horses and chariots were substitutes for a god.

Perhaps our disagreement is just semantic. I agree with your commentary; it means that "our reliance is not on armies, but on God." It's an issue of reliance or trust, and two possible objects of trust are contrasted.It may be helpful to look at occurrences of the phrase "false gods" in English Bible translations. Here are the passages I've found where multiple translations use the phrase:Jer 13:25, where the issue is the object of their trust, similar to Ps 20:7 above:

quote:

---

NET: This is your fate,
the destiny to which I have appointed you,
because you have forgotten me
and have trusted in false gods.

​

NIV: This is your lot, the portion I have decreed for you, declares the LORD, because you have forgotten me and trusted in false gods.

​

NLT: This is your allotment, that which is due you, says the LORD. I have measured it out especially for you, because you have forgotten me and put your trust in false gods.
  —Jer 13:25

---

Jer 14:22, where the issues are both power or ability, and also the object of their trust:

quote:

---

ESV: Are there any among the false gods of the nations that can bring rain?
Or can the heavens give showers?
Are you not he, O LORD our God?
We set our hope on you,
for you do all these things.

​

JPS: Can any of the false gods of the nations give rain? Can the skies of themselves give showers? Only You can, O LORD our God! So we hope in You, For only You made all these things.
  —Jer 14:22

---

Jer 16:19, where the issue is strength and the ability to help:

quote:

---

NET: Then I said,
LORD, you give me strength and protect me.
You are the one I can run to for safety when I am in trouble.
Nations from all over the earth
will come to you and say,
‘Our ancestors had nothing but false gods—
worthless idols that could not help them at all.

​

NIV: O LORD, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in time of distress, to you the nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, Our fathers possessed nothing but false gods, worthless idols that did them no good.
  —Jer 16:19

---

Jer 18:15, where the issue is sacrifice:

quote:

---

ASV: For my people have forgotten me, they have burned incense to false gods; and they have been made to stumble in their ways, in the ancient paths, to walk in bypaths, in a way not cast up;

​

ESV: But my people have forgotten me;
they make offerings to false gods;
they made them stumble in their ways,
in the ancient roads,
and to walk into side roads,
not the highway,

​

WEB: For my people have forgotten me, they have burned incense to false gods; and they have been made to stumble in their ways, in the ancient paths, to walk in byways, in a way not built up;
  —Jer 18:15

---

Amos 2:4, where the issue is obedience:

quote:

---

NET: This is what the LORD says:
Because Judah has committed three covenant transgressions—
make that four!—I will not revoke my decree of judgment.
They rejected the LORD’s law;
they did not obey his commands.
Their false gods,
to which their fathers were loyal,
led them astray.

​

NIV: This is what the LORD says: For three sins of Judah, even for four, I will not turn back [my wrath]. Because they have rejected the law of the LORD and have not kept his decrees, because they have been led astray by false gods, the gods their ancestors followed,
  —Amos 2:4

---

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert EinsteinI am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

quote:

---

Perhaps our disagreement is just semantic. I agree with your commentary; it means that "our reliance is not on armies, but on God." It's an issue of reliance or trust, and two possible objects of trust are contrasted.

---

It's semantics in the sense that you've changed the meaning of false god(s).One's god of choice does not want his followers to put their trust and reliance in another god for support. That is what they are talking about in Jeremiah. Yahweh didn't want his people to worship (trust, rely) the gods of the surrounding nations. False Gods of the Bible and the Ancient WorldFrom the Jewish perspective, false gods are the gods of other nations.It isn't about relying or trusting on everyday items to do what they are intended, but worshiping or relying on the god of another nation to provide for you as one feels their own god does.As mentioned in Jeremiah 14:22, the ancients relied on gods for rain and sunshine to provide food. They sacrificed and gave praise to the god of their choice.We don't do this with money. The personification of money in the NT to make a point against not sharing doesn't mean that people actually worshiped money. There may have been a god of riches called Mammon, but info is sketchy.Even a god of money doesn't make money a god/false god.

Obviously it was intended as a non-compete clause for religions at the time.But don't you think that's a pretty narrow way to construe it these days? There's not a lot of competition for Christianity anymore, at least not among polytheistic religions. That's the reason that the passage in Jeremiah is interpreted, in modern theology, to refer to not letting shallow material concerns, like wealth, power, prestige, or influence, supersede more important spiritual concerns.In that sense money - personified in Christian mythology as "Mammon" - very much is a false god. I just don't see how that can be denied except for very narrow interpretations of "god". And you wouldn't be trying to define or limit God from your narrow human perspective, now would you?

quote:

---

But don't you think that's a pretty narrow way to construe it these days? There's not a lot of competition for Christianity anymore, at least not among polytheistic religions. That's the reason that the passage in Jeremiah is interpreted, in modern theology, to refer to not letting shallow material concerns, like wealth, power, prestige, or influence, supersede more important spiritual concerns.

---

I think it is an appropriate way to construe it.There are plenty of teachings concerning spiritual concerns without turning money into a false god.

quote:

---

In that sense money - personified in Christian mythology as "Mammon" - very much is a false god. I just don't see how that can be denied except for very narrow interpretations of "god". And you wouldn't be trying to define or limit God from your narrow human perspective, now would you?

---

In that sense, the personification is a false god if worshiped, not actual money or having wealth. Having wealth doesn't mean one worships the god, Mammon. Having wealth doesn't mean it gets in the way of spiritual concerns.I'm not limiting, I'm just not watering down the meaning of a deity. Artemis is the goddess or false god, not the things she represents.

Right, but the phrase "worshipping Mammon" means "letting the pursuit of wealth get in the way of spiritual concerns." Nobody actually worships Mammon - there's no Mammon cult, there are no temples to Mammon*, there's no traditional Mammon scriptures - the "god" Mammon has only ever existed as a negative example, as a metaphor."Worshipping Mammon" as a term doesn't refer to anything but letting the pursuit of wealth get in the way of spiritual concerns. "Mammon" is precisely how money can be a "false god." No, that's exactly wrong. Artemis is the hunt. She is the young virgin. She is the wild woman. That's what it means to be the personification of those things - the deity of those things. It's not like she's some divine bureaucrat whose job it is to manage hunts, and virginal girls, and the fertility of women. Artemis is those things - what divinity is in hunting, or virginity, or a woman's power of lifegiving is Artemis's divinity, specifically. She is in and of those things, and they are in and of her.*Yeah, I know, wags - Wall Street, Donald Trump's biography - but that's my point - those are only metaphorically temples and scriptures.

quote:

---

"Worshipping Mammon" as a term doesn't refer to anything but letting the pursuit of wealth get in the way of spiritual concerns.

---

Exactly!

quote:

---

"Mammon" is precisely how money can be a "false god."

---

I still disagree that it makes money a false god. As you said, no one is worshiping anything, therefore money can't be a false god.Mammon is more wealth personified, than just money.

quote:

---

No, that's exactly wrong. Artemis is the hunt. She is the young virgin. She is the wild woman. That's what it means to be the personification of those things - the deity of those things. It's not like she's some divine bureaucrat whose job it is to manage hunts, and virginal girls, and the fertility of women. Artemis is those things - what divinity is in hunting, or virginity, or a woman's power of lifegiving is Artemis's divinity, specifically. She is in and of those things, and they are in and of her.

---

Those are the things that are personified in the goddess called Artemis. People prayed to her for a good hunt or a healthy child. The child and the hunt are not the gods/false gods. The personification that became Artemis is the god/false god.

You've already agreed, though, that that's not what "worshiping a false god" means. You've agreed that it doesn't mean temples and prostrate worship; you've agreed that it means "putting material concerns ahead of spiritual ones."Therefore by your own agreement putting money ahead of spiritual matters is "worshiping a false god", and the "false god" being worshiped in this instance is money.So, you've already agreed that money can be a false god. Would you like to walk back your previous agreement about the modern understanding of "worshiping false gods"? It certainly wouldn't be the first time you've changed your mind rather than face the consequences of what you've already accepted. Right, because those are her domains. The young virgin is Artemis. The expecting mother is Artemis. The ebb and flow of seasons is Artemis. The hunt is Artemis. The wild place is Artemis. All of those things are Artemis and Artemis is all of those things. That's what it means to be the "god" of something. Artemis is the hunt, so she is manifest in the hunt. Worshiping the hunt would certainly be worshiping a false god, both in the modern sense you've already agreed to, and the ancient sense of competition with the Hebrew God.