Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Texts implying that Yahweh is not omnipotent
According to orthodox Christian philosophical theology, one essential belief concerning the true God is that He is extremely powerful. The idea that the divine exhibits this quality has a long history as can be seen from the fact that the words “Elohim” and “El” can be translated as “the powers” and “mighty one” respectively (cf. Eichrodt 1961:56). It is therefore no surprise that most « orthodox » theists would claim that an essential prerequisite for deityhood is that the entity in question must be omnipotent (cf. Kaiser et al. 1996:133).
This kind of power, however, is and was not generally conceived of as involving absolute omnipotence. Such a state of affairs appears to deconstruct itself with all sorts of mind-blowing contradictory possibilities (cf. Kolak 1994:51-54). It is therefore claimed that the true God is logically omnipotent. By this it is meant that the nature of divine omnipotence is determined or limited by His essential nature as a wise and omnibenevolent deity-in-relation to creatures with an independent and free will of their own (cf. Haley 1992:28).
Now according to the Old Testament in general, Yahweh is indeed an extremely powerful character. In fact, his power and competence are way beyond that of any of the other entities depicted in the texts. However, there are many scenarios where it appears to be implicitly insinuated that Yahweh is not nearly as omnipotent as orthodox theology would admit or like to be the case (cf. also Walton et al. 2000:557; van der Toorn 1999a:912). Consider the following scenarios, all of which can be interpreted as alluding to a kind of power in no way indicative of divine omnipotence:
• Yahweh does not create ex nihilo or all at once but has to work with pre-existing chaos materials over an extended period of time (cf. Gen 1:1-27).
• Yahweh needs to rest (cf. Gen 2:1).
• Yahweh needs people to till the soil (cf. Gen 2:5).
• Yahweh needs to travel to obtain information (cf. Gen 3:8-11, 11:5-7, 18:7).
• Yahweh is afraid of human potential and shows fear (cf. Gen 3:22; 11:5-7).
• There are some inevitable future destinies of peoples that even Yahweh seems powerless to change (cf. Gen 15:13; 16:12; 18:17-18).
• Yahweh, after barely overcoming Jacob in a wrestling match, cannot reveal his name and needs to depart from the scene before the light of dawn (cf. Gen 32:22- 33).
• Yahweh cannot lead the people by way of the Philistines as he fears they will want to turn back (cf. Ex 13:17).
• Yahweh cannot allow Israel to drive out the Canaanites to quickly for the fear that the wild animals might become too many (cf. Deut 7:22).
• Yahweh did not completely destroy all forces of chaos (Leviathan, Yam).
• Yahweh’s people cannot defeat their enemies because they have iron chariots, despite the fact that he was with them (cf. Judg 1:21).
• Yahweh is said to need help in some matters and cursed the people who did not come to his aid (cf. Judg 5:23).
• Yahweh looks around for assistance (cf. 1 Kgs 22: 20-23; Isa 63:3-5).
• The dead are beyond Yahweh’s sphere of control (cf. Ps 6:4-5; 88:10-12; Isa 38:18-10).
A closer look at each of these statements shows that, though it is not explicitly and unequivocally noted, there are definite limits to Yahweh’s capabilities. The all-toohuman ways in which Yahweh acts in these and many other scenarios in the Old Testament suggest that there are things that even Yahweh cannot do. Such texts can therefore, upon closer scrutiny and without the need for dogmatic rationalisations, be understood as implying that the deity is not omnipotent in the sense of being able to do everything logically possible (cf. also Fretheim 1984:22; Brueggemann 1997:371).
In addition, as will become clear in the discussions to follow, the fact that Yahweh is often depicted as less than omniscient implies ipso facto that he cannot be omnipotent. However, as Harwood (1992:38) argues, it might actually be fortunate for those who endorse realism regarding the ontological status of Yahweh-as-depicted in the text that the deity is not construed as being omnipotent. The reason for this is, as was noted earlier, the fact that the concept of omnipotence seems to be meaningless when one considers all the philosophical dilemmas it generates.
Suppose we define omnipotence as the ability to anything. Thus an omnipotent god could create a triangle with four sides; a number that is less than ten but more than nine; a rock so heavy that he could not lift it; and an effect that preceded its cause. Since none of the foregoing can exist it follows that omnipotence cannot exist, and therefore a deity possessed of such a trait cannot exist (cf. Harwood 1992:38). According to Harwood (1992:38), most modern god-worshippers, shown that absolute omnipotence cannot exist, would be willing to credit their paramount god with limited omnipotence. Anything a Disney animator could accomplish in a cartoon, their god could accomplish in reality. Thus a four-sided triangle would remain impossible, even to their god; but a mouse could give birth to a brontosaurus; a living human could be created out of clay, even though clay does not contain organic molecules; and a seventeen-billion-year-old universe could be created retroactively six thousand years ago.
Unfortunately, even limited omnipotence is incompatible with another supposed divine attribute, i.e. omniscience. If a god knows what will happen in the future, and knows that it will happen and that he will not change it, then he, in fact, cannot change it and is therefore not omnipotent. And if he can, when the time comes, change the future from what he knows it must be to something else, then he did not in fact know what would be and is therefore not omniscient. If he did know that he would change it, then he was incapable of not changing it, and is therefore not omnipotent. And if he…. Ultimately, a god cannot be simultaneously omnipotent and omniscient, and a god that is both cannot exist (Harwood 1992:38).
In conclusion, should one assume that the real God is actually omnipotent – or at least more powerful than Yahweh-as-depicted in some of the scenarios in the Old Testament – the ontological implications are, once again, all too clear. If the true God is omnipotent then Yahweh-as-depicted in the texts implying the opposite must be a character of fiction with no extra-textual counterpart. In short, from an orthodox philosophical theological perspective, Yahweh as thus depicted does not exist.
Texts implying that Yahweh is not omniscient
Orthodox theology also conceives of the true God as being omniscient (cf. Kaiser et al. 1996:77). By this designation it is meant that God knows everything, past, present and future. Yahweh however, as sometimes depicted in the Old Testament, though very knowledgeable, does not quite seem to measure up to the profile constructed for him by post-biblical theology. Consider, the following examples from the texts implying that Yahweh is less cognisant than popular orthodox conceptions would have us believe: “And Yahweh the god called to the human and said to him, ‘Where are you?’ And he said, ‘Your voice I heard in the garden and I saw that I feared because I was naked and I hid.’ And he said, ‘Who told you that you were naked? Did you eat from the tree, which I told you not to eat from?’ And the man said, ‘The woman you gave me, she gave to me from the tree and I ate’. And Yahweh said to the woman, ‘What is this that you have done? And the woman said, ‘The snake misled me and I ate.’” (Gen 3:9- 13) “Then Yahweh said, ‘Shall I hide from Abraham what I am going to do, while Abraham will surely become a great and mighty nation and all the nations of the earth will be blessed in him?’…Furthermore Yahweh said, ‘The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is truly great and their sin is very heavy. I want to go down in order to see whether they have actually acted according to the outcry over them which has come to me; and if not, I want to know it.’” (Gen 18:17) “But the angel of Yahweh called to him from the heavens and said… ‘Do not lift your hand against the boy…because now I know that you fear God and did not hold back your only son from me.’” (Gen 22: 12) “When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not let them travel along the road which led to the land of the Philistines, even though it would have been shorter, for God said, ‘What if the people become fearful when they see war and decide to go back to Egypt?’” (Ex 13:17) “Then Yahweh spoke to Moses and Aaron and said, ‘How long will this evil congregation murmur against me?’” (Num 14:27) “And God came to Balaam and said, ‘Who are these men with you?’” (Num 22:9) “And you must think about the entire way along which Yahweh your god has led you for forty years in the desert to humble you and to test you in order to know what is in your heart, whether you will listen to his commands or not.” (Deut 8:2) “Yahweh your god is testing you in order to know if you really love Yahweh your god with all your heart and with all your soul.” (Deut 13:1-3) “And these are the nations Yahweh allowed to remain…They were there to put Israel to the test, in order to know if they would listen to the commands, which Yahweh commanded their fathers through Moses.” (Judg 2:20-3:4) “I have seen Yahweh sitting on his throne while all the hosts of heaven stood next to him…And Yahweh said, ‘Who will convince Ahab that he can go up and fall in Ramoth in Gilead?’ And the one said this and the other one that. Then the spirit came forward and went to stand before the face of Yahweh and said, ‘I shall convince him.’ And Yahweh asked him, ‘With what?’ And he said, ‘I shall go out and become a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You will convince, yes, you will win over; go out and do so.’” (1 Kgs 22:19-22) “…and God left him in order to test him, in order to discover everything that was in his heart.” (2 Chron 32:31) “And one day when the sons of God came to set themselves before Yahweh the Satan also came among them. Then Yahweh asked the Satan, ‘Where did you come from?’ And the Satan answered Yahweh and said, ‘From a journey over the earth, which I have crossed.’ And Yahweh asked the Satan, ‘Did you see my servant Job?’” (Job 1:6) “Yahweh looked down from the heavens upon the sons of man in order to see if there were any who understand and seek God.” (Ps 14:2) “Thus says Yahweh, ‘Stand in the court of Yahweh’s house, and speak…Maybe they will listen, and everyone will return of his evil way that I may repent of the evil I might commit.” (Jer 26:2-3; cf. 36:3,7; 51:8; Isa 47:12) “And I thought, ‘After she has done all this she will return to me’; but she did not return. …I thought how I would set you among my sons, and give you a pleasant land, a heritage most beauteous of all nations. And I thought you would call me, ‘my father’, and would not turn from following me. Surely, as a faithless wife leaves her husband, so you have been faithless to me, O house of Israel.’” (Jer 3:7,19)
The plain sense of these texts featuring questions, perplexity, uncertainty and the need for information on the part of Yahweh clearly implies that Yahweh does not know everything about either the present or the future (cf. also Fretheim 1984:45-59). All apologetic attempts to salvage the belief in Yahweh’s omniscience via analogies, reinterpretation, comparative proof-texting and other types of rationalisation are considered by the devil’s advocate as being symptomatic of an addiction to dogma rather than the result of a genuine attempt to take the text seriously on its own terms. In addition, the devil’s advocate would also like to point out the fact that limits to precognition are also assumed in all those instances where Yahweh – hardly the immutable unmoved mover of philosophical theology – is depicted as changing his mind in light of new information. The deity often repents of actualising the « evil » he had planned after a human mediator convinced him that the particular course of action would not be a wise move (cf. Gen 6:6, 8:21; Ex 32:10-14, Num 22:20-22 [contra 23:19!]; 1 Sam 2:30, 15:11 [contra 15:29!]; Am 7:3,6; Jon 3:10, etc.).
The particular modes of divine repentance as depicted in these and other Old Testament texts cannot be harmonised with the dogma of divine immutability. As Fretheim (1984:113-117) therefore correctly observes, many Old Testament texts clearly depict a deity who had to modify his agenda as the result of something happening which he did not foresaw when he initially established particular relationships.
Claiming that Yahweh actually knew all along what was what makes nonsense of both the particular plot in the text and the integrity of the deity’s character and his dialogue. All apologetic claims that Yahweh did not really change his mind, it was merely the people who changed and therefore their relation to the unchanging deity was modified, is another type of ad hoc rationalisation that conveniently ignores the plain sense of the texts involved (see Kaiser et al. 1996:215-216).
Ironically, however, as was the case with the issue of omnipotence, it might even be considered fortunate and philosophically less problematic that Yahweh does not seem to know everything. Those texts suggesting that Yahweh does, in fact, know everything, including the future (e.g. Isa 41:21-24; 44:7,24-26; 45:21; 46:9,10; 48:3-8; cf. 55:10,11), lead to vexing and seemingly insoluble philosophical problems.
CHAPTER INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION AND ACTUALITY
1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM
1.3 HYPOTHESIS
1.4 OBJECTIVE
1.5 METHODOLOGY
1.6 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS
1.7 ASSUMPTION
1.8 NOVELTY
THE CASE AGAINST REALISM: ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE EXISTENCE OF YAHWEH
CHAPTER 2 THE ARGUMENT FROM THEOLOGICAL PLURALISM
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 THEOLOGICAL PLURALISM IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
2.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3 THE ARGUMENT FROM UNORTHODOX THEOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 UNORTHODOX ELEMENTS IN OLD TESTAMENT YAHWISM
3.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4 THE ARGUMENT FROM POLYMORPHIC PROJECTION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 THE ALL-TOO-HUMAN GOD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
4.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5 THE Debate FROM MYTHOLOGY AND SYNCRETISM
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 PARALLELS BETWEEN OLD TESTAMENT YAHWISM AND OTHER RELIGIONS
5.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6 THE ARGUMENT FROM FICTITIOUS COSMOGRAPHY
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 OLD TESTAMENT COSMOGRAPHY
6.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 7 THE ARGUMENT FROM FICTITIOUS HISTORY
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.2 ARGUMENTS AGAINST HISTORICITY
7.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 8 THE ARGUMENT FROM META-TEXTUAL HISTORY
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.2 AN ALL-TOO-HUMAN META-TEXTUAL HISTORY
8.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 9 CONCLUSION
9.1 INTRODUCTION
9.2 SUMMARY AND RECAPITULATION
9.3 THE PAN-ATHEIST IMPLICATIONS OF THE CASE AGAINST REALISM IN OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
