Posted by Helen on: 08.31.2006 /
Yesterday’s Running To Win radio broadcast opened with this statement:
Looked at from our standpoint, to be egotistical is wrong because we have no right to be egotistical. But looked at in the right way, yes, God is egotistical, but He has a right to be, because to him everything funnels into His glory and into His plan.
I’d be interested to hear the following from atheists, Christians and people inbetween:
Comment by: Keith
1My 1990 Webster’s Dictionary defines “egotism” as: “the frame of mind which causes a person to pay too much attention to himself, to be conceited and selfish or to refer to himself frequently in writing.”
I’m pretty sure that Scripture teaches that we the mind of God is a beyond-our-understanding thing (and if there is a God … I would hope that his thinking would be beyond mine). Since I don’t have a clue what the people I know best are thinking most of the time, trying to guess God’s frame of mind can be kind of a fruitless exercise. However, the evidence may suggest that he likes to refer to himself in his writing :-).
I’ve heard a similiar statement before, and it struck me funny. A friend of mine is deeply moved by this way of thinking about God, but for me it rings hollow. The God I believe in has put others first in just about every decision He has made, IMO, and I have a hard time believing He can in anyway be described as “paying too much attention to himself.” No way - not if my God is real. He has always been the embodiment of unselfishness to me personally … all the egotism in our relationship has been mine.
Comment by: jim
2I don’t think of Jesus as egotistical - I think of him as confident.
He said ” The Son can do nothing of himself only what he sees the Father doing” (John 5:19)
Not words an egomaniac would use from my perspective
He also said ” The Father delights to show him all that he is doing and will show him even more so that you will be amazed” ( John 5:?)
Not the words of a shrinking violet and if taken alone would certainly get him into the egomaniacs club.
Taken together they are the words of someone who is dependent and confident.
That is how I think about Jesus and I hope he is the one running the universe because if he isn’t well…
Comment by: Jesse
3I’ve heard variations on this “God has a right to do stuff we can’t rightly do” thinking before from Christians. God is not egotistical. I think the point is that when we read the Bible’s description of God, we misunderstand the context of the accounts (this is not 2000 B.C., and we’re not in the Middle East).
What we refer to as “glorifying God” is not like giving God props; like he needs for us to pump him up or something. He just wants us to acknowledge the truth - he’s the Creator. He doesn’t want us to make up stuff to flatter him with - that’s egotism.
Comment by: Siamang
4As a non-theist, I think my reaction might be hard to put into words.
I think the God of the Bible, as He is portrayed in the Bible, is egotistical. A jealous god.
However, the God I’d prefer to believe exists, nature’s god, is so modest as to not exist except perhaps as the universe itself. He’s a god evident only in the way things work, and perhaps only existant within that work. This god cannot be egotistical, as it has no ego. Anyway, if I believed that belief mattered, this would be my image of God. It’s a deist sort of god.
As a non-theist, I take Jesus to have been a mortal man. I think the historic Jesus truely believed what he taught. I think most religious leaders do truely believe what they teach. Internally within Jesus’ teachings, he is not egotistical. But when viewed externally, from a point of view that he was mortal like you and me, it is egotistical to believe what he believed.
As a non-theist, I have a different perspective. My perspective is that all we know of God within religion is the God that the Church says exists. It’s the preacher’s God. Viewed from that perspective, if a preacher says “But looked at in the right way, yes, God is egotistical, but He has a right to be, because to him everything funnels into His glory and into His plan.” I see something different. As a non-theist, what I hear a preacher saying is: “But looked at in the right way, yes, the vision that I want you to accept is that God is egotistical, but He has a right to be, because everything funnels into what I say is His glory and into what I say is His plan.”
If a preacher has a plan for your life, it’s egotistical, because he doesn’t know any better than anyone else anything about God, in my view. Sure, preachers paint an egotistical God. People almost always paint a very human image of God, whether they are aware of it or not. Preachers believe that they are speaking the true word and decrees of the creator of the universe Himself. That’s egotistical! They may do it in the most demur, self-depricating way possible, but at its base, what they’re doing is egotisical.
This is all imho of course. But I’ve never heard a preacher say in a sermon “I really don’t know what God wants us to do in this case…. anyway, it’s just my idea or opinion on that, you tell me!”
Comment by: Karen
5I agree with Keith that it’s almost nonsensical to try and put human labels on a god who is supposed to be so far beyond our little world of emotions and egos.
That said, however, from an atheist’s perspective there’s a lot in the bible that seems to be pointing toward a deity that we would probably label “egotistical” if we were talking about a person on the psychiatrist’s couch.
I mean, c’mon … the god of the bible definitely has a huge hangup about needing to be worshipped. And venerated. And adored. And praised for his wonderful works. And so forth. And he has a real penchant for nasty punishments for those who don’t comply with his laws and his need for acknolwedgement - he sends them to eternal torture!
And what about eternity as a reward? All the believers and angels and heavenly beings spending eons and eons and eons forever circled around his throne singing and praising and throwing down their crowns? Yikes. I definitely need a pat on the back once in a while to keep my spirits up, but that amount of attention would get really dull and uncomfortable really fast for me. ;-)
Comment by: Mike C
6Funny… I seem to find myself saying something like that all the time. It’s almost a liturgy at our church. :)
But maybe that’s the difference between an emerging church and a more typical FE church.
Comment by: Julie Marie
7I’ve never heard that said by a pastor. They may say things like that, but not around me. The first time Hemant wrote about Via Christus, I liked what I heard and wished you were in SC rather than IL. I like your approach, MIke.
Comment by: Helen
8Keith wrote:
I’m glad you wrote this, Keith. This is exactly why I stopped trying to figure out what God might be saying to me ‘in my thoughts’. It was too hard, since I couldn’t guess His frame of mind.
Jim wrote:
Jim, I like that distinction.
Jesse wrote:
Jesse, why does he want us to acknowledge he’s the Creator though? Why does he care whether we do or not? That confuses me.
Siamang wrote:
Yes…it seems to me that preachers who preach an egotistical God often end up coming across as egotistical themselves. At least to ‘outsiders’ who have not been trained to make distinctions like “Even if my pastor sounds egotistical when he talks about an egotistical God who has non-negotiable demands, it’s not him who is egotistical but God”. I’m not sure that pastors realize how egotistical they can sound to ‘outsiders’ when they talk about an egotistical God.
To be fair, I’ve heard pastors say they don’t know - but I’ve never heard one say in a sermon “You tell me” because the modus operandi during sermons is, they talk, you listen. You don’t tell them stuff - they tell you stuff.
Mike wrote (in reference to Siamang’s final comment):
Maybe so.
I also suspect it’s partly the difference between a small new church which can be somewhat informal and a bigger more structured church environment. Smaller less formal churches have advantages.
Julie Marie wrote:
Me too!
Comment by: Siamang
9Me three.
Comment by: Helen
10My own view is - I find this confusing. I think of Jesus as not egotistical which is one reason why I feel I can relate somewhat to Jesus.
But if Jesus is God and God is egotistical how can Jesus not be egotistical?
And if God is egotistical then God is so different from what I aspire to be (non-egotistical) that how can I hope to have a close relationship with God?
Comment by: Lance
11I don’t believe there is a contradiction to God being “egotistical” (in the purest sense of the word - if there is such a thing… and remember, that’s how the original quote was framed: “But looked at in the right way…”) and His being the epitome of love.
By definition, God is perfect and pure, without blemish, all in such a way as without counterpart in all Creation… “holy” (= “set apart”). So if we could remove any hint of the conceit or selfishness that we usually associate with the word “egotistical” then God would be that - in the sense that He knows that He is the best, the greatest of anyone or anything.
At the same time, He loves us (perfectly and purely). And if love, by definition, desires and works for the best for another, God desires… well… Himself FOR us. He knows that we will only be truly satisfied, fulfilled, happy, and whole, when we have satisfied ourselves in Him.
There is an intriguing passage in the Old Testament that says that God has set eternity in our hearts. I believe this is the essence of this discussion, and of what the Scriptures are all about: Humans will always have a longing for something bigger and better until we find that longing fulfilled in the very reason we were created - to have relationship with the most Beautiful and Glorious Being in the universe.
Comment by: Helen
12Thanks for your comment, Lance. You expressed what the opening statement refers to very beautifully.
I used to be ok with the beliefs you expressed, but then I started to think, if God is so different from me, how can I even begin to know him? It doesn’t seem like it could be possible.
Comment by: Lance
13Helen wrote:
(I meant to reference this in my first post - sorry!)
I believe it’s because “Daddy knows best!” Truly God knows what is best for us, and He knows that HE is THE best for us. In fact, that’s the best way of looking at the commandments of the Bible. God, in His great love for us, wants us to experience life as it was meant to be, and in relationship to Him. It’s not because He’s “holding back on us.” (In fact, that was the very first temptation in the Garden!)
Comment by: Lance
14Helen wrote:
Ah, but that’s the beauty of why Jesus came! To “incarnate” God. To make God knowable. To put flesh on and become one of us. To “reveal the Father” and show His love.
And the same is true for the Scriptures, and also for the Church (”warts & all!”). These are the primary means by which God both reveals Himself and makes possible relationship.
Comment by: Helen
15Lance: so is Jesus egotistical, if he “incarnates” God and reveals him?
Comment by: Lance
16Helen, I would say that Jesus is egotistical only in the sense that I originally tried to limit the use of the term in my first post. Frankly, I’m uncomfortable with using the term - as it seems we all are! - just for the fact that it’s virtually impossible for us to dissociate selfishness and conceit from the word.
That said, think about it… He told 12 men to follow Him, and allowed them to do so for almost 3 years; He told people that no one could know God without first knowing Him; He said that all the Old Testament Scriptures were written to point to Him; He received the extravagent worship of an entire year’s wages being poured over Him…
All the Scriptures are indeed Christocentric. But this same Christ reveals the extravagent love of God for us when pours Himself out on the Cross. In His love - doing what is best for us - He’s done everything necessary to draw us to Himself. But true love also does not manipulate, so He leaves us with the choice to follow or not.
Comment by: vynette
17Helen,
“But if Jesus is God and God is egotistical how can Jesus not be egotistical?
And if God is egotistical then God is so different from what I aspire to be (non-egotistical) that how can I hope to have a close relationship with God? ”
Referring to God’s ‘egotism’:
Is there any possible way to understand the nature of an eternal spirit? All we have are the writings of men, albeit sometimes inspired.
From Genesis to Revelation, what is laid out for us is the evolution in MAN’S moral, ethical, and intellectual development. The evolution in MAN’S thinking about the nature of the Supreme Being.
This process culminated in the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. “For the law was a schoolmaster leading us to Christ”.
Thus we have men ascribing their own thoughts and feelings to the Almighty.
Contrary to the doctrines and traditions of the Christian churches, the New Testament writers do not claim ‘divinity’ for Jesus of Nazareth. (Fundamental to the problem is a misunderstanding of the appellation ’son of God’ when used in reference to Jesus.)
If we are to talk about Jesus and ‘egotism’, then should it not be based on a correct premise?
Comment by: Helen
18Thanks for your comments, Vynette.
I agree with you that “your premise is wrong: Jesus isn’t divine” is one answer to my question.
If anyone wants to discuss whether Jesus is divine you’re welcome to do so on our discussion board. I don’t want to get into that here.
Comment by: Mike O
19Is God egotistical? Well, when asked what his name was, he said “I AM.”
I think what people are getting stuck on is the negatives that Keith touched on WAYYYY Back up in comment number 1 when he looked up the dictionary definition. There are two words in there that DON’T fit God … selfish and conceited. All of this creation, he did for US. His son died for US. He is defined as “GOD IS LOVE.” Egotism is not love. It is the antithesis of love.
There is even a verse in the new testament, I can’t remember where, where Jesus says (this is the Mike Paraphrase) “You are my friends if you do what I tell you.” Sounds kind of bratty to me. But of course it’s taken out of context. There’s a whole lot to God, and the fact that He IS God does give him the right to, for lack of a better word, be egotistical. But I think there is a better word. Are your parents egotistical just because they have authority over you, and they really do know what’s best for you, and they really do protect and provide for you and they really do call all the shots?? No. They’re your parents. They love you. They GIVE their guidance, protection, provision and yes, rules to you, not so they can be ‘all that,’ but so you can have ‘all that.’
I get the speakers point, but no, God is not egotistical unless you can somehow cull out the negatives. God is God.
Comment by: Pam Hogeweide
20i don’t think God is egotistical.
The reason he is worshipped is because he is God. It is a response of the human heart when it encounters God.
Eternal worship of God is not about stroking His God-Sized ego. Rather it’s about an eternal response to the presence of GOD.
I think we all interpret God, to some degree or another, through a distorted glass that hinders us from seeing the reality of his true nature.
Jesus, whom we believe was God in the flesh, helped give us accurate knowledge about God and what he is truly like.
And Jesus, for damn sure, was not egotistical. Otherwise he would have whupped some Roman butt and kicked Caesar out of there.
But he didn’t
And, if he was egotistical, he would have orchestrated a grand birth in a grand palace with royal parents.
Instead he was born in a barn to a teen mom who was not legally wed.
Egomaniacs don’t do stuff like that.
Great topic, Helen. Thanks for stirring us up!
Comment by: jim
21Siamang said
First of all I need to say how cool it is to hear your voice again Siamang. I really miss you. Even when I don’t agree with you or more likely am unable to grasp what you are saying- I still like to read what you have to say- You are very articulate.
Now to your comment - I totally agree with you - If those passages out of the Old Testament were all we had then it is easy to find fodder for an egomanical god (although there are significant passages in the OT to counter that image I would have to agree that the jealous god one wins out)
But if you include or read what it says about Jesus in say Colossians - that he emptied himself and made himself a servant and made himself like us and if you put that together with the life Jesus lived - then that becomes impossible to correlate with anyone who is seriously committed to egomanicalism ( I had to do it :-)
Obviously I ignore the Old and embrace the new but of course all of that is moot to those for whom Jesus is just a nice guy
Comment by: Mike O
22Jim made a good statement over in his Why you need to be at the Revolution blog. In the last paragraph, he said, “When people like each other — the rules change”
It’s interesting how the people who “like” God don’t see him as egotistical, even though he said and did things that could be taken as egotistical. And the people who don’t “like” God, or don’t believe in him, have a hard time with those things. (Don’t read anything into “don’t like God” … I didn’t mean that … I’m just applying Jim’s statement to this conversation).
“When people like each other — the rules change”
Forget about God for for a second … let’s say we’re talking about a friend of yours. If that friend did or said things that come across as egotistical, but you like that person and you know that’s not really who they are, you’d be able to explain the perceived egotism. Some of us (Christians and others) can explain God’s perceived egotism because we like Him … the rules are different.
Comment by: Helen
23Mike O wrote:
and
Siamang wrote:
For many years I thought like Mike O and others - basically, whatever the OT seems to say about God, obviously God cannot be selfish, conceited, arrogant, vindictive or any of those things. Even if, were a human to say or do the things God says or does in the OT, that would be selfish, conceited, vindictive or arrogant.
Then I began to think more like Siamang and simply say “How is God portrayed?” and admit that God as portrayed in the OT does come across that way. What if that’s the way humans thought of God when the OT was written? What if, subsequent to that time, we (speaking as the conservative Christian I was) decided God cannot be that way and so we needed to come up with explanations of how God could be interpreted that way, but that’s the wrong interpretation? These explanations don’t make sense to us because someone who seems conceited (etc) but isn’t is entirely outside our experience. So we have to also say “we can’t understand this with our finite human minds”.
And then when outsiders say “That doesn’t make sense! Obviously God is portrayed as jealous/vindictive/conceited/egotistical in a negative way in the OT!” we (again, speaking as the conservative Christian I was) say “You can’t reason this out with your head because our finite minds can’t grasp the nature of God”. And then we turn the tables on them and call them arrogant for not being willing to say “My mind can’t grasp this but I accept it anyway”
Now I can’t help asking myself, “Why should we accept things we can’t understand? Is that wise? Is that safe? Is that healthy?”
And I can’t answer those questions “yes” with assurance any more.
Comment by: jim
24This is why I like (and respect) Helen - she keeps it real
Comment by: Helen
25Mike O wrote:
Mike, this is such a great point and really goes to the heart of why people who believe in God and people who do not have that belief can read the same passage about God and disagree over whether it portrays God positively or negatively.
Specifically in this case - think about this: if one or two people said that a male friend of yours (to simplify this - your friend could be female too ;-)) “Hey, your friend sure is an egomaniac!” and you knew he wasn’t, you’d probably defend him.
But what if people kept saying that to you? Would there ever come a day when you’d go to your friend and say “Hey, I know you’re a great person but for some reason you’re coming across as an egomaniac to some of my other friends and it’s really giving them a bad taste in their mouth about you” Would you ever talk to your friend, for his sake, about how something in his behavior was hurting his relationships? Or would you just defend him forever? Might you even realize “Perhaps it’s me who has the distorted image of this guy - perhaps he really is a egomaniac but because I like him I’ve not been willing to see the truth?”
That’s sort of where I’ve ended up: I’ve realized that if enough people think someone - even if that someone is God (maybe especially if, since God is all-powerful and all-knowing) - comes across as an egomaniac (in a negative way), then either a) he is in fact an egomaniac or b) I don’t understand why someone all-powerful and all-knowing doesn’t change the way he presents himself, for the sake of his relationships, to come across more like the good person he really is.
Yes I’m using my mind to think about this, which I’ve been told so many times is too finite to grasp God. But I didn’t like where I ended up when I didn’t use it to think about God and Christian belief, so I’ve decided to try using it again and see if I like the results better (So far I do).
Comment by: Helen
26Thanks Jim. I want to be real. If God is real too that’s fine with me. I just don’t want to find myself living by imaginary constructs that I can’t reject because I’m not allowed to think them through, because my ‘mind is too finite to grasp them’.
Comment by: Mike O
27Helen, I am so grateful to have met you. You’re the first non-Christian (?) I’ve met that challenges my thinking without being aggressive, combative or defensive, and that doesn’t think I’m an idiot for believing.
You remind me of my dad, only he’s on the other side. He’s way more conservative than me … very religious in my opinion. But we can talk, and bounce our ideas off of each other. We agree on about 82% of things (that was meant to be funny!), but he’s a good ’sparring partner’ if you know what I mean. We’re good for each other.
So are you. I like you.
Comment by: Helen
28Thanks Mike. I like you too.
Thanks for the question mark on whether I’m a non-Christian. I’ll probably comment on that when we have a discussion more focused on that issue.
Comment by: Mike O
29Yeah, I wasn’t sure what to say there.
Comment by: Helen
30That makes two of us :-)
Comment by: Rachel
31OR “Maybe the truth is that I’m a total egomaniac too and that’s why this guy and I get along so well” !?
It seems like some people like God because they think he is going to punish all the people they don’t like.
Comment by: Lance
32Re: God being a jealous God, how He is perceived, etc.
Could it be that God isn’t the one who needs to change how He is perceived? (Bear with me a minute…) Could it be that a key reason He is perceived so poorly (mean, vindictive, egotistical, etc.) is not because of a failure on His part to show His true character, but rather due to the way He has been painted by His ambassadors, the Church?
I believe that God has done everything necessary on His part for people to come to an accurate understanding of who He is, what He’s like, what He’s done for us. But He has also chosen to largely limit Himself to flawed creatures in communicating that truth to the world.
Now don’t get me wrong here. I believe strongly that the Church is the Hope of the world. There’s nothing like the church when it is functioning the way God intended. It is His beautiful bride. But there’s also nothing so ugly as the Church when it is dysfunctional, and devoid of the Spirit.
So if when we read in the Old Testament that “God is a jealous God” and bring negative connotations to that, might it be because Christians have presented the view of God in the mean-spirited, tyrant, fiery-type of jealousy that turns people off? But what if His followers could paint the picture of God so yearning for relationship with His favorite created beings, desiring their very best, that He was jealous of their affection and devotion in the same way a loving husband would rightfully be jealous if his wife were “looking for love in all the wrong places.”
I’m afraid that we Christians are a big part of the problem for God being viewed as less than the most Beautiful and Glorious Being imaginable.
Comment by: Mike O
33Amen to that! Barna did a survey once (I think it was Barna) and asked people what was their general opinion of Jesus Christ, and the responses were generally positive. But when the same people were asked what was their general opinion of Christian, the responses were generally negative.
What’s up with that?!?
Comment by: Helen
34Rachel wrote:
Yikes - I didn’t even think of that one, Rachel! Good point.
*ahem* I thought that was the definition of being human - a tendency to like anyone who might be able to get back at the people you don’t like… ;-)
I liked that one pastor whose sermons I heard a lot used to be honest and say he struggled with this.
Comment by: Helen
35Lance wrote:
But the downside of your belief that God has done everything necessary on his part is:
a) If I perceive God more negatively than you it’s all my fault
-or-
b) If I perceive God negatively because of the way you interact with me it’s all your fault
So…your belief that God has done everything necessary has very shaming ramifications for human beings.
Lance, if we go back to the definition of God being egotistical in the opening statement, i.e. all things are for his glory, I’d like to ask you this question: does making people feel bad give God glory?
Comment by: jim
36Helen - that has to be a chapter title
Comment by: Lance
37Helen, your comments & question raise some important issues. I appreciate that. My quick answer is that no, of course God is not glorified by “making people feel bad.” But of course, I must elaborate… :)
God IS glorified when our shame/blame/sin (insofar as it is legitimate, not false) is taken away. But your question raises the issue of the nature/condition of the human heart, personal conscience, etc., which takes us too far afield from the point of discussion.
To keep to the point, however, I must say that God is not in the business of “making people feel bad,” in sense your question poses. In order to be most glorified God - for us to best appreciate His beauty - we must first begin to better recognize our own fallenness.
Let me try to illustrate… The prophet Isaiah saw a vision of the glory of God in the temple of heaven, “high and lifted up.” (Isaiah chapter 6) Though I’m sure Isaiah was a pretty good guy, upright and a man of integrity, his first response to this vision was to acknowledge his own sinfulness, and also to identify with the corporate sinfulness of the people.
Was God glorified in humbling Isaiah in this way? Yes, for He then went on to cleanse/purify Isaiah, preparing him to be a fit vessel for the work He was sending him to do.
Godly shame/remorse is always to prepare us for forgiveness & cleansing. But there is an ungodly shame/guilt that is destructive and/or manipulative.
I think addressed your question (?). And I think I understand what you’re calling “the downside” of my comments. But the UPside of it is that God truly is knowable! When the primary means of God’s revelation of Himself all line up - the Creation, the Scriptures (especially as they point to Jesus, Himself), the Community of Faith, living/acting/speaking/serving… as it should, then God has shown Himself. This brings Him glory.
Forgive me if I seem “preachy.” I guess I can’t help it, to some degree. (Yes, I am a pastor!) I know there is much I DO NOT know. But what I HAVE come to know, I enjoy trying to share with others.
I really do appreciate your site, here, though. You all make me think! And I appreciate the spirit of the dialog, very much. Please let me know if I come across as too arrogant/confident/know-it-all. ;)
Comment by: Helen
38Lance, thanks for your response. It’s fun to have pastors here - I’m glad you’re joining in the conversation.
Thanks for saying that. I hope you meant it and you don’t mind me being honest, because I’m going to be ;-)
On the whole I prefer when people state their beliefs as beliefs, not facts.
The way you express yourself is like someone who believes differently from you saying “The wonderful truth is - God doesn’t exist! The Bible is a myth!”
How would you feel if someone expressed their beliefs to you that way? They could probably follow it up with your very own statement “what I HAVE come to know, I enjoy trying to share with others”.
As I said I’m enjoying having you here but when you share your beliefs, please try to bear in mind what it’s like to be on the receiving end when someone proclaims things to you that you are not currently convinced of.
Comment by: Karen
39Mike O. wrote
This is a great analogy. Let me try to take it one step further, at the risk of stepping on toes. (I’m not meaning to launch an attack, just to try and expose a different viewpoint than most of the believers here are probably used to.)
Using the above analogy, this might be the atheist’s point of view:
Did you ever have a girlfriend who really, really likes a person that you feel is not a good guy? It seems to you that this guy has a big ego. Sometimes he even seems to be a bully. He also says contradictory things (some nice and some not-nice). It seems obvious to you, and a lot of your other friends, that there’s plenty of signs that this guy is trouble.
But when you try to talk to your friend about him, she’s always explaining away his perceived problems. You see, she likes him so much that she’s willing to overlook his ego and his bullying (”but — he’s so sweet to me!”) and make excuses for his negative words (”I know he said some awful things that one time, but he didn’t really mean them. See, here’s some great things he said another time.”) No matter what you say, your friend is so devoted it’s like she’s blind to the guy’s faults. There’s no persuading her to look at him objectively - she’s letting her emotions cloud her judgment.
I’m not saying this is necessarily true about god, or that all atheists think this way even. I’m just pointing out that this scenario can be what the “rules are different” analogy looks like to an atheist.
Comment by: Helen
40Thanks Karen - you explained that very well.
Comment by: Rachel
41I appreciate you illustrating a different viewpoint, Karen. I don’t perceive it as an attack at all. After all, the reason we are all here is to listen to different views. :)
Comment by: Lance
42Helen, thanks for your perspective on how I come across (at least above) when I’m not preaching to the “already-convinced.” (Yes, I did mean it! ;) ) I need to hear that, appreciate & understand it, and receive it. Blessings.
(btw, if you don’t see future posts from me, it’s not because I’m miffed & leaving in a huff! ;) It’s just that this is my first venture into blogging like this and realize how time consuming it is! [How do you all do it? :o ] It would be way too easy for me to spend all day doing this!)
One other personal note, Helen… I especially appreciated your “dialog” on this site with Rev. Leuking. Thank you for posting that!
Comment by: Helen
43Thanks, Lance. I understand about your time constraints. I hope you’ll have time to drop in occasionally!
Comment by: Mike O
44To Karen’s comment #39: I’m not saying this is necessarily true about god, or that all atheists think this way even. I’m just pointing out that this scenario can be what the “rules are different” analogy looks like to an atheist.
I see your point. Of course I would disagree with their viewpoint because I think I know God better than they do. But then again, who doesn’t think that? Which comes right back to your point. I can see how others would come to that conclusion.
If it were your husband instead of a friend, whose opinion would be more likely to be correct? WHo would be more likely to know his character better, you or them? You would, of course.
Yes, if your husband is a wife-beater you may lie and cover up for him and explain away his actions. But you would still know his character better than anyone.
I’m not trying to get this into a battle of religions, becuase I know that different sects have different views about the character of God. But to the original question regarding egotism, you would know better if your husband was egotistical than anyone else. And to the “when you’re friends, the rules change” comment, that’s what I’m still talking about here. You would see your husband (know??) as not egotistical because you understand his motives better than anyone else. Others wouldn’t have all that insight.
The God I know (and I’m speaking for me) is not egotistical.
Comment by: Karen
45I understand what you’re saying, Mike O. and I appreciate your acknowledging the viewpoint that many nonbelievers might have.
Where I differ from your take on the analogy is in your statement (above) that the abused wife knows her husband’s character better than an outsider does, and therefore her assessment of him is the best one.
Unfortunately, I’ve seen that that’s not always the case. Some people, especially people who’ve learned not to trust or value their own instincts and intellect, can have an almost unlimited capacity for self-deception. And in fact, I’ve known battered women who sincerely believe that their husbands are really not bad people, that they really don’t mean to hurt them (”it’s just the alcohol/drugs/anger that makes him do it - it’s not really HIM”) and that given better circumstances the abuse will stop. In fact, this is why so many women still stick around in abusive situations when there are more alternatives for them nowadays.
They really can fool themselves into believing that absolute jerks, who are not going to change, actually are loving husbands who just need a better break, a little understanding or more love. A lot of the time they believe it is their fault! “If only I could get the kids to behave better, he wouldn’t lose his temper.”
It isn’t until they break away and get into therapy that the light starts to dawn and they recognize they were unduly influenced by their emotional attachment to the bums.
I can apply the analogy to my own life (in the religious sense, not the battered wife sense - thankfully!). I was a fundamentalist for close to 30 years and never acknowledged that the bible presented anything negative about god until I left that belief system and could see - looking back from the outside - that it was there all along, but I was not being honest with myself.
Comment by: Mike O
46That’s interesting. A lot of people do overlook the harder aspects of God (judgement, punishment, etc) but they are there. We paint this picture of Mr. Rogers and it’s just not accurate. I mean, it is for the times/people he needed to be Mr. Rogers. But Mr. Rogers would never overturn tables in the temple or destroy a city (Sodom and Gomorrah) for their sin. There’s a wild side to God, too.
So what are you now?
Comment by: Karen
47Mike, I call myself a “weak atheist.” This is no commentary on my lack of upper body strength (despite all that weight-lifting! ;-) ) but a reference to the two “varieties” of atheism.
Here’s a Wikipedia definition that might be helpful:
So, atheists do not hold beliefs in any deities.
Of the two rather subtle atheistic variations:
So - I’m a weak atheist. I don’t make the positive claim against god(s) existence. I just do not hold a belief in god, and therefore I live my life as if there were no god. The reason that I don’t take the position that there’s no god is because I don’t think I have enough evidence to state that.
(I could also be called an “agnostic,” but I find that that term implies more uncertainty than I feel and therefore is misleading.) Hope that helps!
Comment by: Eliza
48Interesting discussion, everyone! I’m still out of town, on the slowest connection in the world (it seems!), so have just now been catching up on everyone’s comments.
Lance’s comments in #11 move me to respond. He said:
As a nontheist (Siamang’s preferred term) or weak atheist (Karen’s preferred term), I don’t think of God, if he/she/it exists, as perfect and pure “by definition.”
If God doesn’t exist, then we can define him/her/it, and we can each include characteristics we feel are crucial for God to have.
If God does exist, then God is however God is, and imo that doesn’t necessarily require that he/she/it be “perfect and pure,” nor necessarily “without counterpart in all Creation.” God would simply have to be unimaginably greater (larger, more powerful) than ourselves - by definition, since a being which wasn’t more powerful than us wouldn’t have been able to create the universe. It’s not clear to me why he/she/it would have to be perfect, or would have to be the only one of his/her/its kind. Genesis 1 talks about the formation of the earth, sun, moon, and firmament - not necessarily the entire universe, which is immense - there are 200 billion suns (stars) in our galaxy alone. Why couldn’t the God who created our solar system be one of many, and perhaps be one who was a jealous type until he found a new way to offer hope to humanity somewhere in the 400 years between Malachi and Matthew?
Comment by: Helen
49Thanks for your comments, Eliza.
Comment by: Helen
50The September edition of our e-zine is now out!
E-zine visitors, please feel free to join the discussion on “God is Egotistical” already underway.
Read the new e-zine and subscribe here:
Off The Map e-zine - September 2006
Comment by: Stonecypher
51Wow, what a great conversation–I’m so happy I found this site!
Is God egotistical, a.k.a. “paying too much attention to himself”? God as normally portrayed–really big white elderly dude floating around in outer space, loving himself a LOT and demanding that we do too–well then, YES, that’s premium egotism.
But the God I see in the Bible is not like that. The God I find there is not one person in love with himself, but rather 3 persons in love with one another and with their Creation–Father, Son, and Spirit. The life of God is the life of these 3 giving and receiving love and honor from one another, and sharing that love and honor with Creation. This is the opposite of egotism! These 3 are so tight in intimacy and joy that they are a single being. The Eastern Christian tradition images the life of the Triune God as “the Great Dance” into which all creation has been included in the incarnate Son.
To me, that is such a more attractive vision of God than the “angry white guy in the clouds who thinks about himself a lot.”
Comment by: Phil
52Calling God egotistical makes me want to toss my Christianity out the door, or at least purchase version 2.0 of the same faith.
I am sure we become like the thing/person we worship. Egotistical God = egotistical follower. Dang! no wonder the church is so maligned by the unchurched world.
Personally I find the idea that God is egotistical sick. I suppose my revulsion of this concept is partially based in the fact that I am not a 5 point Calvinist. This statement clearly comes from a Calvinistic view of God’s Sovereignty. (Sorry Calvy friends - I am not saying all Calvinists believe God is egotistical, nor am I saying all Armenians are free of such silly thought.)
Sacrifice is at the heart of our religion, and in every way it is modeled by our God.
I put this in such strong terms because if I heard this as an outsider to Christianity, I would probably agree, and then feel quite happy about my choice to reject the God of the Bible.
Comment by: JG
53I fully agree with Eliza, there are two quite separate questions.
1 Does God exist?
2 If he does exist, what is he like? Is he “perfect and pure”
I have in the past been struck by the story of David Copperfield. He grew up believing Miss Havisham was his benefactor but it turned out that she simply wanted to harm him and his real benefactor was a convict who he had helped as a boy.
As a Christian I do believe God is good, perfect etc etc and believe this is part of the “good news” - not only does God exist but he is a God we would want to relate to.
But in pure logical terms, if there is a God, it does not follow he is “perfect and pure” - God could be like the Roman Gods, just playing with humans to satisfty their own desires.
Comment by: Helen
54Stonecypher wrote:
What a beautiful description of God, Stonecypher! Thanks for sharing that with us.
Phil wrote:
That makes sense to me, Phil.
By the way you’re right - the pastor who made the statement is a 5 point Calvinist. I expect he’d agree with your statement about sacrifice and God. I know he’d never intentionally say anything bad about God. I doubt he realizes that while “Egotistical is fine for God since God is God” works fine for him, it doesn’t works so well for some of the rest of us.
JG wrote:
But in pure logical terms, if there is a God, it does not follow he is “perfect and pure” - God could be like the Roman Gods, just playing with humans to satisfty their own desires.
JG, thanks for understanding where Eliza is coming from rather than saying “Ah, but God is good”, which would implicitly deny that what she says has validity from a logical point of view.
This is a great addition to some discussion we had higher up the thread about how people who claim a personal relationship with God often see his nature differently from those who have no belief in God or relationship with him. The questions raised earlier were:
1) Is it valid to assume those who say they have a personal relationship with God have the best understanding of his character - since they know him best?
2) On the other hand, might those with a personal relationship with God actually be more blind to his true nature because when confronted with a ‘fault’ of his they are unwilling/unable to see it for the problem it really is?
Comment by: JG
55Helen, many thanks for this. For neutral, objective observers, I think the answer must be: it could be either. I don’t think there can be an assumption either way. But the following thoughts occur to me:
1. Using the battered wife analogy, it is easier for people outside the situation to take an ojective viewpoint. But in relation to God, none of us can be objective in that sense because we are all affected. A different analogy would be a father of many children where some children claim he has abused them and other children defend him saying that could not possibly be true. Who do you believe? If God does exist then that impacts on all of us and we all have to work out how we want to relate to him.
2. Using the marriage analogy, when you first fall in love, you see only the best (or what appears to be the best) in each other. When the relationship breaks down you tend to see only the worst in each other. And generally with any relationship, once someone gets under your skin, it is so difficult to avoid becoming negative about that person, seeing only the worst in them and letting every little thing wind you up.
3. I would strongly disagree with anyone that suggests we should assume God is good or that we should hide questions, struggles etc behind a mask. We need to be open and honest. If people worship God, this should come from a personal conviction that God is good and worthy of our worship not because they have been told to think that way.
Comment by: Paul Nord
56“God is egotistical”
I’ll disagree.
In Him, mercy and truth have met together. And righteousness and peace have kissed each other. Those qualities are at opposite ends of the spectrum.
With total mercy, you might feel the need to abandon the search for truth.
If truth is exposed, you’ll find that none of us deserve mercy.
Righteousness is so often self-righteous, pious, and egotistical.
The attitude of peace is often expressed as, “I’m ok, you’re ok. Do what you like. Believe what you like. That’s your lifestyle. Please respect mine.” But there’s nothing righteous about such peace.
God is all of those. And more.
Comment by: Pete
57Wow…I’m really happy I stumbled onto this discussion. Usually anything like this with 56(!) posts would’ve had me moving on but I was generally intrigued throughout. That being said, I think there are two major things that make people think God is egotistical: 1. His desire for us to worship him 2. His insistance that he is the only way to heaven. Hopefully I’ll address them without sounding egotistical myself. forgive me and know it isn’t intentional if I slip. (your comment to Lance about his matter-of-factness linger in my mind).
1. I struggled with this my last year of Bible college (I’m a youth pastor) and it nearly caused me to throw away 4 years of learning and a lifetime of service and belief because I couldn’t reconcile God being so conceited that he wanted our worship with him supposedly being loving, humble, etc.
Interestingly enough it was my child (2 at the time) who God used to reveal to me the other side of this matter (often times I think I judge God from my perspective before looking at why a God would do such things if he were indeed a loving god–I know I did in this case). See, when I would come home from work or class, I knew without a doubt that once I opened my door my boy would coming running over to me in his little 2 year old toddle and say “Dada!” and his whole day would change and his face would light up just by my presence.
My son’s love is still one of the most profound and “purely good” feelings I’ve ever experienced. And I think God is no different. It’s not that he wants his ego stroked no more than I want mine stroked by my son. It’s that the pure, total and selfless love found in worship feels so good when it comes from a loved one, that we all want it from everyone we love every chance we get–our wives; our kids; whoever. If we love them, their expressions of love back at us are unlike anything else in the world. God wants this same thing from us, I think. (and that’s profound IMO!)
Not only was it a profound difference to know God desired my love (of which worship is just an expression) because He loved me so much, but it was even more profound that I could make God feel good. I could influence the emotions of the creator of everything! It blew me away ( and blew my doubts about God’s ego away as well).
2. If you were in a hotel that was on fire and a fireman broke into your room and said “Follow me, I know the only safe way out and if you don’t you will die!” Would you consider him egotistical?
I think that’s what God has done. He is the only way to Heaven. Telling people that he is isn’t egotistical.
So why not just let people into heaven without requiring them to serve him? Well that gets way off the course of this discussion and I’ve rambled enough I think.
Rather than spell out the whole sin/forgiveness doctrine which I’m sure many here are familiar with to some degree, I’m going to simply give my personal opinion as to why he requires devoted lives BEFORE Heaven. I personally believe God won’t destroy evil since that would remove free will, which is a greater evil.
(This is not in any doctrine book, but simply my opinion as I also wrestled with this subject) Simply put: God allowed the seeds of evil to exist once in Heaven. To assume he didn’t know what Satan was thinking wouldn’t make sense, since we Christians claim he is all-knowing. I think God knew, but as his justice demands, he had to allow Satan to actually DO wrong before he cast him from heaven.
Satan spread his evil, and stole a 3rd of God’s creation away. I think God has since said “No more. Never again will I allow the seeds of evil into heaven. All must prove themselves first. Because I love my creation too much to allow THAT to happen again.” And so now only those who have shown their devotion are welcomed to heaven, to protect the rest of his creation from those who would plant seeds of evil. (I hope that made sense)
Anywho I’ve gone waaaay too long, I’m sorry. I hope someone bothers to read it all :( I’ll shut up now.
Comment by: Helen
58Hi Pete! Welcome to CatE and thanks for your comments. I was especially struck by this:
It really is amazing to think we can make God feel good.
It does seem Biblically defensible to me that we could - since, although this goes the other way, there’s a very strong statement in Genesis 6 about how bad people were making God feel: “It grieved him to his heart”.
If people can make God feel that bad then it makes sense to me that they can make him feel good too.
Comment by: Helen
59Paul, thanks for your comments; welcome to CatE!
Actually I do like the respect part. But I agree that saying something is ok when it’s not is not righteous.
Comment by: lisa w
60This is the deal for me:
I’m not drawn to MEN who are Egotistical and Jealous so why on earth would I be drawn to a GOD who has these traits?!
-Just stupid. Just more male dominance crappola.
I think I need a chocolate chip cookie now to calm down before I vent any more.
Comment by: Mike O
61Sooooo … I take it you’re not a fan?
Comment by: dh
62“1I hope you will put up with a little of my foolishness; but you are already doing that. 2I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. 3But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ.” 2 Cor 11:1-3
Lisa this doesn’t seem like “male dominance crappola” because it is to Christ not man that we should show our devotion to. Because He was the creator it makes sense that we worship Him especially since Hefirst loved us.
Comment by: Pete
63Thanks for the kind words, Helen.
I have really been seeing more and more that God wants us to experience life, not just get through it. That he’s not painting some grand picture with us as part of it, or having us hold his paints for him. Instead he hands us a spare brush and says “let’s make something beautiful together.” That’s true love to me. Doing it together when you could do it alone.
It makes his desire for our love make more sense as well as the idea that although he has a plan, we can change things through prayer.
Not to mention it just seems so much more in line with his character (how Jesus had his disciples do things and didn’t just sit there floating 3 feet off the ground speaking things into reality).
So it would stand to reason for me that he wants to share those expereinces, not sit there and watch us go through them….so he laughs, creates and has fun with us. But he also grieves, weeps and feels anger (when appropriate) with us. Heh. I just began to realize how much I really love him. it’s amazing the way he speaks to me sometimes…anyways I’m off for now. take care.
Comment by: lisa w
64mike o: and Dh I’m a fan of many things (like OTM, kind confident and strong people, and chocolate chip cookies) but not language that depicts God as having the worst of human traits no matter how you paint them. I prefer, regardless of biblical depiction, God as not jealous and not egotistical. Some people are comfortable with that dominating language. I’m not. I imagine many people also aren’t. Therefore I do not worship God with this idea/language in my mind.
Comment by: dh
65When I state that the Bible as saying “God is jeolous”. Being jeolous can bebad and good depending on the attiude of the person. If a person is in a relationship and the spouse is a drunk then the spouse who isn’t a drunk could say “I’m jeolous for him/her to turn away from that drunken behavior and havea better relationship with me.” I think you are being overreactionary to the term “jeolous” when the context isthemost important. I was in a humorous way pointing this out indirectly and sarcastic way how the term jelous has multiple definitions and how you might want to rethink what you are saying in light of the obvious that the Biblical passage is not “domineering, harsh or egotistical” with regard to the use of the term “jelous”.
With regard to “egotistical” egotsitical is somewhat similar to “haughty” we know God isn’t haughty but we also know that God desires us to worship Him and Him alone.
I would say that in light of thedefinition that He isn’t “egotistical” because His self-importance isn’t exagerated in that He truly is the one who created us and if He created us and loves it makes sense that we would want to please our creator in everyway possible. Otherwise, we are being ungrateful at the very least and haughty and egotistical ourselves.
So in conclusion, is this lack of response to a God who is jelous for those who aren’t following him actually an attitude of true egotism, pride, self-righteous, etc.? We must all must ask ourselves this question.
As you can see “godly jealousy” jelousy can be both bad and good. You have to look at the context of the term.
Comment by: Helen
66To be fair though, dh, I can’t think of a context outside the Bible where people say someone is “jealous” and mean it in a good way. So it’s not surprising to me if someone who isn’t a Bible-believing Christian hears the word “jealous” and thinks that’s a bad thing.
Comment by: lisa w
67thank you, Helen.
I just think, Hey, we are humans and have words to describe our relationship with God. Just because someone at sometime used the word Jealous to describe God doesn’t mean I have to be married to the word!
DH, It’s weird! If God is Jealous of something/someone else having the attention of his creation would you then conclude that he is jealous of Satan for stealing his attention? Obsurd.
It’s just awkward language.
I think we all made our points here.
Comment by: dh
68He isn’t jelous of Satan because Satan doesn’t have a soul so it isn’t obsurd. I think Helen explained perfectly what I was saying for balance. I was just getting that we mustn’t react overly to a word when the term being used has multiple definitions andthe context of theword is actually a secondary definition of the term used. I was explaining to you the multiple definition to help put into context what the Bible says and how he isn’t that in a bad way like this current culture misunderstands when reading the term.
I think non-Bible believing misunderstand because they are focusing on only one defintion rather than focusing on the context and the multiple definitions that exist for the term. While it isn’t a mistranslation a different term could be used for greater clarification and that was what I was trying to get at and trying to put aside and attract people to the Bible by helping people put aside their prejudices to a term actually used in the Bible. Does that make sense?
Comment by: lisa w
69Yes, I suppose. I also understand that if a word doesn’t work and people have to stand on their heads and cross their eyes in order to understand the ‘real’ meaning then perhaps it’s just fine to use another word instead of spending so much time defending one that clearly doesn’t work well.
This is why, of course, there are some really interesting translations out there like ‘The Message”.
Peoples reactions to words are valid. Even the word “church” can set people off. Everyone has hot buttons. They inform us. They change us. They create revolutions
thanks for the discussion.
Comment by: dh
70You too Lisa. I think we are on the same page. For me I try to stick with what the words were used originally and for me the rest is just semantics. With regard to the “other translations” I’m very cautious. The Message on many of the passages are “true to the text” but on a few (notice I said a few) I get concerned with regard to what they say on certain passages.
I get concerned about peoples reactions because many times the reaction is actually an overreaction and the overreaction many times isworse than the thing that is being reacted from. Well, I hope you can see we can work together like “iron sharpens iron” to help either one of us from overreacting in a negative way. How we slove problems many times create more problems and for me it is important to find balance as opposed to change for change sake. If you get my drift.
Comment by: lisa w
71Drift taken.
thanks, Dh.