All posts tagged Idolatry

Precision within Idolatry

Note: This post was originally published on the Biblical Counseling Coalition blog “Grace & Truth.” I would highly recommend this organization as a clearinghouse for excellent materials in Biblical Counseling. This post has since been critiqued by Dr. Jay Adams on his blog at nouthetic.org. Next week I will post a reply to Dr. Adams’ critique in which I hope to demonstrate that the content of this blog is not an attempt to be “new” to draw an audience, but rooted in Scriptural directives and example.

One of the areas in which I believe Biblical Counseling can grow is the precision with which we think of idolatry. I am not referring to our ability to identify the object of idolatry: a person, money, an experience, etc… Neither do I mean just singling out the desire that fuels an idolatry: pleasure, control, peace, etc… Both of these are important.

But I believe we can be precise in our understanding of idolatry in another way. An idol (by definition) replaces God. More accurately, it tends to substitute for some aspect of God. Rarely do modern people call their idols “god”; we just rely on them for some particular thing only God can do. Therefore, because God relates to humanity in many different ways, we can turn to our idols in just as many ways.

For purpose of illustration, I will coin the phrases “idols of worship” and “idols of comfort.” Each is meant to capture different aspects of God we can replace.

Idols of Worship

  • With these idols we celebrate the object of our affection.
  • We pursue it with passion because we find it delightful. We try to savor and master the experience.
  • The mode of worship for these idols is pleasure
  • If you will, this is an idol we “sing to.”
  • These idols would have a tendency to stem from our raw sin nature and deem God to be less desirable.

Idols of Comfort

With these idols we turn to them for refuge.

  • When life gets hard we turn to these false gods believing they can provide safety or a form of escape.
  • The mode of worship towards these idols is trust.
  • If you will, this is an idol we “pray to.”
  • These idols typically emanate from experiences of suffering and perceive God to be less available, relevant, or dependable.

Both forms of idolatry share some essential commonality. God has been replaced. The replacement is incapable of sustaining what is being asked. The person will experience forms of disappointment and pain.

Yet the two forms of idolatry are different in important ways. Idols of worship are “classic” idols. Idols of comfort are “subtle” idols. The first is pursued for its own sake. The latter is pursued as a means to an end. The first insults God. The latter doubts God.

What is the relevance of this discussion? Does it change counseling methodology? Does it impact our theology of counseling? I believe it does.

Impact on Methodology

In both cases, the goal is to get to right beliefs about God through Scripture and by repentance. However, the “fear of God” that leads to repentance is very different. Idols of comfort already know fear. They are looking for something to be strong. Idols of worship are more rooted in pride and think they’ve already found what they’re looking for.

The words spoken to someone struggling with an idol of comfort should be more tender. The trustworthiness and understanding of the counselor serves as an ambassador for the trustworthiness and compassion of God. They are drawn from their idol. Dependence is natural and desired. Usually the scariest part of repentance and faith for these people is the absence of control.

The words spoken to someone struggling with an idol of worship are spoken to someone who does not yet see their need to be rescued. They are often still an evangelist for their idol. Their idol serves them and they want to know if God will do the same. More cognitive, relational, and emotional structures have to be torn down and built from scratch.

Impact on Theology

These are not the only categories for idolatry that could be developed. Each way that God relates to man can reveal its own flavor(s) of idolatry. We can try to replace or subsidize any aspect of God’s character or any of God’s activities towards us. The emotions that we are playing to in our false worship become indicators of how what we need points us back to God.

With this conception of idolatry, I believe it allows us to speak of the influence of suffering upon idolatry in clearer, more refined, and more compassionate ways. Our compassion does not have to be the mere avoidance of condescension (“I am a bad sinner too”) or empathy for injustice (“I would be tempted in the same way.”). Our compassion can be more descriptively robust without leaving our anthropology behind or compromising biblical standards.

Extended conversations about pain, neglect, disappointment, and other forms of suffering paint a picture of how someone sought comfort before they knew there was a Comforter. In these cases, repentance may be a very sweet transfer of trust. Conviction may feel like fear and anticipation more than guilt. In which case, idolatry would be “seen through” as much as “put off.”

In these possibilities, the core categories (idolatry) and movements (repentance) of change are the same but the experience (emotions) and role of the counselor (confrontation for idols of worship; directive compassion for idols of comfort) is different. I would hope as we grow in our precision of understanding idolatry that it would enable us to capture the experience of more hurting people, win their trust, and point them to all of who God is.

Join the Conversation:

  •  What other categories of idolatry would you suggest? What is distinct about that category and what part of human experience does it help us understand?
  • What dangers do you see in adding diagnostic categories within idolatry? In your opinion, does the potential reward merit the risk?

Idols of Sin vs. Idols of Suffering

What is an idol? Simply put, an idol is anything we place our security, hope, identity, pleasure, or ambition in more than God. When we look to an object, person, or activity to make us fulfilled or complete we are committing idolatry. When a certain temporal value or priority determines what is right-wrong, worth our time, or friend-enemy then that thing has our heart.

For most Christians that is not a novel definition (at least I hope not). But there comes a point where that definition is very challenging to apply. What happens when the idol is something that God intends for me to have?

  • A young girl wants an absent father’s love so she is willing to compromise with her boyfriend to be affirmed.
  • Someone has been abused and wants to feel safe so they seek comfort through an unhealthy habit (i.e., smoking, over eating, etc…).
  • After repeated rejection and ridicule an individual commits to being a people-pleaser in order to be part of a community.

This is not to imply that all pre-marital sex, smoking, over eating, and people-pleasing results from the above mentioned situations. However, we want to recognize that some people engage in these activities in the pursuit of pleasure while others do so as an escape from suffering.

With either motive

the actions are wrong and the activity/relationship is seeking to fill a role that only God can fill. Yet they are replacing God in different ways. My attempt to capture this difference is to coin the phrase “idols of suffering.”

We most naturally think of “idols of sin.” We want something we do not think God will or can give us so we seek it outside of His commands or character. We are blinded by our desire and we are crying for freedom.

With “idols of suffering” we want what God offers but due to broken life circumstances it is largely unavailable. We are looking for the closest thing we can find to what God offers in an attempt to make life work. We are confused by pain and want relief more than freedom.

In both cases our actions are morally wrong and doomed to failure. The most gracious thing that can happen is for our idolatry to be unmasked as a God-counterfeit. Yet the tone of this conversation would be different based upon the two situations.

“And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.”  (1 Thes. 5:14)

In this passage Paul is assuming that the idle, fainthearted, and weak are all living outside God’s will (or else there would be no need for intervention). Paul is pointing out that it is not enough to merely know the sin. We must also know the sinner and the situation.

We may know the answer, but not the question or the context. If we are going to minister effectively, we must take the time and spend the effort necessary to know all three.

zp8497586rq

What Would Make a Devil of Us?

A Counselor Reflects on Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis

“The most dangerous thing you can do is to take any one impulse of your own nature and set it up as the thing you ought to follow at all costs. There is not one of them which will not make us into devils if we set it up as an absolute guide (p.11).” Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis

I cannot say that I have ever thought about becoming a devil, even for a Halloween costume, but as I read this quote from C.S. Lewis it was not the way I thought (if I did think about it) of becoming one.

My instincts said, “I would have to intentionally engage in sinister activities for prolonged periods of time with malice-aforethought in order to become a devil.” As I think about it, though, that is exactly what C.S. Lewis was saying; only the sinister activities are wearing the “costumes” of innocent desires (i.e., impulses).

Impulses such as golf, Facebook Farmville (now I’m stepping on toes), reading, parenting, working, eating, a special diet, theology, loving, being loved, education, and any other pleasure are forms of worship.  When we do these things we are delighting in them and declaring them worthy of our full, concentrated attention (intentionality from my thought in paragraph 2).

When we “set it up as the thing you ought to follow at all costs” we are declaring it our god. This impulse begins to play all the roles that the true God ought to play – determining right/wrong, good/bad, worth my time, friend/enemy, degree of value, etc… Those who agree and cooperate with my impulse are “righteous” and those who do not are deserving of wrath.

Because I believe I am right (and everyone should agree with me) I follow my impulse for a prolonged period of time. I even begin to read my Bible through the lens of my impulse and God’s Word is muzzled because I read it to say (affirm) only what I am already living for.

Because I have declared my impulse good (and it probably is except for what I am doing with it), I begin to plan my life around the pursuit of this impulse (malice-aforethought in paragraph 2). My schedule and daydreaming become substantially shaped by my impulse.

The end result is that I have a god who is not God and I am verbally and nonverbally declaring its glory to the world around me. All the time the sinister-ness of what I am doing masquerades in the costume of an innocent desire and I do not realize that I have become more devil-ish than God-like.

So the caution is that (1) we should never let what we do for God become our god and (2) we should never mistake the blessings of God as our god. Both are such tempting (but deep) pitfalls.

In light of this consider the story of the Rich Young Ruler (Matthew 19:16-30). RYR viewed his material possessions as his “stamp of approval” from God in typical Jewish (and often modern Christian) fashion. When Jesus asked RYR to trade God’s blessings for eternity with God, RYR could not let go of God’s blessings to take hold of God’s person.

His “impulse” was to follow God’s rules to secure God’s blessings. It was the absolute rule of his life that he followed at all cost. He came to Jesus asking for more rules to follow for another blessing. He went away sad (to the place of weeping and gnashing of teeth) because his good impulse (being good for God’s rewards) had “made a devil” of him.

 
UA-1304055