The Jealousy of God

The question this study sought to answer was whether or not God’s jealousy (Ex 20:5) contradicts His being love (1 John 4:8) if love is not jealous (1 Cor 13:4). I discover that it is really a question of semantics. I use Zondervan’s NASB Study Bible.

Exodus 20:5 “You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God…”

NASB note: jealous God. God will not put up with rivalry or unfaithfulness. Usually His “jealousy” concerns Israel and assumes the covenant relationship (analogous to marriage) and the Lord’s exclusive right to possess Israel and to claim her love and allegiance. Actually, jealousy is part of the vocabulary of love. The “jealousy” of God (1) demands exclusive devotion to Himself (see 34:14; Deut 4:24; 32:16,21; Josh 24:19; Ps 78:58; 1 Cor 10:22; James 4:5), (2) delivers to judgment all who oppose Him (see Deut 29:20; 1 Kin 14:22; Ps 79:5; Is 42:13; 59:17; Ezek 5:13; 16:38; 23:25; 36:5; Nah 1:2; Zeph 1:18; 3:8) and (3) vindicates His people ( see 2 Kin 19:31; Is 9:7; 26:11; Ezek 39:25; Joel 2:18; Zech 1:14; 8:2). In some of these passages the meaning is closer to “zeal” (the same Hebrew word may be translated either way, depending on the context.)

Ichthus: the Hebrew word (for jealous/zeal) is listed in Strong’s Hebrew concordance as #7067 – there are free on-line lexicons (both Greek and Hebrew… one is at crosswalk.com) if you care to look it up using Strong’s number.

Does the above passage contradict the passages below?

1 Corinthians 13:4: “Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant,” and 1 John 4:8: “The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.”

The Greek word being used for “jealous” in 1 Cor 13:4 is listed in Strong’s as #2206. The New King James Version translates “jealous” (#2206 – I know… “jealous” is not Greek… but I do not have the transliterated word available… sorry) as “envy” in that verse (as well as a few others). In 2 Cor 11:2, where Paul says, “For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy,” jealous is listed in Strong’s as #2206 and jealousy as #2205. The New King James version also uses the words ‘jealous’ and ‘jealousy’ in that verse. It should also be noted that the New King James Version translates “love” as “charity” in 1 Cor 13. The Strong’s number is 26. This Greek word is translated as “love” elsewhere in the Bible in the King James Version – many verses, including Romans 5:5,8.

If you look up #2205 (jealousy) in the concordance or lexicon, it says it can be used in a favorable or unfavorable sense. To me this says there is good jealousy and bad jealousy. For an example of good jealousy, see my “Get to know Mom by osmosis” thread. I think this is the godly jealousy referred to in Ex 20:5 and 2 Cor 11:2. An example of the ungodly jealousy would be the suspicious spouse who is jealous without cause… I believe this is the jealousy referred to in 1 Cor 13:4. Take care.

Ichthus:

The comment you quoted is correct in saying that the “jealousy” referred to in the O.T. presumes that Israel is being addressed. There is more to it, as well. At the time of the Exodus, the Hebrews (I won’t call them “Jews” at that point) were not monotheistic. Nor, in the revelation of Moses, were they commanded to be. Note that the language of the First Commandment is:

“I am the Lord your God . . . you shall have no other gods before me.”

And not:

“I am the Lord God . . . there are no other gods besides me.”

See the difference? The Hebrews, prior to the Babylonian captivity, were supposed to be (and on rare occasions actually were) monotheolaters – worshipers of only one god – but not monotheists – believers in only one god. Their religion was transformed in Babylon, where they could not worship their god in the land he had given them, could not make the proper sacrifices at the Temple, and so, had they continued to think of JHVH in the same old fashion, would have been cut off from him and, most likely lost their ethnic identity (as the earlier captives who had been taken to Assyria probably did). The God of the Hebrews became something more in that crucible, something more universal, not tied to a particular place, and that is when the Hebrews became Jews.

But before that – jealousy presumes a rival, real or imagined. If JHVH, the Lord their God, who brought them out of Egypt, was not the only God, maker of heaven and earth, but only one god among many, who was nevertheless their god, and they his people, then indeed he might be jealous, insisting that they turn from all other gods or goddesses and devote themselves exclusively to him. But once he became something more, something universal, the One God, the All, then He had no rivals, and could not be jealous.

In old pre-Captivity Israel, in the histories of the Old Testament and in the accounts of the Prophets, one finds a recurring theme of the Hebrews being tempted to unfaithfulness with other gods. Now understand that they were not “converting” to another religion, they were simply paying homage to other deities that everyone knew (or believed) were real, but that the Hebrews weren’t supposed to be worshiping. One could continue believing in JHVH while offering a prayer or two to Astarte or Baal (even though one knew JHVH didn’t like that.) But one does not see modern Jews doing this sort of thing. They do not see their God as one among many, are not tempted to pursue other gods (though occasionally a Jew may convert to another faith altogether), and so the issue of JHVH saying “don’t do that” just doesn’t arise; if they’re going to “do that” then they’re also going to abandon JHVH altogether for another concept of the All, and so his Commandments no longer apply.

In short, the God of that time was jealous, but God today is not, because the two are not the same God.

God is not nor ever has exhibited Jealousy, period, its a simple mistake in translation or understanding of the author.

If the Jewish/Christian God never exhibits jealousy then why does This God blackmail and threaten? Then this God after all of that, expects you to love it? That is called an abusive relationship nowadays. Or stalking, take your pick. Try doing all of that with your mate, kids or friends and see what happens. I mean even if you look upon this God as a parental figure it still is a rather ego filled abusive parent. put your kid in time out or spank em a gentle spank ,but torture their soul for eternity? Sounds like an evil mother-in-law or wicked Stepparent.

All of this contradictory and confusing human like behavior concerning God is presented in the Old Testament, Koran, Tora and like and all of it is simply wrong. IMO, the Old Testament is basically toilet paper and totally misrepresents Gods true nature. These are simply Jewish stories handed down by families from one generation to another, folklore at best full of mistakes and out right lies. Every point that these writings attempt to make about Gods personality is completely opposite and contradictory of what Jesus taught. If you want to know Gods personality look ONLY at what Jesus said, nothing else ever written in any bible is even close.

Hard to figure out where Jesus begins and poetic license ends. Many good words were taught by Jesus and I can agree with much, but, his words about God I have to back away from. I can put no trust in a creature that promotes its supposedly only child to die such a death just to make the child a martyr for its own benifit.

And Even the other religions, the Gods don’t come down and show themselves they supposedly use humans. Yea OK sure. Perhaps living in this day created a cynic in me but, cons come in all shapes and sizes. I have faith that a superior being exists but, it wishing to be worshipped by other creatures, and then the God or Gods call themselves good and for mankind, etc and I can go on about them being a bit ego challenged stretches the credulity.

Wait, why hasn’t God exhibited jealousy? The Bible makes it pretty clear He has, and I see no reason why it would be bad for Him to.

I agree that you must be careful with all things written by man and prove them before acceptance. However I think you misunderstand the sacrifice scenario.

Jesus was God litterly; he wasn’t his son in the fact that he was another entity. Gods personality or Soul if you will was made incarnate in a human body, the only difference between all humans and Jesus was the Soul. Now for God to sacrifice himself because he Loved us and our sin was separating us from him and his good gifts, well that is a selfless and noble cause for good purpose.

Its not about God wanting to be worshiped, that a common dogmatic misunderstanding. It is all about Love and you cannot give or receive or experience Love by your self. For this reason God created man and this is the Purpose of us all and why we are social creatures after Gods image. See God is a social creature as well and he could not find any fulfillment in all the wonders he made if he could not share it with like minded and willed individuals who had choice.

Because jealousy is rooted in selfishness, which is the opposite of Love and God is the creator of Love but not selfishness and to be selfish is to be divided. Satan is the creator of Selfishness and even though God created Satan he is not responsible for the choice Satan made to be selfish.

I don't seen jealousy rooted the same way as you, I don't think.  To my mind, jealousy is rooted in the ego - it's wanting something you don't have, because you feel you are entitled to/deserve it.  If you don't really deserve what it is, it's based on a false perception of your own self-importance. Vanity- you could call that selfishness in a sense, but not in the very broad sense of 'wanting stuff'.  If all you meant by selfishness is 'wanting stuff', then I have to disagree with you- God must want stuff, because He made stuff and didn't have to, presumably. 
  Now, if we agree that this 'selfishness' is a misperception of one's own self-importance, then it comes down to a question of the importance of God.  What does God not deserve? To what is He entitled? What can He demand of His creation, that is not His to demand? I don't think jealous applies to Him in the way it does to humans- that is to say, I do not think it is a wrong for Him, as it is for humans.

Hi navigator. You said, ” The Hebrews, prior to the Babylonian captivity, were supposed to be (and on rare occasions actually were) monotheolaters – worshipers of only one god – but not monotheists – believers in only one god.”

Judah was captured under the Babylonian captivity not Israel. Prior to that, Israel had already fallen under Assyrian captivity. Israel and Judah were positively two separate nations and identities (the United Kingdom had separated many years earlier after the death of Solomon). The Assyrians tried to capture Judah but failed.

You said, ” The God of the Hebrews became something more in that crucible, something more universal, not tied to a particular place, and that is when the Hebrews became Jews.”

The Hebrews probably trace their lineage to “Eber” (Gen. 10:20). Jewish status probably occurred at the time of the first circumcision, or with the reciting of the law. In any event, the idea of “jewishness” existed long before both the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. The name of the nation “Judah” is derived from the word/idea “jew” and this long preceded the Babylonian and Assyrian captivities (obviously). Furthermore, there are historical references to “jew” (yahud) as early as the Canaanite period prior to and during the Early Bronze Age which long preceded the Babylonian captivity.

You said, ” In old pre-Captivity Israel, in the histories of the Old Testament and in the accounts of the Prophets, one finds a recurring theme of the Hebrews being tempted to unfaithfulness with other gods. “

True - and this idolatrous and adulterous trend continued long afterwards, well beyond the period of captivity and even until today. Jesus spoke about it too (Mark 8: 38, Matt. 12:39, etc).

You said, ” Now understand that they were not “converting” to another religion, they were simply paying homage to other deities that everyone knew (or believed) were real, but that the Hebrews weren’t supposed to be worshiping.”

Paying homage to other deities is to submit to the authority of those deities. It is impossible to serve two masters (Matt. 6:24, Luke 16:13). Conversion, like paying homage, is the same. GOD demanded and continues to demand monogamous spiritual loyalty to Him (Exo. 34: 15-16, Deut. 31: 16, etc.).

You said, ”One could continue believing in JHVH while offering a prayer or two to Astarte or Baal (even though one knew JHVH didn’t like that.)…”

Israel and Judah paid a horrendous price for this very thing: Israel did this more than Judah but both did it and paid dearly for it at the hand of GOD. It was because of this very thing you describe that the United Kingdom was divided after the death of Solomon (1 Kings 11: 4-14). This behavior continued to occur before, during and after the Babylonian and Assyrian captivities – and a price was paid every time. By contrast, Daniel (the individual), under Babylonian captivity remained faithful to GOD only, and he was richly rewarded and commended as a result. GOD showed mercy when the Persians under Cyrus, having conquered the Babylonians, under the “Edict of Cyrus,” returned many of the captives back to their former lands – even paying for the construction of the second temple (under Nehemiah and Ezra).

You said, ” In short, the God of that time was jealous, but God today is not, because the two are not the same God.”

Not so at all. GOD is unchanging. The GOD of yesterday is the same as the GOD today and tomorrow (Malachi 3: 6, Heb. 13:8, Psa. 102:27). Jealously is still a trait ascribed to GOD even in the Christian era and we are still in the Christian era (1 Cor. 10:22, 2 Cor. 11:2). passion

I don’t believe I referred to “Israel” in that context, but if I did, it was a linguistic mistake without deeper significance.

The point here is that the people who had lived in Solomon’s kingdom before it sundered suffered two instances of being transported to foreign lands. The first was when the Assyrians conquered the Kingdom of Israel (northern kingdom) and hauled its people off to Assyria. The second was when the Babylonians conquered the Kingdom of Judah (southern Kingdom) and transported those people to Babylon. The victims of the first mass-kidnapping disappeared without a trace, giving rise to a lot of speculation about what happened to the “ten lost tribes.” The victims of the second mass-kidnapping did not disappear, but returned to Israel after Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon and gave it back to them, and modern Judaism is descended from them.

What happened to the “ten lost tribes”? We don’t know for certain, but the most likely explanation is that they simply assimilated. They lost their religious and ethnic identity, and merged with the Assyrian people, and their descendants are still living in Iraq today.

Why didn’t that happen to the deportees from Judah? Because they handled the crisis differently, evolved a different religion out of their old roots, ceased to be mere Hebrews and became Jews. Jews have a high resistance to assimilation and a powerful tenacity in holding onto their faith, but mere Hebrews, evidently, did not. And that is, I submit, because Judaism is a far more profound and compelling religion than the tribal worship of the Hebrews from which it emerged in the crucible of Babylon.

What constitutes “Jewishness”? I agree that the word probably has much older roots. However, in today’s usage, the word implies certain things.

Judaism today is a monotheistic faith, with a cosmic deity that created the universe. The God of the Jews is not simply a tribal deity any longer, the ones those ragged and violent nomads who descended on ancient Canaan like howling furies were supposed to worship exclusively, and who was appropriate in nature to their barbarian culture. He has become a God of wisdom and mercy, of love and inspiration, a God worthy of a modern understanding, Who compels sincere devotion and not merely allegiance based on fear or greed.

The pre-Captivity Hebrews did not display many of the characteristics we associate with Jews today, and their religion was not, in its core beliefs and values, Judaism. The similarities between that religion and Judaism are purely surface details, remnants of language and ritual that remained after the great change in the understanding of the nature of God.

There is no Mark 8:38; Mark 8 ends at verse 35. Matthew 12:39 is Jesus answering those who asked him for a miraculous sign, and has nothing to do with worship of other gods.

Be careful in interpreting a parable. You’re not understanding it correctly here at all. Jesus was not talking about other gods there, he was talking about putting money and worldly goods alongside God in one’s devotion.

Either there are multiple Gods or there is only one. If there is only one God, then other gods are either other images and names for the One, or else phantoms and delusions without any reality. But money isn’t a phantom and delusion without any reality, it is definitely real, and a person who devotes himself to money cannot simultaneously devote himself to God.

If the same idea applies to other gods, then the other gods must also be real, just as money is – and we are back to the polytheism of the ancient Hebrews, which I don’t think Jesus shared, since he was a Jew of early Roman Empire times, not one of David’s kingdom.

So we’re told. But that doesn’t impact what I was saying: they saw their God as one god among many equally-real gods and goddesses, not as the sole God of the Universe. He told them they were only supposed to worship him, and to stay away from the other gods, they disobeyed, and were punished – so goes the story anyway. But in none of that is there any suggestion that the other gods don’t exist. Nor, as far as I can tell, did the ancient Hebrews believe that.

All right, you can say that, but if you do, then that means that the ancient Hebrews were NOT worshiping God. They were worshiping a tribal deity appropriate to a primitive, polytheistic culture. For such a deity, jealousy is appropriate and to be expected.

For the One unchanging God, it is not.

Hi navigator. Thank you for your follow up comments. You said, ” There is no Mark 8:38; Mark 8 ends at verse 35…

Not so. Mark 8:38 say’s, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” Mark 8:38.

You said, ”…Matthew 12:39 is Jesus answering those who asked him for a miraculous sign, and has nothing to do with worship of other gods. “

I referenced Matt. 12:39 regarding the “adulterous” nature which I mentioned in my original post.

You said, ”Be careful in interpreting a parable. You’re not understanding it correctly here at all. Jesus was not talking about other gods there, he was talking about putting money and worldly goods alongside God in one’s devotion…

This verse depicts “mammon” as an idol – a false god – a thing that could be “served” in replacement of GOD and therefore idolatry. Here is the verse for your review: “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matt. 6:24). bold is mine.

You said, ”But that doesn’t impact what I was saying: they saw their God as one god among many equally-real gods and goddesses, not as the sole God of the Universe.”

If your original point was to say that idolatry existed in ancient times then I certainly agree. Idolatry always existed and always will. Regardless, Mark 12: 32, 1 Cor. 8:6, Eph. 4:6, 1 Tim. 2: 5, James 2:19, (etc) describes one GOD.

You said, ” All right, you can say that, but if you do, then that means that the ancient Hebrews were NOT worshiping God.”

Those who worshipped GOD are replete throughout the OT: Abraham, Noah, David, etc. One GOD (Mal. 2:10). Many of the ancients (and moderns too) worshiped false gods and they were not worshipping GOD when they did so. Their idolatry resulted in many sorrows including the division of the United Kingdom immediately after Solomon, and later when being conquered by the Assyrians, Babylonians, etc as mentioned in the previous posts. passion

You’re right, there is a Mark 8:38. I no longer have a printed Bible, and the page on line I was reading cut off.

However, that verse has nothing to do with worshiping other gods. Nor, by the way, does adultery.

No. That’s a poetic misinterpretation. The word in Greek does not mean a god or idol or spirit of any kind. It means money, plain and simple, and the message is similar to when he told the rich man to sell all he had and give it to the poor, followed by the comment on camels and eyes of needles. Jesus saw wealth as a barrier to union with God.

No. My original point was that the religion of the Hebrews did not take on the characteristics of Judaism prior to the Babylonian captivity. The Hebrews were not monotheistic before that, and JHVH, the God of the Hebrews, was seen not as God, but merely as their god.

There is no evidence that the God they worshiped was seen as universal, and much evidence that he was not.

There is no physical or empirical evidence that I can see for God being Jealous, if so then please list it, and give an explanation as to why you think it’s valid.

Hi navigator. Thank you for the follow up comments. You said, ”…Jesus saw wealth as a barrier to union with God.”

Not so. Joseph of Aremeitha was wealthy and he is commended in the Bible (Matt. 27:57, Mark 15:43). Jesus recommended that believers should learn the ways of wealth and sound stewardship without becoming covetous of it (Luke 16). The barrier to union with GOD is not money in-itself but the LOVE of money which the Bible flatly states (1 Tim. 6:10). "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. 1 Tim. 6:10 bold is mine. It is when the love of money takes root that idolatry occurs – which is the correct meaning of the Matt. 6:24 - the word “LOVE” is used in the verse. “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matt. 6:24). bold is mine.

You said, "…The Hebrews were not monotheistic before that, and JHVH, the God of the Hebrews, was seen not as God, but merely as their god. “

David preceded the Babylonian captivity and he was monotheistic. Noah preceded the Babylonian captivity and he was monotheistic. Abraham preceded the Babylonian captivity and he was monotheistic. There were many other examples too of course – all monotheistic and all preceding the Babylonian captivity by many years. passion

I didn’t say he saw the barrier as impossible to penetrate, only that he saw it as existing, and that is quite obvious:

Mark 10:17-27. Since the church, unlike Jesus himself, ministers to the rich and has put down roots in the world, a lot of convoluted reasoning has been offered to overcome this obvious fact about his teachings and even to make wealth a sign of divine favor, but one has to twist things to arrive at that conclusion.

No, none of those men were monotheistic. Understand that there is a difference between monotheism and monotheolatry. Monotheolatry is the worship of only one god; monotheism is the belief that only one god exists. David may have been a good Hebrew who never indulged in worship of other gods than JHVH, but he certainly believed in their existence. Everyone did in those days.

Hi navigator. Thank you again for the follow up. You said, ”…and even to make wealth a sign of divine favor, but one has to twist things to arrive at that conclusion.”

No twisting – just what the Bible actually says. Wealth is a sign of Divine favor provided the wealth is not loved (Deut. 8:18, Ruth 2:1, Prov. 13: 11, Ecc. 6: 2, etc). For example, Solomon’s extraordinary wealth is clearly demonstrated as pure Divine favor (2 Chron. 1:12). It reads; “Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.” (2 Chron. 1:12).

However, it is equally clear that if wealth becomes the object of one’s love, it then becomes the “root of all evil” (1 Tim. 6:10). “For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.” (1 Tim. 6:10). bold is mine. The operative word is “love.” In other words, idolatry. Not having wealth does not imply that one is out of GOD’s favor. Not in the least. Every person has a purpose, and all are a part of GOD’s plan. Paul discusses this in Phil. 4: 11-12. passion

“What the Bible actually says” is open to interpretation. Not being a Christian, I feel no obligation to take the entire book as a whole, or make it harmonious in all its parts; nothing could be clearer to me than that some parts, like the ones you quoted in the remainder of what you said here, conflict with others, like the words of Jesus, and it was the latter that I was talking about.

Regardless of what any other books of the Bible or any other religious authorities say about wealth, it is perfectly obvious that Jesus considered it a barrier to finding oneness with God. There is simply no other way to interpret his words on the subject.

And these last two reply’s have what to do with the thread topic?