NEW GODS THE IDOLS OF MEN

 

HUMANS HAVE THE TENDENCY TO MAKE NEW GODS

An Essay on False Gods, Private Interpretation, Religious Schism, Political Power, and the Persecution of Truth

Humans have a persistent tendency to make gods that are not God, to establish forms of worship that God has not commanded, and to defend religious ideas that originate not from the truth of God but from their own knowledge, imagination, ambition, fear, and desire for power.

The Holy Scriptures reveal that this tendency is not merely an ancient problem involving carved images, golden calves, or pagan altars. It is also a problem of the human heart, which can construct an image of God according to its own understanding and then demand that other people recognize, follow, and worship that image. Deuteronomy 32:16–17 declares, “They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations provoked they him to anger. They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.” These words expose a recurring spiritual danger: people may introduce new objects of devotion, new religious authorities, and new doctrines that depart from the God who revealed Himself.

The issue is not simply whether people use the name of God, Jesus Christ, or the Bible. The deeper question is whether what they believe, teach, and practice agrees with the truth and will of the God they profess to worship.

The Bible provides a particularly serious declaration of God's rejection of religious practices that human beings attribute to Him without His command. Jeremiah 19:5 records God's words concerning the high places of Baal: “which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind.” Jeremiah 7:31 similarly states that the people built the high places of Tophet and burned their sons and daughters in the fire, “which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart.” Jeremiah 32:35 repeats the condemnation of the abomination committed in the name of Molech. These passages demonstrate that a religious act does not become acceptable to God merely because its practitioners regard it as sacred or associate it with divine worship.

A person may sincerely perform a religious practice and yet be doing something God never commanded. Therefore, sincerity alone cannot establish truth, and religious tradition alone cannot prove divine approval. The name of God must not be used to authorize what God has rejected.

This principle reaches beyond physical idols. A man may cease to worship a statue yet continue to construct an image of God within his own imagination. He may fashion a Jesus who approves his ambitions, a gospel that protects his position, a doctrine that justifies his conduct, or a religious institution that serves his interests. In this sense, the making of gods is not limited to producing an object out of gold, silver, wood, or stone. It can also occur when people reshape the identity, character, commandments, and will of God to suit their personal preferences.

The idol becomes an idea, a doctrine, a religious system, or an authority that people defend as though it were the unquestionable voice of God. Such a danger becomes especially serious when human interpretations are elevated above the Scriptures and when people are taught to obey religious leaders without examining whether their teachings agree with the Word of God.

The account of King Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel chapters 2 and 3 illustrates how spiritual truth can become entangled with political power. After Daniel revealed the king's dream, Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the greatness of Daniel's God. Daniel 2:47 records the king's declaration: “Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets.” In Daniel 2:48–49, the king rewarded Daniel with authority and elevated his companions Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to positions of responsibility. Yet the king's acknowledgment of Daniel's God did not prevent him from establishing his own golden image. Daniel 3:1 declares, “Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold,” and verses 4–6 describe the command that all peoples, nations, and languages must fall down and worship it under the threat of death in a burning fiery furnace.

Here the king's personal authority became the foundation of a compulsory system of worship. The image was made by the king, established by the king, and enforced by the king. His command did not make the image the true God; neither did his political power make the worship of that image righteous.

The account of Nebuchadnezzar further reveals that religious persecution can arise when a ruler's demand for conformity is challenged by people whose allegiance belongs to a higher authority. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to worship the image despite the threat of execution. Their declaration in Daniel 3:17–18 is decisive: “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” Their obedience to God was not dependent upon the outcome of their trial. They refused to exchange their allegiance to God for physical safety, political favor, or the approval of the multitude. Their example demonstrates that a government, religious institution, or powerful individual may demand worship, conformity, or unquestioning loyalty, but such demands do not become righteous merely because they are backed by authority. The question is whether the demand agrees with the will of God.

King Jeroboam provides another example of the creation of a religious system motivated by insecurity and the fear of losing power. First Kings 12:26–27 records his concern that the people might return to the house of David if they continued going to Jerusalem to worship the LORD. Instead of trusting God and governing according to righteousness, Jeroboam considered how he could prevent the people from transferring their allegiance to another king. First Kings 12:28–29 states, “Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” He established one calf at Bethel and the other at Dan. First Kings 12:30 then declares, “And this thing became a sin.” Jeroboam also established houses of high places and appointed priests who were not of the sons of Levi, as recorded in verse 31. Thus, his political insecurity produced a religious arrangement designed to preserve his kingdom. Rather than allowing the people to follow the worship prescribed by God, he offered them a more convenient system that served his own interests. This account warns us that religious innovations can be driven by the desire to retain authority, control people, secure loyalty, and prevent the loss of influence.

The sin of Jeroboam is especially instructive because he did not merely build an idol; he reorganized the people's religious life around his political objective. He altered the place of worship, introduced golden calves, and appointed priests according to his own arrangement. He made religious service convenient for the people while directing it away from the order God had established. In this way, convenience and institutional stability became substitutes for obedience. A system may attract multitudes, establish ceremonies, appoint leaders, and maintain an appearance of holiness, yet these outward accomplishments do not prove that it has the approval of God. When religious arrangements are created principally to protect the position of their founders, the service of God becomes subordinate to the preservation of human power. The people may believe they are worshipping the God who delivered Israel from Egypt, but their worship has been redirected through objects and arrangements that God did not authorize.

The root of this problem is also addressed by Jesus Christ Himself. Matthew 22:29 records His answer: “Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.” Mark 12:24 repeats the same rebuke. This declaration identifies two serious deficiencies: ignorance of the Scriptures and ignorance of the power of God. A person may possess religious vocabulary, quote selected passages, participate in worship, and claim to represent Christ while failing to understand the Word and the divine power to which that Word bears witness. Knowledge of religious language is not necessarily knowledge of God. Neither is human intelligence, academic achievement, institutional rank, or public influence a substitute for spiritual understanding. When people do not know the Scriptures rightly, they may use isolated verses to support ideas that contradict the broader testimony of God's Word. When they do not know the power of God, they may replace divine authority with human reasoning, emotional excitement, ceremonial performance, or displays of religious influence.

This is why the making of false gods can occur even among people who claim to be Christians. The danger is not confined to those who openly worship pagan deities. It can also appear when people use the name of Jesus Christ to promote teachings and practices that are inconsistent with His commandments. Second Corinthians 11:4 warns of those who preach “another Jesus,” offer “another spirit,” or proclaim “another gospel.” Paul's warning is significant because the false teaching may retain familiar religious names while changing the substance of the message. A person can speak of Jesus while presenting a distorted image of His character and will. A preacher can speak of the gospel while directing people toward personal glory, material gain, domination, or allegiance to a human personality. The name may remain unchanged, but the message and spirit being promoted may differ from what the apostles preached. Consequently, the mere repetition of the name of Jesus cannot establish that a teaching is true.

The warning in Matthew 7:20–23 reinforces this point. Jesus says in verse 20, “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” In verses 21–23, He declares that not everyone who calls Him Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven, and that some will appeal to their prophesying, casting out devils, and wonderful works performed in His name. Yet His answer to them will be, “I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” This passage challenges the assumption that religious activity, spiritual claims, miracles, or public recognition automatically prove divine approval.

The Lord directs attention to doing the will of His Father and warns that religious accomplishments can coexist with iniquity. A ministry may have a large following, an impressive reputation, and many public demonstrations of power, yet those things alone cannot establish its standing before God. The ultimate standard is not the reputation a person has constructed but the truth, obedience, and righteousness that God requires.

Private interpretation presents another danger when human beings make their own understanding the final authority over the Word of God. Second Peter 1:20 states, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” This verse must be understood within its immediate context, including verse 21, which explains that prophecy did not come by the will of man but that holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. The passage warns against treating prophecy as the product of an isolated human will. It does not mean that every difference of interpretation automatically constitutes rebellion, nor does it prohibit careful study of Scripture. Rather, it calls for humility before the divine origin and authority of the Word. The danger emerges when an individual elevates personal opinion into an unquestionable divine decree, refuses correction, and demands that others submit to an interpretation merely because it has been declared by a religious leader or institution.

When private opinions are institutionalized and defended as absolute truth without sufficient submission to Scripture, divisions may multiply. One group establishes its own doctrinal boundaries; another rejects those boundaries and establishes different ones. Each may claim exclusive possession of righteousness, holiness, spiritual authority, or divine approval. Over time, disagreements can develop into denominational schisms, personal hostility, accusations, and contests for followers.

The problem is not that every distinction between Christian traditions is necessarily false, nor that all denominations are equally mistaken. The problem arises when human loyalties, pride, and institutional interests become more important than the pursuit of truth, humility, correction, and the will of God. People who profess to belong to one Lord can become divided by competing constructions of His identity and commandments. When the desire to defend one's own religious system becomes stronger than the desire to be corrected by the truth, religion itself can become an instrument of strife.

This tendency is not limited to religious leaders. Political interests can also exploit religious differences, using faith to mobilize followers, consolidate authority, stigmatize opponents, or justify coercion. The history of Nebuchadnezzar's image demonstrates the danger of compelling people to participate in a ruler's preferred form of worship. Jeroboam's calves demonstrate how insecurity can motivate the construction of an alternative religious system. Together, these accounts show how worship can be manipulated when political power seeks to control the conscience of the people. Religious persecution occurs when people are threatened, punished, excluded, or deprived of their freedom because they refuse to accept the beliefs or practices imposed upon them. Such persecution may be committed by political rulers, religious authorities, or groups that consider their own position so unquestionable that dissent must be suppressed. The biblical lesson is that authority does not make falsehood true, and coercion does not transform an unauthorized act of worship into obedience to God.

The tendency to make false gods also helps us examine the hostility that can arise between religious believers and atheists. Atheism, understood simply as the absence of belief in God, is not itself proof of hatred or persecution; atheists hold different views and behave in different ways. Nevertheless, some atheists may display hostility toward religious believers, ridicule their convictions, or attempt to suppress religious expression. From a biblical perspective, such conduct can be examined as another manifestation of the human tendency to elevate one's own judgment above the claims of others. A person who rejects the existence of God does not thereby become a worshipper of a literal idol, and disbelief alone does not establish that someone is persecuting God.

However, when anyone—religious or nonreligious—treats personal conviction as an unquestionable authority, denies others the same freedom of conscience, or seeks to silence them through intimidation, the underlying problem becomes the elevation of human will over the rights and dignity of others. The same standard must be applied consistently: religious people must not persecute atheists, and atheists must not persecute religious people. Belief cannot be made genuine by force, and truth cannot be established by intimidation.

The biblical challenge, therefore, is not to replace one form of coercion with another, but to distinguish the worship God has commanded from the systems human beings construct for themselves. The people of God are called to testify to the truth, not to manufacture obedience through threats. Jesus Christ taught His disciples to bear witness to Him, and the apostles proclaimed the gospel through preaching, teaching, and the testimony of their lives. The refusal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego to worship Nebuchadnezzar's image demonstrates the importance of conscience before God. Their example does not authorize believers to force their convictions upon everyone else; it demonstrates that they themselves would not surrender their obedience to God under threat of death. Their faithfulness exposed the limits of political power and revealed that the king's command could not determine the truth.

Ultimately, the human tendency to make new gods is a warning against allowing personal imagination, ambition, insecurity, and pride to redefine the divine. Deuteronomy 32:17 speaks of “new gods that came newly up.” Jeremiah 19:5 condemns practices God declared He had neither commanded nor spoken. Daniel 3 reveals a golden image imposed through political authority. First Kings 12 exposes a religious system established to preserve a king's power. Matthew 22:29 warns against error arising from ignorance of the Scriptures and the power of God. Second Corinthians 11:4 warns against another Jesus, another spirit, and another gospel. Matthew 7:21–23 reminds us that calling Jesus Lord and performing religious works do not, by themselves, prove obedience to His will. These passages converge upon one essential warning: human beings must not confuse what they have created with what God has revealed.

The true measure of worship is not the number of followers, the magnificence of a building, the influence of a leader, the antiquity of a tradition, the novelty of a doctrine, or the force with which a belief is defended. The decisive question is whether the worshipper is seeking to know and obey the true God rather than fashioning a god in his own image.

When people cease to submit their thoughts, motives, doctrines, and actions to the truth, they risk turning religion into an instrument of self-exaltation. When they allow political ambition to govern worship, they risk making an idol of authority. When they insist that their own interpretation cannot be corrected, they risk making an idol of their understanding. And when they persecute others merely because those others do not share their convictions, they reveal how readily human power can displace humility, justice, and love.

Therefore, let every person examine not only the idols made by ancient kings but also the idols that may be established within the heart, the pulpit, the institution, the political order, and the human imagination. Let religious leaders beware of using the name of God to protect their own interests. Let believers examine their doctrines in the light of Scripture and remain willing to receive correction. Let political authorities protect freedom of conscience rather than compel worship. Let atheists and religious believers alike reject intimidation and persecution. Above all, let no human being presume that whatever he invents, approves, or commands must therefore be the will of God.

The God of Scripture is not made true by human recognition, nor is His will determined by human ambition. The responsibility of humanity is not to create a god that agrees with its desires, but to seek the truth, distinguish what God has commanded from what He has not commanded, and walk in righteousness without making the worship of God an instrument of pride, domination, or persecution.

In summary, humanity has a persistent tendency to create gods, doctrines, and religious systems according to its own imagination, ignorance, ambition, and desire for power rather than according to the revealed will of the true God. From the golden calves of Jeroboam to Nebuchadnezzar’s golden image, the Scriptures demonstrate how false worship can arise from private interpretation, political insecurity, and the distortion of divine truth. This same tendency contributes to religious schism, false claims of spiritual authority, and persecution between people who profess different beliefs, including hostility toward believers by some who reject God.

 The central argument is that whenever human beings elevate their own ideas, interests, and authority above the truth of God, they risk making a god that is not God. Such distortion may occur through ignorance of the Scriptures and the power of God (Matthew 22:29), private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20), the preaching of another Jesus or another gospel (2 Corinthians 11:4), or the pursuit of political and religious control (1 Kings 12:26–31; Daniel 3:1–6). The resulting divisions and conflicts reveal the danger of confusing human invention with divine revelation. Therefore, the biblical remedy is to submit beliefs and practices to the truth of God's Word, reject coercion and persecution, and distinguish genuine obedience to God from worship fashioned to serve human ambition.