You may not believe it, but I was a STAR! Two years ago, I had a TikTok channel (@haggairesnikoff) dedicated to delivering YCT Torah in one minute bites. In one video, I addressed the Jewish rejection of the Christian doctrine that God was made flesh. Christian viewers from across the country challenged me: Aren’t you limiting the omnipotence of God if you say that God cannot take human form? My reply: it’s not that God couldn’t take human form, it’s that we believe that God wouldn’t. This, however, begs the question. What’s the problem with believing in a corporeal God?
There may be technical answers to this question. Saying that God has a body implies that God is not eternal. Saying that God takes human form implies that God may have human appetites and weaknesses. I tend towards a more pragmatic reason that God would never take a human body. Believing that God may appear human creates a confusion between God and humanity that can lead to abuse.
Rabbi Meir ben Shimon of Narbonne Me’ili (early 13th c., Provence) addresses this matter in his Sefer Milchemet Mitzva, where he writes (ed. Moshe Yehudah HaKohen Blau, pt. 2, pp. 319-320),
כי אלו שהזכרנו היו משכילים ומצליחים בעצתם ודעתם יותר מכל חכמי דורם. ולכן היו אומרים כי אין [נפש] המשכלת בהם כשאר נפשות ב”א בלבד, רק כי האלהות קיבל בשר בהם…ומתירים לעצמם בזה כל רשע וחמס וניאוף וגזל ורציחה וכל דבר רע…
These people who we mentioned were more enlightened and successful in their understanding and intelligence than all of the wise people of their generation. And therefore, they said that the enlightening spirit in them was not like the souls of humans alone, rather the Divine took flesh in them…And they permit themselves all wickedness and violence and licentiousness and theft and murder and all evil things…
The claim that a human is divine creates an opening for abuse. The Me’ili goes through a philosophical argument (elided above) to explain why. I suggest a more direct connection. The people discussed above genuinely believe themselves to be God made flesh. As such they are the arbiters of right and wrong. However, they are still subject to the appetites and weaknesses of human beings. This combination creates the opportunity to justify any satisfaction of their appetites as the will of God. This is even more true for a person who claims to be God for exploitive purposes.
We’ve understood why God would never have a human body. What about a non-human body? The Rashbam (Shmuel ben Meir, c.1085-c.1158, France), in his commentary on the Golden Calf, reveals a key truth about idolatry. He writes,
כל עובדי ע”ז יודעים שא-להינו שבשמים ברא את העולם, אך בזה היו טועים. שהתרפים יש בהם רוח טומאה כמו הנביאים שיש בהם רוח הקדש
All idolators know that our God in Heaven created the world. However, they err in this: For the idols have in them an unclean spirit like the prophets who have in them the spirit of God.
The Rashbam claims that the essence of idolatry is that an object is imbued with an impure spirit (i.e. a pagan god). What is wrong with this? Don’t we say that the prophets carry, or communicate, in some way, the spirit of God?
The answer is that the notion that God may inhabit even a non-human body, still creates opportunities for exploitation and abuse. The word of God as communicated by a prophet is still mediated through a human mind. It is still an interpretation of a sort. If God inhabits a body, however, even a non-human one, there is the illusion of a direct connection. Whatever messages one claims to receive are given the status of direct communication. In other words, access to an idol implies access to absolute truth. Someone who claims to know the absolute will of God has the opportunity to justify any behavior by claiming it is divinely sanctioned. Believing in a corporeal God is not inevitably abusive, but the danger looms large.
The gift of the Torah is that no closer communication with God is possible. Absolute truth remains out of reach, and no person can justify abuses and exploitation by claiming access to it. Every interpretation is open to disagreement and reinterpretation. Belief in a corporeal God, however, even temporarily, implies the possibility of direct connection and direct communication. Refuting this communication becomes much more difficult and the possibilities for exploitation and abuse multiply.
To read this post in Spanish, click here
Daf of the Day
