The Nature of Deity
While different religious faiths have vastly different structures, basic concepts and developments the ones that accept some sort of deity fall into one of two basic types. Additionally these basic types tend to be mutually exclusive and while religions based on one of the basic type may be superficially similar to one based on the other at the core they are vastly different in concept.It is this core difference that can cause the major differences in interpretation and implementation of what are similar sounding precepts. It can also lead to acts that simply do not seem to be in harmony with the precepts of the religion. For example a major precept of the Christian faith is that of ‘turning the other cheek’. With this precept it might be expected that the implementation of church law, informed by this principle, would be less than harsh and indeed this is seen to be the case in many ways. A good example being the punishment for witchcraft, a very serious crime in the Middle Ages, being rather mild, the more extreme cases of burning or hanging being almost exclusively imposed my civil authorities. For example he Council of Elvira (306), Canon 6, refused the holy Viaticum (Holy Communion) to those who had killed a man by a spell (per maleficium) and canon 24 of the Council of Ancyra (314) imposes five years of penance upon those who consult magicians.
This legislation represented the mind of the Church for many centuries. Similar penalties were enacted at the Eastern council in Trullo (692), while certain early Irish canons in the far West treated sorcery as a crime to be visited with excommunication until adequate penance had been performed.
So given this how can we explain the viscous response to acts of heresy? Well to understand this we need to understand the two different concepts underpin concepts of deity. These views fundamentally affect how faith and belief are interpreted. These two concepts are whether the deity is transcendent or immanent.
Transcendent Deity
This word ‘transcendent’ derives from the Latin word meaning “to go beyond”. In essence it defines a deity that exists outside of or beyond creation. Often the deity is involved in the act of creation and is seen as a creature of a different and higher order than humans or any other part of the created universe.Immanent Deity
Immanence is also derived from Latin but in this case implies not an external or outside deity but one that is fully within. An immanent deity is seen as completely within and constrained by creation. Am immanent deity would be thought of as being part of creation in a literal sense, that is to say that every part of creation is part of the deity and that the deity is found in everything that has been created. Often the deity is seen as coming into being as part of the creation process.Taoists for example believe that the Tao is a formless form of ‘energy’ that is present in all things.
While many Christians would suggest that as God continues to operate in the universe, in answering prayer and so on, he could be considered to be both transcendent and immanent. However it is clear that the Jewdeo / Christian God is in this case a transcendent deity that simply continues to operate in the created universe. His essential nature is transcendent.
This core difference between religions fundamentally affects the implementation and practice of their faith.
We have seen that the Christian / Muslim / Jewish God is by its nature transcendent. This fact lets us answer the question posed above. Where you have an external truth and where the punishment imposed by that external truth is rather harsh – eternal damnation being at the tough end of the spectrum of punishments, then almost any act is justified if it prevents the recipient from receiving that final punishment.
Conversely a belief in an immanent deity does not lend its self to such interpretation. With no external truth imposing harsh punishments it is difficult to justify you acts by reference to its laws and rules.
Another aspect of the difference between the faiths that have these two different core beliefs is in how they approach the other faiths and belief structures. The Jewdeo/Christian faith simply does not, and cannot, allow that any other faith has any validity. Indeed followers of other faiths are at best misguided and every effort should be made to bring them into the true faith.
However a belief in an immanent deity where god is the whole of creation and all parts of that creation tend to mitigate against such beliefs. It’s difficult to proclaim that your vision of god is the one true vision when everybody else is as equally part of the deity and therefore equally as likely to have an understanding of the deity. Indeed this ‘equality’ of divinity naturally tends to an acceptance that different paths are equally valid and rather than suppress or rail against other paths one should learn form them and see what truths they hold.
It should be remembered that not all faiths follow these stereotypes suggested by their underlying concepts or that every follower of any given religion is going to adhere to these basic concepts but in trying to understand why different faiths have followed the path they have and developed the rules and structures they have understanding whether it is based on a transcendent or immanent deity is vital.
So given that this difference in faith seems to be not only fundamental to belief but also to the universe it’s self, and after all what could impact the universe more that the nature of its creation, can we see any signs in the universe that can guide us in determining the core nature of deity? Transcendent or Immanent?
Well perhaps science has something to say here and if I’m annoyed enough and nobody else writes anything I may well inflict some more of my thoughts on you!