This essay explores the theological claim that yhwh, the god of the old testament, is the “creator of the world and universe”. By analyzing scriptural support for ethically controversial practices such as slavery and child marriage in the torah and qur’an, and contrasting these with the ethical cosmologies of Native “American” traditions rooted in reciprocity and harmony with nature, the essay contends that yhwh represents a culturally bounded deity. The absence of the “Americas” in the biblical corpus is not merely geographic but philosophical, reflecting a limited moral scope that undermines claims of divine universality.
Introduction: Deity, Geography, and Moral Universality
In traditional monotheism, god is defined as the omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent creator of the universe. Yet the textual content and moral codes attributed to yhwh in the old testament suggest a deity deeply embedded within the socio-political norms of iron age Israel rather than a transcendent moral legislator for all humanity. The omission of entire continents—such as the “Americas”—from the biblical imagination is not merely a cartographic issue but an ethical one. If a divine being creates all and governs all, the scope of divine revelation and moral law must match that breadth. Instead, what emerges from abrahamic texts is a selective revelation, often condoning practices incompatible with contemporary ethics—practices notably absent or condemned in Native “American” traditions.
I. Scriptural Morality: The Ethics of Slavery and Child Marriage
A. Jewish and Islamic Texts
The torah explicitly permits slavery and even provides regulations on how slaves should be treated. For instance:
•Leviticus 25:44–46 states: "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you... you can bequeath them to your children as inherited property."
•Exodus 21:7 allows a father to sell his daughter as a slave, with regulations on how her “owner” must treat her.
In the qur’an, slavery is also regulated rather than abolished:
•Surah 4:24 allows for sexual relations with women “whom your right hands possess,” a phrase commonly understood to refer to slaves.
•Surah 65:4 discusses the waiting period (‘iddah) for divorced girls “who have not yet menstruated,” which scholars such as Ibn Kathir have interpreted as referring to child brides.
These scriptural permissions—common in tribal Near Eastern societies—reflect a moral framework tied to a malicious patriarchal authority, property rights, and warfare. They suggest a deity that governs a specific culture, rather than one whose laws transcend time, geography, and evolving ethical norms.
B. Philosophical Implication
Philosophers such as Immanuel Kant and John Rawls emphasize universal moral principles, particularly the notion that all individuals must be treated as ends in themselves. The abrahamic deity, however, as depicted in these texts, seems to contradict such universality by endorsing the instrumental use of human beings, particularly women and slaves. If a god’s moral law cannot pass the test of categorical universalization, then such a deity cannot be said to represent moral absolutism—nor can it reasonably be assumed the creator of all moral agents.
II. Native “American” Philosophies: Reciprocity, Personhood, and the Moral Cosmos
Native traditions across the “Americas” offer stark contrast. From the Iroquois Confederacy to the Lakota and the Inca, the moral relationship between humans, animals, land, and spirit is defined not by domination but by reciprocity, balance, and kinship.
The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Great Law of Peace emphasized democratic governance, rights of women, and environmental stewardship—long before such ideas gained modern traction.
In Lakota cosmology, Wakan Tanka (the Great Mystery) is not a lawgiver but a spiritual force that permeates all beings, making oppression of one over another a form of cosmic imbalance.
The concept of “mitakuye oyasin” (“all are related”) expresses the idea that every element of the natural world possesses relational personhood, deserving respect.
These systems did not sanction slavery as institutionalized in the biblical sense, nor did they ritualize child marriage. While variations existed, the overarching moral vision was one of ecological harmony and egalitarian relationality. In this light, Native “American” cosmologies present a stronger philosophical candidate for universal moral systems than the localized deity of the abrahamic religions.
III. Theological Consequences: Can yhwh Be a Universal Creator?
If yhwh is truly the creator of all peoples, then divine moral law should be visible or intuitive to all cultures. Yet not only are the “Americas” absent from biblical cosmography, but the ethical systems developed independently on these continents often surpass the old testament in ethical sophistication, inclusiveness, & timelessness.
From a theological standpoint, this presents a problem of moral partiality: why would a universal god deliver revelation that condones systemic injustice to one group while leaving another, arguably more ethically evolved culture, untouched and “unsaved”? christian theology attempts to address this with doctrines of general revelation or progressive revelation, but these are retroactive constructs. The old testament itself offers no indication that yhwh has concern for lands or peoples beyond the fertile crescent.
Conclusion: From Cultural Deity to Ethical Provincialism
Philosophically and theologically, the claim that yhwh is the universal creator becomes untenable when scrutinized through both the geographical limitations of scripture and the ethical content therein. The god of the old testament may well be a powerful tribal deity—rooted in the specific historical and moral conditions of the ancient Near East—but this provincialism disqualifies it from being the supreme architect of the cosmos. In contrast, the relational, reciprocal ethics of Native “American” traditions offer not only a more inclusive cosmology but one that aligns more closely with modern conceptions of universal moral law and ecological interconnectedness.
References:
- The tanakh (Jewish Publication Society translation)
- The qur’an (trans. M.A.S. Abdel Haleem)
- Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-qur’an al-‘Azim
- Vine Deloria Jr., God is Red: A Native View of Religion
- Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals
- John Rawls, A Theory of Justice
- Barbara Alice Mann, Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas
- Charles Eastman (Ohiyesa), The Soul of the “Indian”