Catholic Perspective on the Noahide Claims of Idolatry and Shituf Regarding the Holy Spirit and Refutation (Code Red)

-


 See Home Page

SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com

 This article is "Code Red": Idolatry


Catholic Perspective on the Noahide Claims of Idolatry and Shituf Regarding the Holy Spirit and Refutation
The Noahide movement, rooted in Jewish tradition, promotes the Seven Laws of Noah as a universal moral code for non-Jews, derived from Genesis 9:1–7. Central to their theology is a strict monotheism that rejects the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, viewing it as idolatrous or, for Gentiles, as shituf—a form of associating other entities with God that compromises divine oneness. While much Noahide critique focuses on Jesus as a human figure worshiped as divine, their perspective on the Holy Spirit is equally critical, though less emphasized in public debates. Noahides argue that the Holy Spirit, as a distinct person in the Trinity, violates the absolute oneness of God articulated in the Old Testament, constituting idolatry for Jews and shituf for Gentiles, which they consider impermissible under Noahide law. From a Catholic perspective, these claims misunderstand the nature of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit’s role as fully God, consubstantial with the Father and the Son, within one divine essence. This essay thoroughly explains the Noahide position on the Holy Spirit as idolatrous and shituf, drawing on their theological framework, and provides a detailed Catholic refutation grounded in scripture, tradition, and theology to affirm the Holy Spirit’s divinity and compatibility with monotheism.
Noahide Perspective: The Holy Spirit as Idolatrous and Shituf
Noahides adhere to a rigorous monotheism based on texts like Deuteronomy 6:4 (“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one”) and Exodus 20:3 (“You shall have no other gods before me”). Their rejection of the Trinity extends to the Holy Spirit, which they view as a problematic element of Christian theology. The Noahide perspective on the Holy Spirit, informed by Jewish sources such as the Talmud (Sanhedrin 56a–b) and medieval authorities like Maimonides (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 9:1), includes the following arguments:
  1. Idolatry: The Holy Spirit as a Separate Entity
    • Noahide Claim: The Holy Spirit, as a distinct “person” in the Trinity, is perceived as a separate divine entity, violating God’s absolute oneness. Noahides argue that attributing personhood and divine attributes to the Spirit constitutes idolatry, as it suggests multiple gods or a division of God’s unity.
    • Supporting Argument: Noahides cite Isaiah 44:6 (“Thus says the Lord… I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no god”) to assert that God is indivisible. They view the Christian depiction of the Holy Spirit as a third divine person, distinct from the Father and Son, as akin to polytheism, forbidden for Jews under the Noahide prohibition against idolatry (Sanhedrin 56a). For example, Christian texts describing the Spirit’s actions (e.g., Acts 13:2, “The Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul’”) suggest an independent divine being, which Noahides reject as idolatrous.
  2. Shituf: Associating the Spirit with God for Gentiles
    • Noahide Claim: For Gentiles, the concept of shituf—associating another entity with God without fully equating it to God—applies to the Holy Spirit. Noahides, following some rabbinic opinions (e.g., Tosafot on Sanhedrin 63b), argue that while shituf may be permissible for Gentiles in certain contexts, the Trinitarian view of the Holy Spirit as a coequal divine person is too close to idolatry to be acceptable under Noahide law.
    • Supporting Argument: Noahides point to Deuteronomy 4:39 (“The Lord is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other”) to argue that even associating a distinct “Spirit” with God’s essence compromises monotheism. The Spirit’s role in Christian theology—proceeding from the Father and Son, receiving worship (e.g., in the Gloria Patri)—is seen as elevating a secondary entity to divine status, which they deem impermissible shituf.
  3. Misinterpretation of the “Spirit of God” in the Old Testament
    • Noahide Claim: Noahides argue that the Hebrew term ruach hakodesh (Holy Spirit) or ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) in the Old Testament (e.g., Genesis 1:2; Isaiah 61:1) refers to God’s power, presence, or influence, not a distinct divine person. They claim Christians misinterpret these passages to support a Trinitarian Holy Spirit, imposing a foreign theology.
    • Supporting Argument: Noahides cite passages like Psalm 51:11 (“Cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me”) to argue that the Spirit is God’s active force, not a separate entity. Jewish exegesis, such as Rashi’s commentary on Genesis 1:2, interprets ruach Elohim as a “wind” or divine energy, rejecting personhood.
  4. No Old Testament Evidence for a Divine Spirit Person
    • Noahide Claim: The Old Testament lacks explicit references to a distinct divine person called the Holy Spirit, making the Christian doctrine an innovation incompatible with Torah monotheism. Noahides argue that the Trinity, including the Spirit, is a later Christian development absent from Jewish scripture.
    • Supporting Argument: Noahides reference Ezekiel 36:26–27 (“I will put my Spirit within you”) as describing God’s influence, not a separate divine being. They argue that texts like Joel 2:28 (“I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh”) use metaphorical language for divine inspiration, not a personal Spirit, and cite Deuteronomy 13:1–5 to warn against new doctrines deviating from the Torah.
  5. Theological Inconsistency with God’s Transcendence
    • Noahide Claim: The Holy Spirit’s depiction as a person who interacts with humanity (e.g., inspiring prophets, Acts 2:4) contradicts God’s transcendence, as articulated in Numbers 23:19 (“God is not man, that he should lie”) and Isaiah 40:25 (“To whom then will you compare me?”). Noahides argue that personifying the Spirit humanizes God, undermining His absolute otherness.
    • Supporting Argument: Noahides draw on Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed (1:51), which emphasizes God’s incorporeal nature, to reject the idea of a divine Spirit with personal attributes, viewing it as a step toward anthropomorphism and idolatry.
Catholic Refutation of Noahide Claims
From a Catholic perspective, the Noahide claims that the Holy Spirit is idolatrous or constitutes shituf stem from a misunderstanding of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit’s nature as fully God, consubstantial with the Father and Son, within one divine essence. The Catholic Church, guided by scripture, tradition, and the Magisterium, affirms that the Holy Spirit is not a separate deity or lesser entity but God Himself, and worship of the Spirit is consistent with biblical monotheism. Below, each Noahide claim is refuted, drawing on Old and New Testament scriptures and theological insights to uphold the Holy Spirit’s divinity.
  1. The Holy Spirit Is God, Not a Separate Entity (Refuting Idolatry)
    • Noahide Claim: The Holy Spirit’s distinct personhood suggests a separate divine entity, constituting idolatry.
    • Catholic Response: The Trinity is one God in three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—sharing one divine essence, not three gods (CCC 253–255). The Holy Spirit is not a separate entity but God Himself, as affirmed in scripture. Acts 5:3–4 equates lying to the Holy Spirit with lying to God, proving the Spirit’s divinity. Old Testament passages like Isaiah 63:10 (“They rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit”) attribute personal qualities to the Spirit, suggesting more than a mere force. The Nicene Creed, rooted in scripture, confesses the Spirit as “Lord and giver of life,” consubstantial with the Father and Son. The Noahide charge of idolatry misrepresents the Trinity as polytheism, ignoring the unity of God’s essence.
    • Scriptural Evidence: Psalm 139:7–8 (“Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence?”) equates the Spirit with God’s omnipresence, affirming divinity. 2 Samuel 23:2 (“The Spirit of the Lord speaks by me”) shows the Spirit as God’s personal voice, fulfilled in Christ’s promise of the Spirit (John 14:16–17).
    • Conclusion: The Holy Spirit is fully God, not a separate entity, refuting the idolatry charge.
  2. The Trinity Preserves Monotheism, Not Shituf
    • Noahide Claim: The Holy Spirit’s role in the Trinity is shituf, associating another entity with God, impermissible for Gentiles.
    • Catholic Response: The Trinity does not associate multiple entities but reveals one God in three persons, each fully divine (CCC 234). Deuteronomy 6:4’s oneness is upheld, as the Spirit is not a secondary being but God Himself. The Old Testament hints at divine plurality within unity, such as Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man in our image”) and Isaiah 6:3’s threefold “Holy, holy, holy,” which the Church Fathers, like St. Augustine (On the Trinity, Book I), linked to the Trinity. The Spirit’s worship in Christian liturgy (e.g., “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit”) is monotheistic, as it honors one God. The Noahide shituf concept, a rabbinic category, does not apply to the Trinity’s ontological unity, and even if it did, Catholic theology transcends such distinctions by affirming the Spirit’s full divinity.
    • Scriptural Evidence: Job 33:4 (“The Spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life”) attributes creation to the Spirit, a divine act, fulfilled in the Spirit’s role at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4).
    • Conclusion: The Trinity, including the Holy Spirit, upholds monotheism, not shituf.
  3. The Old Testament Spirit Is Personal, Not Merely a Force
    • Noahide Claim: The ruach hakodesh is God’s power or influence, not a distinct person, and Christians misinterpret it as Trinitarian.
    • Catholic Response: While the Old Testament often describes the Spirit as God’s active presence (e.g., Genesis 1:2, “The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters”), it also attributes personal characteristics, suggesting a divine person. Isaiah 63:10’s “grieved his Holy Spirit” implies emotion, and Nehemiah 9:20 (“You gave your good Spirit to instruct them”) suggests agency. The New Testament clarifies this personhood (John 16:13, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth”), but the Old Testament lays the foundation. The Church Fathers, like St. Basil (On the Holy Spirit, ch. 16), saw Old Testament references as Trinitarian precursors. The Noahide reduction of the Spirit to a force ignores these personal attributes and the continuity of revelation.
    • Scriptural Evidence: Ezekiel 11:5 (“The Spirit of the Lord fell upon me, and he said to me, ‘Say, Thus says the Lord’”) shows the Spirit speaking as God, fulfilled in the Spirit’s role as Paraclete (John 14:26).
    • Conclusion: The Old Testament’s ruach hakodesh has personal attributes, supporting the Holy Spirit’s divinity.
  4. Old Testament Evidence Supports the Spirit’s Divinity
    • Noahide Claim: The Old Testament lacks evidence for a distinct divine Spirit person, making the Trinity a Christian innovation.
    • Catholic Response: The Old Testament progressively reveals God’s nature, with the Spirit’s divinity implicit in texts like 2 Samuel 23:2–3, where “The Spirit of the Lord” speaks as “the God of Israel.” Psalm 51:11’s plea for the “Holy Spirit” suggests a divine presence integral to God’s being. Joel 2:28’s promise to “pour out my Spirit” is fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2:17–18), where the Spirit acts as God’s personal agent. The Church’s Magisterium, rooted in scripture, affirms the Spirit’s consubstantiality (CCC 685). The Noahide claim of innovation overlooks the Old Testament’s Trinitarian hints, clarified in the New Covenant (2 Corinthians 13:14).
    • Scriptural Evidence: Isaiah 11:2 (“The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding”) describes the Messiah’s anointing, fulfilled in Jesus’ baptism (Luke 3:22), showing the Spirit’s divine role.
    • Conclusion: The Old Testament supports the Holy Spirit’s divinity, refuting the innovation charge.
  5. The Holy Spirit Upholds God’s Transcendence
    • Noahide Claim: Personifying the Holy Spirit humanizes God, contradicting His transcendence.
    • Catholic Response: The Holy Spirit’s personhood does not diminish God’s transcendence but reveals His immanence within His unchanging nature (CCC 685). The Old Testament balances transcendence (Isaiah 40:25) with personal engagement, as in Ezekiel 36:26–27, where the Spirit transforms hearts, a divine act. The Spirit’s actions in the New Testament—guiding (Acts 16:6), interceding (Romans 8:26)—fulfill Old Testament promises without compromising God’s otherness. St. Gregory of Nazianzus (Orations, 31.26) emphasized the Spirit’s transcendence as God, not a humanized entity. The Noahide objection conflates divine personhood with anthropomorphism.
    • Scriptural Evidence: Psalm 104:30 (“When you send forth your Spirit, they are created”) attributes creation to the Spirit, a transcendent act, fulfilled in the Spirit’s life-giving role (John 6:63).
    • Conclusion: The Holy Spirit’s personhood upholds, not undermines, God’s transcendence.
Conclusion
The Noahide claims that the Holy Spirit is idolatrous or constitutes shituf arise from a misunderstanding of the Trinity and the Spirit’s nature as fully God, consubstantial with the Father and Son. Noahides argue that the Spirit’s personhood suggests a separate entity, that Trinitarian worship is impermissible shituf, that the Old Testament’s ruach hakodesh is merely God’s power, that no scriptural evidence supports a divine Spirit person, and that personification contradicts God’s transcendence. From a Catholic perspective, these claims are refuted by the Trinity’s monotheistic unity (CCC 253–255), the Old Testament’s personal depictions of the Spirit (Isaiah 63:10; Psalm 51:11), the Spirit’s divine actions (Job 33:4; Ezekiel 11:5), and the continuity of revelation fulfilled in the New Testament (Acts 5:3–4; John 16:13). Scriptures like Genesis 1:26, Isaiah 11:2, and Joel 2:28 reveal the Spirit’s divinity within God’s one essence, and the Church Fathers, like St. Basil and St. Augustine, affirm this truth. Catholics can confidently engage Noahides, using their shared Old Testament to proclaim the Holy Spirit as God, not an idol or associate, inviting them to see the Trinity as the fulfillment of God’s self-revelation, culminating in the life-giving Spirit who dwells in the Church (1 Corinthians 3:16).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Home Page - Seven Colors Ministry - Catholic Counter-Noahide

-
Image
Seven Colors Ministry SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com X (Twitter): @7ColorsMinistry by Maggie Barcelona (USA) A Catholic Counter-Noahide Ministry  About Us SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com X (Twitter): @7ColorsMinistry Why are we called "Seven Colors Ministry"? - Countering the Seven Noahide Laws - Why We Use Vatican II Polemics in Rebutting Noahide Claims, Despite Our Traditional Catholic Stance Noahide In The Church Today - What is the Catholic Church teaching on the Noahide Laws today? (download handouts from a church) - What has the Vatican said about Noahide Law? - Why are Catholic Schools in Toronto sending children to learn the Noahide Laws? - Why is a Catholic Priest translating the Chief Rabbi of Rome's Noahide messages to Christians into English? Topics To Discuss Why Noahides Reject Jesus in the Old Testament and Catholic Refutations - Why Some Catholics Are Confused About the Sabbath, are joining the Noahide Movement over it, and Catholic Responses - A Catholic def...
Read more

Catholic Perspective on the Proposed Jewish Response to Vatican II and the Noahide Laws: Vatican II’s Doctrinal Shifts and the Path to a Potential Vatican III

-
      See Home Page SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com Catholic Perspective on the Proposed Jewish Response to Vatican II and the Noahide Laws: Vatican II’s Doctrinal Shifts and the Path to a Potential Vatican III The Noahide movement, rooted in Jewish tradition, promotes the Seven Laws of Noah as a universal moral code for non-Jews, derived from Genesis 9:1–7 and codified in the Talmud ( Sanhedrin 56a–b) and by Maimonides ( Mishneh Torah , Hilchot Melachim 9:1). These laws include a prohibition against blasphemy, which some Noahides interpret as forbidding criticism of Judaism or Jews, aligning with a broader push for interfaith harmony. A 2015 article by Marshall Breger and Jack Bemporad in The Forward suggests that some Jewish leaders seek to respond to Vatican II’s reforms with an authoritative document, potentially incorporating the Noahide Laws, to advance Jewish-Catholic dialogue. The quote states: "The Catholics have revised their understanding of the place of Jews ...
Read more

Why is a Catholic Priest translating the Chief Rabbi of Rome's Noahide messages to Christians into English?

-
   See Home Page SevenColorsMinistry@gmail.com Rabbi Riccardo Di Segni’s article, “Noah Walked with God: Jewish Universalism,” translated by Father Murray Watson, introduces Noahidism to Christians as a universal ethical framework, emphasizing its role in Jewish theology. Di Segni portrays Noah as a righteous but ordinary figure whose survival after the Flood makes all humanity “Noahides” (¶2). He outlines the Seven Noahide Laws—prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, theft, sexual immorality, cruelty to animals, and the establishment of courts—asserting that Gentiles can achieve salvation by following these laws, paralleling Jewish salvation through the Torah (¶3–4). He acknowledges Jewish debates over whether Christian Trinitarianism is monotheistic, suggesting some rabbis allow it for non-Jews, but stricter views may exclude Christians from salvation (¶5). Di Segni proposes “parallel salvation,” where Jews and Christians recognize each other’s paths, or a “politic...
Read more