Why did people keep family idols in the Bible?

Teraphim were small images, used for purposes of divination. The incident furnishes us with a sidelight as to the way in which spiritist practices had spread. These little "household divinities" were reverenced and valued, and oftentimes especially so by the women, hence Rachel's anxiety to have them in her possession as they travelled away from her old home. Heathen practices are very infectious. Of Rachel's action Jacob evidently knew nothing, so the accusation, correct though it was, stirred his anger and led to a statement of his case.

This is a Hebrew word in the plural. It refers to domestic idols, as for instance those Rachel stole from her father; there the word, as elsewhere, is translated 'images' with'teraphim' in the margin. Gen. 31:19, 34, 35. Michal the wife of David had one in her house, and laid it in the bed when David escaped. 1 Sam. 19:13, 16. Micah also had them in his house, and regarded them as 'gods.' Judges 17:5; Judges 18:14-20. They were used in some way for divination, and are included among the images and idols which Josiah cleared from the land. 2 Kings 23:24; Ezek. 21:21; Zech. 10:2. In Hosea 3:4 the Jews are described as having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor image, nor ephod, nor teraphim — as they are at this day bereft of their sacrifices, and without even the divination and false gods they once had. But the prophecy speaks also of a coming day when they will seek Jehovah their God, and David their king, and enter into blessing.

The first mention of idolatry is with Laban, whose images Rachel had stolen. That they were objects of worship is plain from his words "wherefore hast thou stolen my gods?" Nor was Jacob's household free from them till but a short time before the death of Rachel. Evidently Laban and his family were idolaters. But it also appears that they had some superstitious knowledge of God — no doubt by tradition. There was a mingling of what they had received from earlier times with the image-worship growing around them. And in such a case even to pay homage to the true God is only superstition. The name of God was not unknown, and the inhabitants of Mesopotamia pretended to revere it, but they joined idols with it. We might ask whether they made a difference in the degree of homage given to Him who was to them "the unknown God," and homage paid to idols? Was there such distinction practised then as we find now expressed by the words latreia and dulia? a distinction winch where it is conceived only deceives the id dater of the present day with the thought that he is a christian. For as we see that one feature of ancient idolatry was not the denial of the name of God, but joining it with idols, so the "dulia," of the present day is joining virgin and saints, yea, preferring them, to Christ. It is idolatry.

This passage also reveals to us the fact that there was an image (a teraphim) in David's house. Certainly, David did not worship it, but its presence allows us to conclude that he put up with it. The teraphim was not an idol, properly speaking, and the Word is careful to distinguish the one from the other. (See Hosea 3:4; Zech. 10:2; 1 Sam. 15:22-23; 2 Kings 23:24; Ezek. 21:21; Gen. 31:19, 30, 32-35; Judges 17:3-5; Judges 18:17-18, 20) The image (teraphim) is somewhat inferior to the idol; it is a sort of demi-god whose domain is the household; it is clothed with a certain importance, and is even consulted on occasion. Such superstitions quickly lead to true idols; this is exactly how Jacob judged the matter, when he told Laban to take back his gods (Gen. 31:32). Often the believer lacks the energy to banish these occasions of stumbling from his family, and each one of us must be earnestly mindful of this even though, like Jacob et David, we may not personally attribute to them any influence over our life. The image had evidently been introduced into David's household by Michal, Saul's daughter, who was thus a snare to the man of God.

Michal avoids her father's wrath by acting before him as though she were one of David's enemies, constrained by his threats to allow him to escape: “He said to me, Let me go; why should I kill thee?” (v. 17). How different her heart is from Jonathan's who openly, at his own risk and peril, took up the defense of the one whom he tenderly loved.

How affecting is the mention of Rachel's theft! "And Rachel stole the teraphim that were her father's." It lets us into the secret root of Laban's iniquity. The fear of God was not there. Personal and family idolatry is disclosed which so often accompanied the profession of the true God. But what can be more offensive to God than to make him a senior or a sleeping partner in a partnership of the gods? Think too of Rachel's stealing at all from her father's goods! It is a queer note of the good Non-conformist, Matthew Henry, that "we are willing to hope (with Bishop Patrick) that she did not take them away as being covetous of the rich metal they were made of, much less for her own use, or out of any superstitious fears lest Laban, by consulting his teraphim, might know which way they were gone. Jacob, no doubt dwelt with his wives as a man of knowledge, and they were better than so; but she might design hereby to convince her father of the folly of his regard to those as gods, who could not secure themselves, Isa. 46:1-2." This is all amiable but unwise. For we may gather the true reason from Israel, just after the solemnities of Sinai, bowing down to the golden calf "they made, which Aaron made," and from Israel's history down to the captivity in Babylon. We are bound to believe the profane and evil infatuation of man's heart instead of imagining other things. Jacob was deceived at the time; but Gen. 35:2 proves that his house was not right with God in this respect, and that later he too became aware of it.

The state of both comes out so plainly that no words can give any help when speaking of them. Here all is set in the light; and Laban brings on himself the proofs of his selfishness and dishonesty. Jacob was under no bond to stay. Laban and his sons gave ample signs how distasteful to them were his growth and their decay. He wanted a word from God Who gave it to him. His wives were of one mind with his own. He therefore seized the first opportunity, which Laban's shearing furnished, to be gone. Now that Laban with all the clan overtook Jacob on mount Gilead, what righteous objection could be urged? Undoubtedly the warning God gave Laban alarmed his guilty conscience, though no true fear of God was there, no sense of his injustice, even if Jacob had been no more than a faithful servant. Still on both sides, what a contrast with the day when Rebekah left the same roof-tree, it seems not with mirth and songs, nor with tambour and harp, but with love and honour and the fear of God and the assurance of His blessing, which had much fled from that homestead. If he dreaded spoliation or violence, he complained of his stolen gods. These he prized next to his gains, with no shame for his avowal of heathenism; for where this is, Satan has already brought in darkness and death.

Man needs that which is greater than himself, a power outside the world, a being who can speak to him and assure his heart and conscience, and any religion without such assurance is worth nothing as a reality. The ancient Egyptian wanted to hear a voice, or at least to receive direction from the unseen World, and in order to obtain this communication, idols became a necessity to him. Whether it be the intellectual and cultivated, or the ignorant and savage pagan, idols or fetishes are to him indispensable. It is through them that communications are held with the unseen, and that magic and sorcery are performed. If the people be too rude to construct an image, stocks and stones are resorted to for the purpose.

The god was supposed to attend and to eat the sacrificial feast provided for him, and in the person of his representative — that is, the idol — was clothed and perfumed. In Chaldea, where, unlike the refinement of Egypt, a ruggedness prevailed, gods flew like hungry flies to the savour of the sacrifice. The idol instructed the client. If the answer was a negative, it remained stiff as the stone out of which it was hewn; if an affirmative, it nodded its head. "I augment to thee millions of thy years upon earth all in the account," said Sefekh, the goddess, to Rameses II. The sayings of the gods are inscribed upon the walls of countless temples. We can easily understand who ate the sacrificial food, and who uttered the sacred words, for the priests served both gods and worshippers, and thus served themselves; but how the image nodded its head is as mysterious as are similar acts when performed in Christendom by images of the Madonna. Through the touch of the idol, and by the passes of its hand, the god infused life into his adorers. * The idol was the link between the seen and the unseen, and no less than a material agent, a tangible medium by which man held communication with the invisible.

The ideas conveyed through the forms and attitudes of gods are full of significance. Through the material form, spiritual teaching is conveyed, respecting principles connected with life, supreme power, and judgment, these being attributes or qualities of the Eternal. Egypt was devoted to idols, and, as we have it from his own words, the Egyptian from his birth onwards, hour by hour, day by day until his death, and then on and on in the underworld, was ever under the control of the deities his idols represented. They never left him. Private houses had their shrines, before which the lamp was kept burning; the small chapels gave homage to the lesser deities, and the greater temples were devoted to the great gods; while all of them, whether what we should designate local "saints," or mighty deities, "accepted sacrifices, answered prayers, and, if needful, prophesied." The enormous business connected with this religion gave occupation to tens of thousands of vestment makers, image and shrine constructors, and priests innumerable.

But in "public," as is known, each nation had its own god; even the cities of the same nation did not give pre-eminence to the same divinity; and as to the "private affairs" all the respectable families had each their own lares et penates. What is the meaning of invoking the Divinity, when the rites observed were a sort of entreaty that the god would not maliciously interfere with them rather than seeking his aid? And why the Divinity, as if there was but one object before the idolatrous world? The same writer (Rollin; see Anc. Hist. Pre.) speaks of the treatment those received who depraved by false philosophy rose up against this "doctrine." Were there any ever found who spoke against the "Divinity" as the One Supreme? There were some who despised the folly of idol-worship, and were called atheists by the idol-mongers. Was it false philosophy to speak against the abominations which could only shock the feelings of a moral pagan (if such could be found), and would lead the intellectual away from the senseless worship? But to speak of idolatry as adoration of the "Divinity" is a hiding of the sin of "many gods" if not an apology for it.

DIVINATION, qesem, 'prediction.' A remarkable passage in Ezek. 21:21-22 gives some instances of how the heathen divined. The king of Babylon had come to two roads, and wanting to know whether he should take the road to Rabbath or to Jerusalem, resorted to divination. First 'he shook his arrows' (as it should be translated). Doubtless two or more arrows were marked each with the name of one of the cities, and shaken in the quiver, whichever arrow was taken by the right hand decided which road was to be taken. Jerusalem fell to the right hand. Perhaps the king was doubtful, so he consulted with images, teraphim; it is not known how these were used for divination: cf. Zech. 10:2. The king still sought another guide: 'he looked in the liver.' By certain set rules the intestines of a sacrifice were said to be propitious or the reverse. The king using three sets of prognostications shows that he had no great confidence in his divinations: he may have been often deceived by them previously. How different from an answer from God vouchsafed to Israel!

Other means of divination are named, as, 'divining by the cup.' Gen. 44:5, 15. This was practised by the Egyptians and Persians and is thus described: small pieces of metal and stones, marked with signs were thrown into the cup, and answers gathered from the marks as they fell. Sometimes the cup was filled with water, and, as the sun fell upon the water, images were seen or fancied on its surface. Another reference is "My people ask counsel at their stocks and their staff declareth unto them." Hosea 4:12. The Arabs used two rods, on one of which was written God bids, and on the other God forbids, these were shaken together, and the first that fell, or was drawn, was taken for the answer; or one rod was thrown up and the direction in which it pointed when it fell was answer. It will be seen here that a 'stock' or god was invoked that what the staff declared should be controlled by him. So in all divination, incantations were used, and the gods invoked to let the replies given be the most favourable. Behind all this we know there were demons who controlled the results given, so as to work out the purposes of Satan.