In Matthew 5:21-22, Jesus equates hate, insult and name-calling with murder. For a long time, I just accepted the common explanation that Jesus is "reinterpreting" the Law, pushing for a "deeper" understanding of "what God really meant". As I blogged several days ago, however, I am beginning to see that Jesus was reading the Law through the lens of love defined as self-sacrifice. Thus, all commandments must be reexamined through that lens. And so what of "Thou shalt not murder"?
What is murder, exactly? In his compelling analysis of the Cain and Able myth, Volf argues (quite persuasively) that Cain murders Abel because he refuses to redefine himself. Able is the quintessential nothing - he is the second son, he is a shepherd, even his name means something like "vapor". Cain, on the other hand is strong. He is a farmer, the first son, strong and able (hahaha, get it?). For no good reason we can see, God chooses Abel. God. Chooses. Abel. Cain cannot accept this; the very fact of Abel's existence now calls his own understanding of himself into question. And, rather than reevaluate himself, Cain chooses to remove that which caused him existential dissonance. He strikes down his brother, the Other, thereby allowing him to maintain his identity unchanged.
If we allow this story to be paradigmatic for understanding the process of murder (and I know it's not going to be 100%, so let's agree not to get caught up in the details), I think this sheds some interesting light on Jesus' comments. Murder arises from a challenge to the integrity of our Selfs. So too I suggest do hate, insult and labeling. Rarely do we hate something that does not affect us; apathy is a much commoner response to these nonentities. Our hatred arises from that which is a challenge to our Selves. Consider, for example, racism in the States - the races that bore the brunt of race-based hatred (Irish, Italian, African, etc) were always those races whose
proximity to the dominant culture forced those in power to question and to reevaluate their assumptions about what made them human. We have a tendency toward self-preservation and stability; it seems to be human nature to lash out in anger against that which threatens us. Insult and labeling are public means by which we can consign the Other to safe categories that no longer threaten us.
And so I can see why Jesus considers murder, hatred, name-calling and labeling to be related. They are really all symptoms of the same problem: our tendency to objectify and dehumanize that which threatens our Selfs, our identities. Jesus calls us to lay down our Selfs in favor of embracing the Other. If we cannot allow the Other into our Selfs, to challenge and reshape us, then we will never be able to allow God, who is entirely more Other than any human, to enter into us, to shape us and to change us. Perhaps this is what Jesus means when he teaches us a few verses later to pray, "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us," and then follows that with, "If you do not forgive sin here on Earth, neither will your Father forgive your sins in heaven." We are not in a place to accept God's forgiveness, to repent, unless we can learn how to do the same down here. Only the peacemakers are called children of God.
And let's not reduce this to cause-effect. We miss the point if we pull a magic formula, a one-to-one correlation between forgiveness on Earth and forgiveness in Heaven. Rather, we learn to be forgiven, to live as the forgiven, in the kingdom of Heaven that is coming to Earth, even as we learn to forgive sin here on Earth.
"Dead man, is it being high that makes you alive, that makes you leave behind three boys and a wife? ...As the track marks work their way up your arm, my mother taught my brothers and I not to call you 'Daddy', but to call you 'Father'. And I believe there is something here to be learned of Grace, 'cause I can't help but love you."
-- "The Widow", As Cities Burn
Comments (9)
1. Great reading of the Sermon on the Mount.
2. Do you think labels of all kinds are bad? Or are they only bad when used by the dominant culture against or toward the minority culture?
3. Are labels ever useful?
4. What do we do with the labels, especially the pejorative ones, the NT employs?
5. Wonderful analysis of Cain and Abel. I think I'm going to have to read Volf now.
6. Specifically from you comment on reading the law through a lens of love - where do you get this from (specifically in the S on the Mt.? Is he offering a new hermeneutic or revitalizing the original intention of the Torah?
Ok, that's enough for now. I'm pretty sure I know where you're going to go with most of it, but just wanted to spell them out a little more.
Secondly, this is a subject worth digging into. The thing that came to mind for me was how grievous it is that we would allow anger to well up because it is threatening to our Self, when the Self most people adhere to is based on what the World and Culture tells us is valuable. (long sentence, I know) This brings an interesting "global" dynamic to the scripture about not living "of the world". As Christians, we set ourselves (typically) apart from culture. We segregate ourselves into our sanctified caves of morals and righteousness.
But, if we really allowed our Self to be created (reawakened) by the value and hope that God places in us through Christ, we would be unable to sit back and remove ourselves. The things that are in the heart of Christ would become our heart. We would care for the orphans and widows because our Self has been transformed to do so. This could apply to every social, economic, and cultural issue of our time.
Does that make sense?
The question I would ask you, is 'Are you using one issue too much?', because I would want you to be cautious in your reading of the 'other' theology that has so gripped you recently. You give a good accounting, and I completely believe you are earnest in finding more of the Truth with this, and searching for the 'mind of Christ'. However, you seem to be lumping a lot. I think you're right, but be careful. But that is out of love. And you know that.
The second thing I would want to say to you is, 'Last night, in my all night prayer thing, I totally prayed that I would not be a "Jesus Ninja", using the concept of forgiveness and reconciliation to the ends of coal piling, but to leave the piling up to God. How cool is that?' To which you would respond by saying something witty. And we would both laugh. Then I would probably just say something like 'syphilis', for no reasons at all. None reasons.
For some reason, this quote I read a long time ago popped in my head, and it seemed relevant. Odds are that you've heard it:
Theodore de Beze: It belongs to the church of God to receive blows rather than inflict them, but she is an anvil that has worn out many hammers.
Creation Museum pics: gimme.