Here is the whole immediate context in Matthew: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you," (Matthew 5:43-44, NRSV) - words that may be familiar? They come from the collection of Jesus’ teaching (see further below).
Notice the “But I say”. Jesus on his own say-so. His way of laying down the (narrow) path to life was different! [So, we read elsewhere an independent assessment of the impression Jesus made: “No one ever spoke the way this man does,” the guards replied (John 7:46, NIV). Even though the leaders were unimpressed, Jesus impacted people who had no reason to be his partisans.] If you look at the other paragraphs in Matthew’s collection you will see that "I say" was Jesus’ consistent stance in his public utterance*. Like today, people were used to preachers citing of experts, not used to preachers taking personal responsibility!
Luke also reports the “love your enemy” instruction. It must have caused people to pause.
Clearly Jesus contradicts and replaces something. What was it he overturned? Matthew tells us what it was they heard, the apparently commonplace of hating enemies. The Jews had plenty of enemies! Hate them - that is what they heard? But - how actually had they “heard”? Just where did it come from? A puzzle - only Matthew reports this and he gives no further information. Luke also has similar love direction from Jesus but Luke does not refer to what people usually heard.
Research the Old Testament (OT) - it contains no such love/hate statement(s). Perhaps enemy-hating could be a kind of extrapolation by interpretation from one line that is found in the OT: You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever. (Deut 23:6, ESV). That order is about a particular grouping and based on a particular circumstance, part of the (troublesome) bloody Israelite conquest and occupation of Canaan (which can be read there). How the instruction could nonetheless be generalised and propagated involves speculation. I wonder if some other "sacred writing" was available then, which included the "hate enemy" bit....
Think over more of the passage from Matthew:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:43-48, NIV).
This forms part of Jesus’ “Sermon on the Mount”. It appears from Matthew people were familiar with the message that their neighbour was to be loved but not their enemy, who was instead to be hated. It reminds me now of the war-time propaganda which portrays the “enemy” as less-human, and even beastly. How the ancient Jews “heard” would probably, or possibly, be from school (men and boys), and from synagogue. Jesus, on the contrary, was in effect vanishing “enemy” into “neighbour”.
There is a specific OT passage (from Torah) which bears on the positive and may be its basis. You shall not go around as a slanderer[a] among your people, and you shall not profit by the blood[b] of your neighbor: I am the Lord. You shall not hate in your heart anyone of your kin; you shall reprove your neighbor, or you will incur guilt yourself. You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Lev 19: 16-18, NRSV). Love of neighbour is very clearly required in the text.
The “neighbour” occurs infrequently in the Gospel account. We do find (Luke 10:29, alone) a questioner asking for that “neighbour” to be defined! His question may not be so unreasonable when we consider that the same word is sometimes used “differently” in the OT. The obvious meaning of "the nearby" is there. So, when the imminently escaping Israelites were bidden to plunder the accessible Egyptians, the same word: Now announce to the people that both men and women should ask their neighbors for silver and gold items” (Exodus 11:2, CSV). Being neighbourly there was expensive! (How did the incident differ from a mass elicitation of bribes?)
Honest inquiry from the man or not, Jesus’ answer to the "neighbour?" question probably did not make things seem easier! That answer was a story, best known as “The Good Samaritan”. In this story (see below) the two racially acceptable and religiously credentialed males failed miserably to be neighbourly. The despised foreigner lived out that message of the Law, without restricting the neighbour on some basis of religion, gender, race or prosperity: You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD (Leviticus 19:18, ESV). Maybe the first two felt compassion and might have acted for one of "their own"; the last one acted mercy. That last one had no racial, residential or religious affinity with the hapless victim. (I assume here I should read the robbed traveller as an Israelite, otherwise the contrast would be missing.)
How could people then have been “hearing” that blunt “hate enemy” message Jesus overturned? They heard it, but it was not what their Bible (OT) said. I understand the practices of Judaism involved extended oral tradition. In Jesus’ day, school memorisation of large amounts of OT interpretation was required of boys. Sermons in synagogues might perhaps interpret passages on the divisive line Jesus rejects. That dissemination of hate could take place in a similar way to the incitement to hatred we hear about today, as media/fiction describe coming from some “pulpits” (evidence?). Today, we fortunately have no need to be at the mercy of demagogues, nor of clever experts, nor of authorised individuals, nor of social media commentators!
I assume Jesus, like all his contemporaries, would have received an education; he certainly was a synagogue attender. Schooling involved reading of the Scriptures (OT). In Hebrew? Aramaic or Greek are possible. Studies included the (unwritten) oral traditions based on the OT, known as mishnah and midrash. I doubt it is possible to know exactly what students were required to memorise, nor what was said in the synagogues (commentary used in the synagogue was called drashah). Contemporary evidence is naturally sparse.
"Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Luke 6:27, ESV) may even have sounded familiar to the thoughtful hearer of: the Exodus ordinance (which is connected to the “Ten Commandments”).
Don’t spread harmful rumors or help a criminal by giving false evidence.
Always tell the truth in court, even if everyone else is[a] dishonest and stands in the way of justice. And don’t favor the poor, simply because they are poor.If you find an ox or a donkey that has wandered off, take it back where it belongs, even if the owner is your enemy.
If a donkey is overloaded and falls down, you must do what you can to help, even if it belongs to someone who doesn’t like you.[b]
Make sure that the poor are given equal justice in court. Don’t bring false charges against anyone or sentence an innocent person to death. I won’t forgive you if you do.
Don’t accept bribes. Judges are blinded and justice is twisted by bribes.
Don’t mistreat foreigners. You were foreigners in Egypt, and you know what it is like (Ex 23:1-9, CEV).
Those ancient (Mosaic) Exodus provisions reflect that agrarian society and age (rural, compact and relatively uncomplicated - "donkey; ox"). It was a culture consciously submitted to the Law of God (not simply to generally accepted standards). The principles nevertheless are clear. Note: "enemy"; "hate you"; "foreigners". Those OT principles were re-stated by Jesus (see above) in terms we can readily extrapolate and must apply to our day and to every place and time. He added the grounds of observance - of God's own generosity.
"Love"? A topic for another day.
The (Fake?) Test Question with the Unwelcome Answer
Then an expert in the law stood up to test him, saying, “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“What is written in the law?” he asked him. “How do you read it?”
He answered, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,” and “your neighbor as yourself.”[a]
“You’ve answered correctly,” he told him. “Do this and you will live.”
But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”
Jesus took up the question and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him, beat him up, and fled, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down that road. When he saw him, he passed by on the other side. In the same way, a Levite, when he arrived at the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan on his journey came up to him, and when he saw the man, he had compassion. He went over to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on olive oil and wine. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day[b] he took out two denarii,[c] gave them to the innkeeper, and said, ‘Take care of him. When I come back I’ll reimburse you for whatever extra you spend.’
“Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?”
“The one who showed mercy to him,” he said.
Then Jesus told him, “Go and do the same.” (Luke 10:25-37, CSV)
Jesus said: "Do Good"
"Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Luke 6:27, ESV)
BUT,
unless, as in the "Good Samaritan" story, the potential enemy was badly
injured (or unconscious), that might be a tall order? How could there
be an opportunity/opportunities to do good to those who hate me?
In
the Samaritan traveller story, did the helper and the helped become
future "good friends"? It would be unlikely, even if I hope so! But it
is not necessarily understood to be so, and Jesus' point stands, even if
the recovered victim never spoke to, or even of, his rescuer. Even if
the recovered victim maintained the rage against all of "that ilk".
Looking back at Matthew we get at least one "love enemy" implementation clue:
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you (Matthew 5:44, NIV)
This other form of the concept, which was not necessarily said at the same moment, provides an answer.
My enemy's enmity may be self-generated and intractable to me. Overtures of neighbourliness may be rejected?
Prayer
remains and can not be rejected - prayer, not to be talked about, but to do. Not necessarily to be heard or recognised. It
is loving to pray for the enemy. God may turn them into a "friend", or,
sadly, not. They are, nevertheless, a neighbour.
(Of course these days for many of us "friend" has another emphasis. The "friend/un-friend" concept is different.)
Jesus did use the word "friend". For example, this to his followers:
You are my friends if you do what I command you (John 15:14, NRSV).
Neighbours
may be friends; neighbours may be enemies. You or I may not be able to
change the enemy into a friend, but God might. Like you, the enemy has a
will to exercise, at least whilst conscious.
Jesus
was criticised for having undesirables as "friends". I think they meant
he accepts/ed people as people and did/does not exclude from contact.
Jesus had no fear of contamination. We find him saying:
John the Baptist did not go around eating and drinking, and you said, “John has a demon in him!” But
because the Son of Man goes around eating and drinking, you say, “Jesus
eats and drinks too much! He is even a friend of tax collectors and
sinners.” Yet Wisdom is shown to be right by what its followers do (Luke 7:33-35, CEV).
To him, no one is untouchable. So he chose. So he lived. To that he calls his followers.
[Addendums:
1. WAR. What Jesus laid down is permanent; human institutions are passing. Our culture is more comparable to that of Jesus' day than to the OT, in that the power of that NT (Roman) state did not unquestioningly apply the Law of God, nor even for itself recognise that Law. How does the word of Jesus apply in a time of warfare? What of "the enemy"? Individuals have to make their own judgement, and their decisions may place them in conflict with their national authority. People who place themselves contrary to the authorities have consequences to face. People who pursue the role of enemy have consequences to face. However, I see no room for "my country, right or wrong". It is interesting that almost all Bible references to "enemy" are to "the enemy". Quite different concepts, surely?
2. ANTI-OTHERISM, such as the odium applied to "The Jew" and the hate-fuelled actions that go with it. It is surely tragic that the people of then Israel, or of the Hebrew religion, the individuals or near successors of those who heard Jesus and his teaching (above), were to be deliberately destroyed and dispersed by the Romans. Moreover, in humanity's bloody history there seems to be a constant theme of anti-Jewishness (ie, anti-Semitism). That hatred and envy pre-dates the first century and seems to long have been part of the contemporary culture. I compare to our more recent anti-immigrant agitation. I think such enmity is more marked where "incomers" retain a cultural identity from elsewhere. Various "excuses" were, or are offered, if questions are asked. There is no excuse for murder, nor racial hatred, nor enslavement, nor aggression.
How can these things be explained? How is rape to be explained? How is assault to be explained? How is theft to be explained? How is injustice to be explained? How is oppression to be explained? The same critical questions apply to whatever entity is the source of the offences.
I see aggression is a recurring element in human affairs. Particularly male instigated aggression. Sad.
It seems to me - personal opinion - that this present era is fortunate to have the United Nations in operation. Why not pray that efforts to end conflict will be successful and that justice will grow.]
More examples of Jesus' "I say" in Matthew chapter 5:
21 “You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister,[e] you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult[f] a brother or sister,[g] you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell[h] of fire (NRSV).
27 You know the commandment which says, “Be faithful in marriage.” 28 But I tell you that if you look at another woman and want her, you are already unfaithful in your thoughts (CEV).
31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery (ESV).
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to our ancestors,You must not break your oath, but you must keep your oaths to the Lord.[m] 34 But I tell you, don’t take an oath at all: either by heaven, because it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, because it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King (CSB).
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also (NIV).
27 You know the commandment which says, “Be faithful in marriage.” 28 But I tell you that if you look at another woman and want her, you are already unfaithful in your thoughts (CEV).
31 “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery (ESV).
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to our ancestors,You must not break your oath, but you must keep your oaths to the Lord.[m] 34 But I tell you, don’t take an oath at all: either by heaven, because it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, because it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King (CSB).
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also (NIV).
(Did Jesus then throw out the old Law? He said not... See Matthew 5:17-20. Jesus did throw over human traditions.)
PS: I pray the USA can have a lot of success in turning enemies into neighbours in 2021.
D.V. Arbel, “Liturgy: Rabbinic,” in Dictionary of NT Background, ed. C.A. Evans & S.E. Porter (Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove IL, 2000) 650-652
D.F. Watson, “Education: Jewish and Greco-Roman,” in Dictionary of NT Background, ed. C.A. Evans & S.E. Porter (Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove IL, 2000) 308-313
Scripture quotations marked (CEV) are from the Contemporary English Version Copyright © 1991, 1992, 1995 by American Bible Society. Used by Permission.
Scripture quotations marked (CSB) are from the Christian Standard Bible.
Copyright © 2017 by Holman Bible Publishers. Used by permission.
Christian Standard Bible®, and CSB® are federally registered trademarks
of Holman Bible Publishers, all rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission.
All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996, 2004, 2007, 2013 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Note: I retain in the publishers' text where they occur the references to footnotes, but usually not the notes. You can check footnotes out by viewing the text on-line. Often they are replicated in different translations.
Bible passages accessed via BibleGateway.com and BlueLetterBible.org
Image: Pixabay
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission.
All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright ©1996, 2004, 2007, 2013 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Note: I retain in the publishers' text where they occur the references to footnotes, but usually not the notes. You can check footnotes out by viewing the text on-line. Often they are replicated in different translations.
Bible passages accessed via BibleGateway.com and BlueLetterBible.org
Image: Pixabay
No comments:
Post a Comment