“She Who Has The Gold Makes The Rules”… no, wait, that wasn’t it

 Blog Against TheocracyThis weekend is Blog Against Theocracy weekend (I didn’t know either).

I guess what gets to me about the increasing use of Christian Rhetoric and the like in our politicians is the way that the words are twisted out of their actual meaning and into something else. The Bible was written in an entirely different time and place, and it pains me to hear those words so commonly abused.

I am not a Christian, but I have studied the Bible. I think studying it is important, and gives us the lessons and words in context. We can’t pretend the Bible hasn’t affected our world. I think teaching the Bible and the messages in it with proper historical and socio-economic background would eliminate so many of the problems with the current theocracy bent in the US and elsewhere.

I wrote this some time ago for livejournal, but I don’t think it becomes any less meaningful over time.

I just want to get this out of the way because man it’s come up a lot lately.

YO EVERYONE! If you’re going to quote something in the Bible, can you please try and remember it’s socio-political background and take that into account when attempting to sort out its meaning?

Thus, the statement “Turn the other cheek” does not mean “walk away from a problem”. Not in the context in which Jesus said it, not in that place, in that time. It doesn’t mean “Let them hit you again until they stop”, either, which is what used to be told to some women who complained about domestic violence to some pastors and some priests.

The quote:

Matthew 5:38-48

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.”

If someone has struck you on the right cheek, chances are they’ve used the left hand to do so. In the culture Jesus was raised in, in the culture he was preaching to, hitting someone with the left hand was the height of… rudeness, arrogance, indicating that someone was so incredibly beneath you that you could hit them with the same hand you used to wipe yourself with after going to the bathroom. It was the hand you used for unclean tasks because the hand was unclean.

What that quote means, in context, is if someone has treated you with such disrespect that they see you as unclean, tell them to hit you again with the right hand - to touch you as though you weren’t unclean, to treat you as though you weren’t seen that way.

The other possibility, of course, is that they’ve backhanded you. As this website says: Backhanding does not happen in a fair face-off. Backhanding is an insult, punishment, or just plain abuse. Back then it represented a clear situation of oppression or dominance.

Offer the other cheek. You are not fighting back, but neither are you meekly taking it. You are asking for more. You may get it or you may not, but either way you’ve made a point or two. You are not exactly what they think you are, and you know it; you are a person, and deserve more equal treatment and respect as a person; you are aware of the truth behind the fraud. You are amplifying awareness of, and insulting,their bullying behaviour and the system that allows it.

The follow up quote, about the tunic and the cloak? If you owed someone money, they would take your tunic at night, every night until you paid the money, leaving you just your cloak to wear. (Consider that - I owe the bank money through my credit card right now. If they could show up every night until I paid off my balance and take my shirt but leave me my coat?) This was, again, Jesus telling people to stand up and point out the unfairness of what was going on.

The last part there, the walking a second mile: Romans could require any subject of the Empire to carry a soldier’s pack for a mile. This was saying something different than the other two… It was saying make yourself noticed, because anyone who would willingly agree to walk a second mile with the soldier would, one would hope, be noticed by the soldier - and the soldier would want to find out why, would want to talk, would then learn about this pack-animal that he’d chosen at random.

These things taken out of context lose all their meaning and can be twisted around. Jesus was not a non-violent person - one can see that in the Scriptures. A man who violently throws people out a temple isn’t non-violent. But he also didn’t go around insisting that everyone had to grab the nearest weapon and beat everyone into submission. What Jesus is saying here is simple:

Treat others with respect. Require others treat you with respect.

Or, the more familiar - “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

It makes me so sad how often that message is lost in the background.

[A similar point was made during Blog Against Sexual Violence Day here, about not using the Bible to justify victims of abuse suffering in silence. I highly encourage you to read it as well.]

5 Responses to ““She Who Has The Gold Makes The Rules”… no, wait, that wasn’t it”

  1. Blue Gal Says:

    Adding you to the Blue Gal blogroll and letting a few people know about your blog. Very well written, though you are too smart for most so-called Christians. That makes you one of us. Welcome to the party.

  2. belledame222 Says:

    Thanks for that.

    You know…what that -really- highlights, also, is that Jesus is very explicitly talking about -political resistance- to abusive authority. Not, just passively let any happy asshole out there take advantage of you, because it’d be Meen to fight back. it’s -tactical-; it’s nonviolent -resistance-.

  3. belledame222 Says:

    …which is what finally makes that “throw the money-changers out of the Temple” business make sense in that context. It’d be like the equivalent of, I don’t know, overturning the podium at a Pat Robertson fundraising fest; or kicking the ass of a slumlord and bringing in squatters to stay in -his- place, or something.

  4. Lynda Says:

    Excellent post and I learned something new. Also, having grown up in “hellfire and brimstone” churches and then subsequently running away as fast as I could, I’ve never once thought of Jesus as someone who would stand up for himself. In many ways, I think God and Jesus — although preached as one along with the Holy Ghost — were pitted as good cop and bad cop. God knew what you were doing at all times… even where your hands went while you slept… while Jesus was too busy dying for you to care much about possible snooze time masterbation.

    Thanks for the new insights I now need to go and ponder.

  5. Rebecca Says:

    I know I’m totally late with tihs, but - wow. Incredibly interesting. That Jesus was a cool fellow.

Leave a Reply