Judge not, that
you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and
with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look
at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own
eye
That’s a bit of a speck itself. Isn’t the Book of Leviticus
all about judgements? And didn’t our speaker tell us, in Matthew 5:17-20
(KJV):
17 Think not that I am
come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to
fulfill.
18 For verily I say unto
you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass
from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore
shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall
be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach
them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you,
That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes
and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Once again, he’s
throwing us curve balls and low sliders. I think he likes to do that. Some
writers on the subject dwell on the word “fulfill.” Most modern definitions circle
around the word as meaning “ … to carry out, or bring to realization, as a
prophecy or promise. to perform or do, as duty; obey or follow, as commands. to
satisfy (requirements, obligations, etc.) Some writers grant the Galilean some
flexibility in squeezing terms like “completing, finalizing, updating. They are
the same ones who say “an eye for and eye” really doesn’t mean an “eye for an
eye” but is really an extremely humane form of legal compensation.
Whatever.
I like to think
about what the Galilean is actually reported to have said. You can sure get
some different interpretations otherwise. Was he purposefully trying to mess with our
minds? Or was he, as some seem to think, making us learn to hit the hard pitches
if we really want to be “Sluggers for Jesus.”
Maybe, just maybe,
it gets real complicated here, difficult to explain. I think, though, that I’ll
just jump off the diving board at the deep end and hope there is water in the
pool. Jesus appeared, if we are to believe what the Gospels tell us, only 200
years after the stabilization of the so-called “Axial Age,” as discussed by Karen
Armstrong and other writers. That’s a complicated era to discuss. The “school” definition
from The Human Journey runs something like this:
From 900–200 BCE a new
mode of thinking developed almost simultaneously in four distinct areas of the
world. In each area this was a time of change, social unrest, and political
upheaval. People began to question their own beliefs once they came into
contact with others whose beliefs were different. In the face of crisis and
change, they were challenged to look at themselves in different ways and
entertain new ideas or cling steadfastly to their old ones.
A more prosaic
writer described it as an era when “The old paradigm was gone and the new
paradigm hadn’t appeared.” As an urban planner, I like to think of it as the
age in which tribalism waned, people traveled and traded, and it became
necessary for humans to rid themselves of some of the fears and mistrusts that
had protected them on the Savanna. In other words. we had to start getting along better with one another.
So here we have a
Savior, seeking help humankind evolve from the jealous, violent, cruel, tribal,
and morally frivolous god of the Old Testament into a more loving and universal
figurehead. It’s a tough challenge, but one that he was perhaps trying to tackle.
In this month’s
reading, shall we try to contemplate the Sermon on the Mount from this
perspective?
 |
| The Agora. When people started trading, things changed. Even religion. |
No comments:
Post a Comment