A narrative has been percolating in my mind for several months now. I have spoken bits and pieces of it in random conversations and in various group settings, but I believe that it’s not going to feel complete unless I write it down. Hopefully, however, through the writing of this I can allow my thoughts to more neatly organize themselves in a way that is neither caustic nor judgmental—rather, I hope to bring to light a fresh view of something that is, well, really not so fresh.
This narrative begins several months ago on a Monday night.
I am a part of a young adult Bible study group that meets Monday nights. On this particular night, we were wrapping up the book of Ezra. I am not going to take the time or space right now for a background on the book (but I encourage you to read it and draw your own conclusions). At the end of the book, beginning in Chapter 9, an interesting theme arises: intermarriage.
The Israelites, led by the leaders and the priests, had entangled themselves with surrounding tribes and had not been faithful to the law that was set by God that strictly called them to not marry or make covenants with a long list of people groups (Exodus 34; Deuteronomy 7, 23). Ezra, being the spiritual leader of the people, was confronted by the leadership of the Israelites about this. They admitted that the people have been making covenants and engaging in the practices with these surrounding tribes.
Ezra was chagrined. The rest of chapter 9 is devoted to a mournful, apologetic prayer to God concerning the terrible transgressions of the people. Surely God was enraged at these practices, especially since He had finally allowed the people to go back to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. He publicly wept and prayed until a crowd gathered around him, also crying out with guilty tears. One man, Shecaniah, stepped up with a seemingly perfect solution: “We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the peoples around us. But in spite of this, there is still hope for Israel. Now let us make a covenant before our God to send away all these women and their children, in accordance with the counsel of my lord and of those who fear the commands of our God. Let it be done according to the Law. Rise up; this matter is in your hands. We will support you, so take courage and do it.”
So they followed through with these plans. They kicked out all non-Jews. Mothers and wives and children were suddenly banished, homeless and destined for poverty. They dealt with the unclean men who were willing to engage in the intermarriage with discipline as well (but not banishment).
As we began to discuss this story that Monday night, the initial consensus was that the right steps toward purity had been taken. God had given them some fairly clear laws and the people had disobeyed. They remedied the situation by amputating the reason for the problem, right? In fact, they had very religious and Godly reasons for ostracizing the group of foreigners and half-breeds (which is what they called them)! God had called them to purity, and they were standing up for truth, for the law, for God. They were standing up for what was right.
In fact, it’s pretty straightforward. If you don’t fit within the confines of the law (and the half-breeds didn’t) then you were religiously ostracized. After all, it’s what God commanded. Sometimes standing up for truth is ugly, right? When people don’t fit within the plan, God’s people have to stand up and do something!
Flash-forward several hundred years.
One of these ostracized half-breed groups, the Samaritans, had long-since settled in the northern part of what is now the West Bank. They were, in fact, descendents of the intermarriage discussed in Ezra: modern day Y-chromosome studies and mitochondrial DNA analysis has shown that they descended from both Israelites (including priestly lines) and mostly Assyrian women.
And they were religiously hated. The full-blooded Israelite populations referred to them in derogatory terms and were not to speak to them. The Samaritans could not worship at the Jewish holy sites (though they considered themselves mostly Jewish). Centuries later, the Jewish community was still standing up for the purity and righteousness God had called them to—and they were good at it.
That’s what it takes to follow God’s law, right? An unwavering commitment to the truth that God had laid out for them—the impure be damned (literally).
It is in this context that a man who had been listening to Jesus preach asks him a question. It should be noted that this is no ordinary man—this is a man who Luke calls an “expert in the law.” This is a man who was very familiar with the story in Ezra–a man whose disgust with the Samaritan people ran deep. This is a religious man who had very religious and even godly reasons for believing what he did. In fact, being an expert, he could probably name the very spots in Deuteronomy in which God forbade marriage and covenants with the Assyrians, the very ancestors of the Samaritan people.
And this expert has one question for Jesus: “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
And Jesus asks, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” It almost seems like he’s asking the man, “You are an expert—but let’s see if you really understand the ideas behind the laws.”
The man answers by quoting parts of the Law from Leviticus and Deuteronomy: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind; and love your neighbor as yourself.”
Jesus responds positively: “Good answer, do that and you’ll live.”
It’s at that point that the man seems to notice his hypocrisy. He looks for a loophole, a way out—it’s almost as if it suddenly dawns on him that he hasn’t been living this way. You can almost imagine him going through the people in his life, gauging whether or not he has loved them, and hoping the people he hasn’t loved weren’t his “neighbors.” He responds with, “And who is my neighbor?”
You can see him trying to justify his way of life. This devoutly religious man, who has undoubtedly spent his life trying to understand and study the law of God, has had religious reason to follow through with his marginalization of others (read: Samaritans). He has been standing up for God’s law, right? He has been standing up for truth, for purity! He is an “expert” on what it means to follow God’s law!
And Jesus responds with one of the most well known stories in the Scriptures.
He begins the now familiar story with a man who is walking on a road and then getting robbed, beaten within inches of his life, and stripped naked. He is left for dead. A priest sees the man and passes by, unwilling to help. In fact, he doesn’t just pass by; he walks to the other side of the road, perhaps so that he didn’t have to be bothered by having the man in his sightline. (I’d imagine that puzzled looks would be exchanged from the people listening to this story—was Jesus calling out a religious leader? Can you imagine the modern day equivalent to a priest? A mega-church pastor, maybe? Or another kind of Christian leader—an evangelist, maybe, or an author?)
Then a Levite does the same thing. A Levite was someone who worked in the temple. Again, people would have been shocked and even angry. Was he just going down the hierarchy of the religious elite, calling them all out as being someone who doesn’t love their neighbor (which, you remember, he said was how someone gains eternal life)?
But then, truly the most shocking aspect of the story is spoken. Let’s be honest, Jesus could have picked anyone to be the hero of his story. He could have picked a Jewish man. He was, after all, talking to an expert in the law. Why not make him the hero of the story? Instead, he does something far more controversial—and I hope you can grasp just how controversial it is, given the preceding two pages of context I have given. In fact, what Jesus says is nothing short of game-changing.
The third man to pass by helps the beaten, bloody man. The third man is the hero. He is the one who exhibits the love that neither church leader was willing to. He is the man who, according to Jesus, is going to inherit eternal life by loving his neighbor. Who is this third man?
A Samaritan. Jesus, speaking to a Jewish expert of the law, picks a Samaritan man to be the hero.
A half-breed. A man who has been ostracized and condemned the church in the name of truth and purity—yet will inherit Eternal Life ahead of the church leaders.
And why? Because he loved his neighbor.
He may not have belonged in the church, but he loved like Jesus calls all of us to.
This story prompts two questions. Primarily—what people groups today do we (as the religious folk) ostracize/marginalize/criticize/hate in the name of truth and purity? Muslims? Gays? Liberals? Evolutionists? Democrats? Postmoderns? Younger generations? Atheists? Would Jesus, if he was telling the story today, pick someone from one of these groups to be the hero? Who have we decided to separate ourselves from for the sake of being godly—only to miss out on the true message of Jesus?
Second—what can we do about it? How can we begin looking less like the church leaders of Jesus time and more like Jesus?
I think the first step is this: we need to begin making these people the heroes of our stories. Like the church leaders, we may have had some very “godly” and religious reasons for marginalizing some people. But like Jesus, we need to stop marginalizing and start interacting. Stop hating those that are different and begin loving them as people who, like the Samaritan, are just as capable of loving God and people.
We need to begin thinking less about who is “out” and who is “in” and more about what we can do to make sure that all people are viewed as “neighbors.”
The truth is that Jesus preached a message of love, not religion. We are all connected as neighbors in humanity.
I hope we can begin tearing down the walls of injustice and intolerance so that people can see Jesus’ love, not the stale religion of exclusion.
Facebook/Twitter Users Beware: The Perils of Social Networking
December 3, 2009 by austintxj77
Social media users (like me) need to proceed with awareness and caution.
I haven’t blogged in a while. It’s not that I haven’t had anything to say. Rather, quite the opposite. I have had quite a bit of things to opine, whine, and wax eloquently about. I simply lacked a whole lot of motivation to write about such things. For one, others often end up putting my thoughts into better words than I can (hence my constant postings of columns by Nicholas Kristof). Also, I was getting somewhat dejected by the amount of argumentative responses I would receive about certain…um, controversial things I would write about.
In fact, we can feel like we know exactly who someone is without ever seeing them physically interact with the people and world around them. We can form opinions about their communication skills without ever hearing them talk. We can make evaluations about what people value without ever seeing them spend time doing something. And all of this is quite dangerous to our overall impressions of the people around us. Because, the truth of the matter is, actions speak louder than words. But what if we never see people’s actions? What if all we have are words?
A person’s words become their identity to a whole population of people that only interact with them online.
And so, Francis (a made-up name) can spend all of his free time volunteering at a homeless shelter. He can donate most of what he has. He can be one of the most selfless people on the planet. However, if Francis spends all of his online “real estate” (i.e. statuses, tweets, etc.) complaining and whining about others, then a perception will (quickly) grow: Francis hates people.
For the first time in history, words speak louder than action.
Another example: my grandfather is one of the most loving people I have ever met. He gives of his time and money more than anyone I have ever witnessed. In fact, virtually everyone that ends up spending any amount of time with him comes to the same conclusion. He is one of the best examples of selfless living that I’ll probably ever encounter. However, he also sends me quite a few email forwards. These forwards typically consist of very politically-charged diatribes against Pres. Obama. Often, these diatribes border on the absurd. They can be hateful and most of them are utterly fictitious. Let me reiterate that these are not things that my grandpa writes, he just forwards them.
However, if someone on his email forward list never spent time with him, they could get a very strong impression that he hates all Democrats or all liberals. Based on his email forwards, such a conclusion is only natural. But I know this is not the case. I know that 96% (roughly) of my grandfather’s thoughts and time are spent looking for ways to help and love people. But one wouldn’t know that by his email forwards. In a world where online presence can often exist in a vacuum, perception is reality.
All that said, I am incredibly thankful for social networking. If you are reading this, then you probably know that Facebook and Twitter are things I use quite often. There are some incredibly good things that can come about as a result of the flattening of the world because of online media. But, like any form of communication, it must be navigated with care and precision.
Posted in Life | Tagged blog, comment, communicate, facebook, Life, network, online, post, status, tweet, twitter, update, word | 2 Comments »