Was Jesus Good?, Part 4

Jesus said we should agree with our adversaries quickly so that we may avoid being thrown in prison. How would this play out in real life? Two adversaries meet, both harboring deep resentment and grievances which demand immediate resolution. Before a prudent judgement is handed down, or even a charge put forth, both parties take Jesus's advice and simultaneously agree with each other. Which is to say, they still disagree. Person 1: "You are right, I was wrong." Person 2: "No, no. It is I who made the mistake. YOU are right." Following Jesus's advice, each party would then agree/disagree for the second time. And so this ridiculous scenario would replay for all eternity. Surely, Jesus was not advocating infinite capitulations.

We're forced to side-step away from literalism if we hope to find the "true meaning" of Jesus's words. Its unfortunate that they cannot hold more power on their own. Unfortunate, yes, but this literal weakness is also potentially dangerous. Charming and guileful individuals have hoisted upon themselves the ready-made authority of the Bible and twisted its meaning to steal wealth and power from the everyman. Thieves should be denied such easy pickings. There is no better way to accomplish this than pointing out the inherent weaknesses and evils found in the Bible. Authority must always be rational and in some measure democratic. The Bible is neither. All people deserve better spiritual and moral guidance than that found in the wishy washy words of the "holy" scriptures.

As I was saying, we are now forced to search for the REAL meaning and purpose behind Jesus's words. That's ok-its obvious, right? Hmmm..."agree with an adversary so that we won't be thrown in prison..." We have to assume that our adversary is either justified or capable of throwing us in prison. Evidently, Jesus is not giving advice to the those who hold the power. He is speaking to the powerless. Likely he is speaking to the same people he has been concerned with all along: the meek, the poor, and the long-suffering. His advice? Submit to the rich and powerful. Don't risk going to prison.

It would be understandable if one thought that Jesus was an advocate of the poor. One might assume that our Savior encouraged the downtrodden to stand up for their rights. Well, one would be wrong, at least in this case. It seems evident that Jesus actively promoted the status quo, as far as class structure is concerned. Be content, be submissive, he said, our reward is in heaven. I'm sure it wasn't just the poor who got this message. Intelligent rulers throughout history have, time and time again, used the popularity of Jesus's message to increase their own fortunes.

Next up, do not look lustfully at women; this is adultery.

We could discuss whether or not looking lustfully at women is in fact adultery or even worthy of close comparison. The claim is certainly outrageous. But let's not take the easy road. Instead, let's ask if some evil is avoided when lust is denied possession of our minds and bodies. The traditional arguments say that lust sickens the mind, erodes relationships, and in some cases leads to sexual violence.

I don't think one could successfully argue against these charges given the most extreme cases. Is there any doubt that people can become addicted to pornography and sex? Who can say that relationships and families are not routinely broken up by individuals caught up in lustful pursuits? I wouldn't be surprised if there were a correlation between those who commit sexual offenses and graphic pornography-particularly pornography of a brutal nature (though its a simple fact that the viewing of typical pornographic images does not necessarily lead to violence).

But does this mean that lust itself is inherently bad? Many things are addictive. Most things that are naturally appealing to us can be used and abused. Is sugar bad? It may seem ludicrous to compare lust to sugar, but think of the harm obesity causes to bodies AND relationships. What is sugar? Its a simple chemical compound that happens to be something we need to survive. That's why we crave it. We wouldn't exist without it. Could our species survive without lust and sexual attraction? No (though I'm sure a science fiction writer or two has imagined alien/AI societies that procreate due to the pure logical necessity of it instead of relying on responses to animal instinct).

The difficult thing is determining when desires stop being natural and necessary and start being unhealthy and potentially harmful. Hypothetically speaking, one may think that the healthiest state of mind I could possess is one that dwells on God and his Word every second of every day. The fact that I spend the vast majority of my time "obsessed" with other things-like biking, eating, drinking, entertainment, and sex-could be reason for someone somewhere to declare that I have an unhealthy frame of mind.

If looking at a woman lustfully is unhealthy or harmful because it in some way erodes my close relationships or because it takes my mind off more productive things, then when can I be sure I've purged myself of such evil? What if I am distracted by the simple beauty of a woman? What if I pause to enjoy a sunset? Couldn't there be something more healthy I could turn my attention to? Do I need to become a monk to be mentally healthy and morally pure (early Christians came to this conclusion, with many sects adopting complete celibacy). This argument may represent a "slippery slope", but attraction really does occupy such a gradual and near infinite spectrum. Even if we agree to define lust exclusively as desire for sex, we still have work to do in determining which sensations qualify. Wants and needs can be subtle. Desire for sex can be instigated by a look, a conversation, an aroma. Moreover, certain events are inseparable predecessors to lustful feelings. How, pray tell, does one escape the harm, the hell, of lust?

We need to return to Earth. Let's not pretend that questions of health and harm are so arbitrary-they're not. There's a near infinite combination of thoughts, feelings, and experiences that could be psychoanalyzed or scrutinized. We could try to judge which is a little more healthy and which is slightly less so. We could worry ourselves about our every action, our every feeling. But its not our business to do so in the vast majority of cases. We value free will and freedom of consciousness. Its only when someone clearly manifests harmful behavior that friends, family, and society may choose to step in and offer help. There's a hundred degrees of worse to better that we have come to accept and ignore. Despite all their disagreements, conservatives and liberals usually have no problems drawing firm lines on questions of good and bad, right and wrong. Usually those lines fall near each other. When they don't, we usually have Jesus and the Bible to blame.

This conclusion does not necessarily lead us to: lust=adultery. Why would Jesus make such a comparison? Speaking for Jesus, we could say that lusting after another woman or man is mental cheating. But can cheating really be cheating if nothing physical transpires? I'd guess that many of us would answer "yes". Your desire for some person other than the one you're committed to could become so consuming that the emotional bonds of your relationship are essentially severed. Even simple, momentary lusting can be, in a sense, expending passion on someone other than your significant other, even if no touching occurs. So yes, lust can be conceptualized as a form of adultery, as silly as it seems. In reality, do we expect relationships to end every time an eye is distracted by a sexy stranger. No. One could even argue that titillating experiences of any kind are positive for a couple. Those sexual desires lead to healthy sexual activity (with each other ;)).

My objections with Jesus's conception of lust are; for one, its demands are completely unnatural and arguably impossible. Seriously, why doesn't he ask us to abstain from breathing. Or try not drinking water when we're thirsty. Its ridiculous, really, condemning lust. And its unhealthy. Guilt, frustrations, sexual disfunction, depression...all can result from suppressing one's natural desires. Some might say that lust will find a way of manifesting itself one way or another. Given enough time, suppressed lust could possibly transform into unhealthy fascinations or strange fetishes.

Sexual attraction is not something we naturally control. Yes, we control our behavior, and we can control our thoughts, but it becomes more and more difficult to rebel against our nature as we progress from behaviors to thoughts to desires. Jesus is asking us to reach deep into ourselves and control something that our genes have hardwired into us for very good reasons.

I take a liberal approach to the questions of morality. If something's not obviously harmful, its permissible. If looking lustfully at a woman immediately caused a relationship to implode; or instantly made a person so obsessed that he quit his job or raped someone, then we could say Jesus had his head on straight. As things stand, I find Jesus's words once again devoid of moral wisdom.

Do not allow a single part of your body to do evil. It is best to remove that part before it does evil.

In other words, doing evil is very very bad. Why? Because at some point, the penalty for doing evil is worse than cutting off your arm or plucking out your eye. Either God doesn't like what you've done and eventually tortures you in hell, or Satan likes it...and tortures you in hell, OR the evil you've done eventually produces harm that is greater than that done to your body when you remove important parts of it.

Its that last part that could make Jesus's advice good outside the context of superstitious belief. But even that doesn't hold up to easy scrutiny. People sometimes get away with it, whatever evil "it" is. And we must ask, what is worthy of being called evil? Squishing a bug? Littering? Eating pig?

Are all evil acts equally evil, or aren't some lesser evils and some greater evils? Are all evils worthy of the same painful dismembering? Would I poke out my own eye if I thought I might look lustfully at a Maxim cover in line at Texaco (never happens)? Should I cut off my middle finger before I flip a bad driver the bird?

I'm not saying the Bible doesn't answer the question "What is evil"? Maybe it does...for itself. I just have a hard time accepting that all sinful acts are so horrible, and equally so.

Jesus's admonishment says something about evil: its very very bad. But it also says something about our bodies: they're relatively unimportant in the scheme of things. I could agree if I believed in the Christian "scheme of things". But I don't. So its difficult to find any value in Jesus's words outside that context. We could say more about how "cruel and unusual" this declaration is; but having agreed with Jesus if we accept his belief, and found things nonsensical if we do not accept his belief, there's little reason to go on.

Just a quick thought before wrapping up this topic: I wonder if these words from the Bible justified in any way the use of extreme forms of punishment and torture that were used throughout the ages. If the flesh is temporary and unimportant in the scheme of things, any measure of pain that can be inflicted upon it is acceptable. The forms of torture and execution devised by pious men throughout history are, based on humanist values, unimaginable evils.

Do not think or worry about your survival. God will provide. Seek the kingdom first.

I think this idea has been tested before. Turns out, God will not literally bring you food and water or provide you shelter. Some say he provides in round-about ways, usually through the good graces other people (who are individuals granted with freewill by God, by the way, so don't ask me how that works). I don't recommend trying to prove me wrong here. Just a note: You can only survive a few days without water, and a few weeks without food. Plus, its pretty cold out there this time of year.

Since the literal translation turns out to be untrue, once again we're forced to devise the "real" meaning of Jesus' words on our own. I have heard that Jesus believed that the Kingdom of God was due to arrive at any moment, and because of that uncertainty and urgency he was telling everyone to make preparing for the kingdom their top priority. This would give meaning to his words. What can we conclude when we observe that the Kingdom has yet to be established..?

But Jesus was also advocating a way of life in the mean time. He said that the reason wild animals survive is because God provides for them. Why can't we live with such faith and connection to God? Christians have always glorified this form of faith-the kind of faith that is akin to hoping to win the lottery. When times are bad, God will come to the rescue. While this kind of faith undoubtedly eases the worry of individuals in difficult circumstances, it discourages self reliance and problem solving.

If my understanding is correct, Jesus attracted followers who probably already lived much like wild animals. Many were homeless, poverty stricken families, handicapped, and diseased. In short, the downtrodden. His message appealed to them because it made them feel important. All of a sudden, their misery became the thing that made them special. Moreover, it made them divinely chosen to possess the kingdom of heaven. Earthly kings could only wish to be them.

(Look for the next installment in "Was Jesus Good" sometime in the next three or four months, given my current rate.. Here's what we get to belittle next. Seriously though, I'm still holding out for some real wisdom. Don't let me down, Jesus!)

• Don't judge, unless you're willing to be judged accordingly.
• Deal with your own problems before pointing out others.
• Do not let the holy to be desecrated by the unworthy.
• Stay on the straight and narrow path to salvation.
• Do not say idle words.
• Do unto others as you'd have them do to you.
• Do not say in secret what you don't want heard in public.
• Fear God.
• Sell your worldly items, give alms, and seek the Kingdom of Heaven.
• Always be ready for the coming of the Son of Man. Don't be slothful.
• Repent!
• Don't be self righteous or arrogant. Don't exalt yourself.
• Don't love status.
• If you commit yourself to a mission, to Jesus, leave all family matters behind.
• Be as humble as a child.
• Do not offend a "little one". You'd be better off dead.
• Do worship instead of accomplishing chores...
• Don't sell things in holy places.
• Pay taxes (if the money is that of the government/ruler).