Eyes, Teeth & Charlie Kirk

Critics of the faith often cite scripture passages to invalidate the idea of a loving God and creator. There are several passages for them to choose from, one of them being, "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise," found in the Hebrew scriptures in the book of Exodus. There's a whole section of verses around that don't mix well in our lives today as 21st-century Canadians. The verses are powerful; you hear them once, and they stick to your heart like napalm.

The impact of those passages is such that they become a quick go-to to justify violence. Without even thinking about it, retaliation makes perfect sense. On one hand, the verse seems barbaric, and on the other hand, the verse fits like a glove if you’re angry with someone.

Those either-or interpretations miss out on context. The Bible was not written for modern, Western-thinking folks like us. The communities that brought scriptures together didn't speak English, and I don't believe they had us and our lifestyles in mind thousands of years into the future. I certainly don't occupy my time contemplating the lives of those who will live in the year 5025. Language has evolved in the four decades of my life; I can’t begin to imagine the evolution of language and culture over three thousand years. This is important to consider when you’re reading texts from the far ancient past.

I am not a Biblical scholar, but consider- hurt is very personal and unique. The best thing we can do with the pain of others is demonstrate empathy, but it's never a direct match. When I've hurt someone, I can do my best to understand what I've done, but I didn't endure the bruise; I delivered it.

"Eye for an Eye, tooth for a tooth," implying an equal pain response. If someone does (X) to you, you are allowed to respond with (X). This equals (=) Justice. A form of inflicted pain algebra.

Is anyone wise enough and possesses enough omniscience to pull that off? If we're honest, the responsible, balanced perspective answer is a definitive no. If someone hurts me, I am unable to respond in a way that this scripture permits me to do, because it will never be enough, and it won't make me feel better. Our perfect sense of justified retaliation is an illusion because we're not perfect.

The very idea of regulating violence and hurt was a brand-new progressive idea in the time those scriptures were written. You didn't just knock someone's singular tooth out; you made room for a whole set of dentures! The people who walked the lands thousands of years ago lived in an entirely different context, but the human heart hasn't evolved that much since then. Those passages in the Hebrew scripture do not high-five our desire for revenge.

I am not advocating for a lawless way of life where there is no response to crime or injustice. An evolved civilization contains and places severe sanctions on violence. Nor do I believe you should immediately concede or surrender your values. I am strongly pleading with those struggling in the aftermath of the Charlie Kirk assassination. There isn't anything you can say or do that will land a satisfying blow to the other side of your arguments. The hurt, fear, and anger you are feeling cannot find resolution in retaliation. The math doesn’t work.

Reprisals are predictable and expected. Most of us understand that simplistic relational math. The world is well accustomed to this kind of response, but the story does not have to play out in this way.

Pushing pause on the need for vengeance opens the door for hope to do what it does best: be unpredictable. You and I have little control over how others respond, and expect them to do the hard work of living hospitably. We are entitled and empowered to ask more from ourselves. Choosing to live charitably is the hard work that opens the doors to hope.

Thanks for reading friend. I wish you peace.