Murder and Judeo-Christian Scripture

I

Cain Murdered His Brother, Abel.

A myth is not a tall tale. It is a genre within folklore, a narrative that seeks to explain a supernatural, natural, or social phenomenon and may be primarily, to oversimplify, aetiological, historical, or psychological. An aetiological myth offers an explanation of how something was initially introduced into human experience.

In one of the several aetiological myths in what is now designated Genesis chapters 1 through 11, fratricide becomes the focus. How did murder enter what the Creator intended to be eternal paradise? The answer was: through the jealousy of one brother toward another.

God required that everyone, even when there were very few everyones, to return a tenth of any gain to God, typically via sacrifice—however utterly wasteful that was.

Abel earned his income through livestock. When the time to worship God came around, he sacrificed one-tenth of his new flocks presumably by slitting their throats on an altar where the spilled blood and bodily fats burned, but not just any tenth; he offered the firstlings, his finest animals.

Cain’s income came from his crops. When he worshiped God, he offered on an altar a tenth of his crops, but not the finest of his fruits and vegetables.

God noticed and was happier with Abel‘s offering than with Cain’s. In anger and jealousy that his brother had shown him up before God Cain killed Abel. As a punishment, God did not allow Cain to be killed in retaliation, but neither did God allow Cain ever to escape the identity he’d chosen: murderer.

The myth doesn’t specify exactly what it was, but God put a kind of mark on Cain that somehow warned people who would’ve killed him in retaliation not to, yet also kept him from pretending to be someone who had not killed his brother.

This myth did not purport to describe what should happen in response to every murder or any murder necessarily. It sought to describe to a culture or a collection of cultures how murder became introduced into the human family. God‘s response in this case is rather incidental, but not to be discounted I think. There were and would be other teachings related to vengeance and retribution, even justice.

It would probably be worthwhile in another context to reflect on how misunderstandings about God drive some individuals to commit murder. For now, we know how at least one group of ancients believed murder began in human community. And we know based on the same myth that, because murder cannot be undone and its effects neutralized, a murderer’s deed or deeds must always follow her or him.

II

The Commandment Prohibiting Murder

Those in the United States most concerned was posting copies of the Ten Commandments in courtrooms and classrooms have no intention of keeping the commandments, but they think others should. MAGAts, particularly MAGAt leadership, break one or more of these on the regular, with impunity. They especially enjoy theft, murder, and adultery. This is not just hypocritical; it is grotesque.

They claim to believe the Bible; they don’t. They claim to live by the standards set forth in Hebrew and Christian scripture while they don’t. Yet, they self-appoint to positions of morality commentators and often participate in proselytic efforts to press all citizens to adhere to MAGAt faux standards and methods of scriptural interpretation.

Those who establish laws in modern societies should consult the most reliable sources of morality and effective laws, wherever they may be found in the ancient world as well as in the modern world. A democracy should not have its laws determined by any iron clad attachment to holy writ from any culture.

Again, my purpose here is not to persuade anyone to join up with any religious group or follow the teachings of any religion’s scripture. The Ten Commandments come up in a discussion of law only because MAGAts claim to embrace fully the would-be rules they tout but tromp on (Trump on?).

The sixth commandment in the collection of ten, as recorded in Hebrew scripture’s book of Exodus, chapter 20, verse 13: “You will not murder.” Using the word “kill” here is a poor choice for English translators since killing in self-defense was not prohibited. What is forbidden here is the premeditated snuffing out of a human life.

Involuntary Person-slaughter

Hebrew scripture goes to great lengths to deal with the accidental taking of someone’s life. Clearly, one who accidentally killed a fellow Hebrew or an immigrant living among them could never be free of an identity as “accidental killer,” and for the sake of safety had to live—possibly for life, depending on when the High Priest in the Jerusalem Temple died—in a refuge city. Safe within the confines of the refuge city, setting one foot outside those borders meant she or he was not protected from attacks by those who had loved the person killed, albeit accidentally.

Murder MAGAt Style

From their very own espoused inviable scriptural tenets, the book of Numbers in Hebrew scripture, chapter 35, verses 16- 18:

…anyone who strikes another with an iron object, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or anyone who strikes another with a stone in hand that could cause death, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or anyone who strikes another with a weapon of wood in hand that could cause death, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.

Feel free to replace references to ancient weapons with modern ones, like this:

…anyone who bombs Venezuelans in a boat, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or anyone who shoots or orders someone else to shoot a child or an adult civilian or a military professional, and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death. Or anyone who obstructs someone’s breathing [strangulation being the most heinous deed imaginable and thus reserved for the vilest of criminals as a means of carrying out a death penalty], and death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.

Trump, Hegseth, ICE, Netanyahu, Noem, Patel, Putin, and those who follow their godless orders: “Thou shalt not murder” (Exodus 20:13). YOUR Bible says, “Or else.”

III

The Grievous Biblical Error of Making Murderers Heroes

The MAGAt disregard for honest interpretation of Hebrew and Christian scripture is horrendous and responsible for so much MAGAt evil, but it is eclipsed by MAGAt preoccupation with violence and particularly murder. That the First Felon is the chief instigator cannot be denied, but he is only one of many involved. This must be addressed headon because of the MAGAt thirst for maiming and murdering.

Both Hebrew and Christian scripture ultimately rise above affirming vengeance and brutality to the higher ground of promoting peace and affirming the sanctity of human life and embracing non-violence (except for protection from active aggressors). Yet, I fear people of faith, Hebrew and Christian, often decided to ignore the murderous activity of individuals whom they liked despite those individuals’s involvement with the stealing of life from detractors.

King David

In ancient Israel, if a king did something wrong, there were no official consequences. Being a king meant one could do just about anything he wanted to do, however malevolent, and continue his reign uninterrupted— including not being sidetracked by public criticism and corrections. Obviously, this is the main reason Donald Trump would like to be a king and also the main reason we must never ever allow anything like that to happen.

King David, because of his preoccupation with power and women (although Prince Jonathan had been the love of his life) had his military commander, Uriah, killed so that he, David, could take Uriah’s wife, Bathsheba, for himself. This even though David already had probably eight or so wives and several concubines. It was a polygamous society, and David’s religion, Judaism, during his lifetime had no problem with polygamy. Men could have as many wives and concubines as they could afford, and David as king was extremely wealthy.

David came to desire Uriah’s wife. He was free to determine how many wives he had, but he was not free, ethically, to take someone else’s wife. There was no shortage of women. He should’ve left married women alone. But lust and greed won out, and David chose a diabolical way to own Bathsheba relieved of having to deal with messy adultery.

Uriah was a rising military star evidently. King David had him assigned to the front lines of battle where he would almost certainly be killed, and he was. The matter worked out just the way David wanted it to work out—at least, for everyone, except Uriah. Again, as king, David could have anyone killed “legally,” though his deeds were morally reprehensible— a person with privilege and power having the right and exercising it to determine which human lives are disposable.

Eventually David repented. Uriah was still dead.

David would rule some forty years. He was a unifying leader. No doubt many of his accomplishments were powerfully positive, despite having had a hand in getting Uriah killed. The killing cannot be forgotten. It can never be overlooked.

Elijah

Elijah, regarded by many as the greatest prophet in ancient Israel, has a tarnished reputation also. Trying to sweep it under the mat is no different than MAGAt WOKEness.

Elijah and the false prophets had a prophetic pissing contest to see whose deity could be first persuaded to send rain after a three year drought. Elijah won, and to seal his victory, as well as to minimize the possibility that false prophets could influence his people ever again he had 850 prophets of the false gods slaughtered.

Elijah may have been a towering spiritual leader before and after those mass murders, but he permanently forfeited hero status that day. Those who told his story initially and those who tell it today should not mention his name without indicating MURDERER. No star for him in the Holy-wood Walk of Fame.

Paul (aka Saul of Tarsus)

Same for Paul. Before he was the zealous, tireless architect of the institutionalization of the Jesus movement, he had been equally as zealous for that element within Judaism that despised followers of Jesus. In ICE-like fashion, they harassed, imprisoned when possible, and sometimes murdered people who simply wanted to embrace Jesus’ teachings including his views of God.

Word was, Paul, then known as Saul, had held the cloaks of some of those who stoned to death who knows how many early followers of Jesus. He didn’t throw any stones as far as we know, but he was nonetheless complicit in the murders of good people simply trying to embrace a fresh spirituality.

No one could’ve eventually regretted more than Paul what he had done, and no one could’ve tried more diligently than Paul to undo his evil deeds. It is not possible once someone’s life has been designated as disposable and then disposed of to reverse the deeds done. What can be done, however, is to stop glorifying Paul, and at the very least as many of his contemporaries did make sure MURDERER is attached to his name every time it is written or spoken.

Judaism and Christianity in institutionalized forms have celebrated holy writ that fails to designate murderers consistently. No wonder both religions have failed the deity whom they purport to honor. Murderer Netanyahu the face of Judaism in the modern world? Murderer Trump MAGAt messiah?

Someone who has had a part in taking a human being’s life forfeits permanently the possibility of hero status, regardless of what she or he may accomplish after the murder is only a memory for most. A large part of what the Epstein-Trump-Maxwell survivors want and deserve is to have their captors and abusers named. England has taken that much more seriously than has the United States.

A few years ago I became intrigued with ancestry.com. I was uncovering some fascinating information about my heritage. I stumbled across the name of a forebear with some information about him from whomever had collected the particular data. As I was reading I froze. Someone designated my ancestor with bold all capital letters: SLAVE OWNER. More digging, I began to find similar designations attached to details about other relatives. I literally became sick to my stomach. Still am.

I don’t know who at Ancestry was responsible for seeing that this information was included, but I think that person or those people contributed greatly to the value of genealogies; indeed, of history. Whatever else my great, great, great, great grandfather and great great great great uncles may have achieved for the sake of goodness if anything, the facts of their buying and selling human beings should not be erased.