Does the Bible or Christanity practice “praying for your enemies”??

I personally myself dont really consider myself 100% Christian or anything, but what does the Bible say about your enemies? Or perhaps people in your past you encountered that you truly did not like that person or thought they were a bad terrible human being?

Some tell me you should pray for your enemies? They are struggling and trying to live just like you are? Let God be the judge on how your enemies end up in life? Me personally, if someone did legitimately wrong me in my past, I don’t think I would have that kind of personality to just “forgive them and slide it under the rug”??

 

Having read the bible as a teenager, I do remember Jesus talking about showing the other cheek emphasizing nonviolence, and loving one's enemies and praying for them, which means the absence of hatred within.

As per eastern philosophy, one's intense desires in the form of cravings and aversions are considered to be impurities that result in mental agitation, leading to loss of peace of mind and self-knowledge that comes with mental equanimity.

Hatred is an expression of desire in the form of aversion. So obviously one must remove hatred within to regain our mental equanimity and peace. This is where the tools of forgiveness and forbearance comes about.

By removing the intense desire of hatred or aversion within, we would be receptive to self-knowledge and grace of 'the kingdom of God ' within us, as per Jesus.

This is my take on this teaching of Jesus.

Also, the practice of forgiveness is considered an austerity that strengthens mental equanimity or equipoise of mind. So, you are actually strengthening yourself and your mind and ensuring that it is not agitated by past memories of pain which creates psychological suffering, and ruins the present moment as well. Of course, this would take a lot of focus and reflection and won't come easily, but it is well worth the effort, imho.

 

I do remember learning that having gone to parochial Catholic school for 1st and 2nd elementary grade school, then on to Christian school for 3rd and 4th grades. I never found inspiration with Catholic school... It always seemed to leave me behind, sending the message that I wasn't friendship material, which is really awful for a second grader. First grade I think we made stained glass window ornaments to stick (with suction cups) to windows.

I had a special relationship with my spiritual side (I hate to say "religious" side because people draw the wrong conclusions about me) from a young age. My mom taught at the Catholic school, did things with the seminary, had been a nun in a convent, and came from a German mom's household, with no dad. She to this very day has a pedagogical approach to communication and is a devout believer.

When I did psychedelic drugs, I begged God for mercy. I had bad trip after bad trip... and I found myself not calling on God, but that God was part of the cosmos... part of the internal discussion my mind wanted to have*. The worst part was feeling like I had to give in to that. I remember feeling like I had given myself over (whether I wanted to or not was irrelevant; I had taken the drug) to evil.

That doesn't have to be the case, but I interpret that as a reflex to the guilt we have simply by being defiant enough to take a psychedelic drug. Now I am old enough (and I'm sober now, and don't do drugs) to know that 1) it's no longer defiant; I'm an adult, and 2) I'm not giving myself over to evil; no matter what my drug addled brain interpreted! It's not my direction, I've made choices about that, and now it's written in my underwear.

Not literally...

What were we talking about? Oh...

To know one's enemy is to prepare. Prayer can be part of that preparation, and I think for some people prayer is a way to recenter; sort of like a Google Map on your cell phone when you are driving... (there is a feature that recenters the touch-screen if you had scrolled North or South to see the next exit.

 

The Bible (specifically Jesus) tells us to love our enemies (Mat.5:43-44; Luke 6:35)).and turn the other cheek (Mat. 5:39) That's a hard one, and if we don't get it right it can perpetuate evil in the world. I'm no theologian, and this is way above my pay grade. I'll give you my best shot, but should make clear it's just my personal opinion.

• Loving our enemies doesn't mean we have to like them. "Like" according to the Britannica Dictionary, means to enjoy or get pleasure from something. When Jesus says we should love our neighbors, He used the term agape or agapaó (verb form of agape), which means selfless, universal love in Greek. (actually, He probably used an Aramaic equivalent, like rachmam or chav, but all we have is the Koine Greek). Agape is the love the Bible tells us is God's essence. God supposedly loves us, not because of our charming qualities, but because it's the right thing to do. And aren't we lucky! Agape takes effort. It requires will, rather than spontaneous affection. It is our duty. But all morality requires subordination of our natural inclinations to what is good.
  
• Loving our enemies doesn't mean we have to be nice to them or let them get their way. A good parent disciplines his/her children to help them correct bad behavior, which often means tough love. Loving our enemies means that we are concerned for them and want to help them change their bad behavior, if possible.
• "Love the sinner", but hate the sin. This isn't easy to do, but it's a moral imperative.
• Sometimes using force against evil is an imperative. I agree with Saint Augustine who said that peacefulness in the face of a grave wrong that could be stopped by only force would be a sin, and it could also be a sin to allow and adversary to endanger your life or well being by using violence against you. Turning the other cheek doesn't mean turning our neighbor's cheek or standing idly by while a bully or rapist has his way with innocent people, including ourselves. But we may not use more force than necessary to combat the wrongdoer.

*************************************

• What's the point of loving our enemies? (1) it removes the distraction of personal grudges from our primary mission to serve God and fight for the right (which can sometimes mean fighting them, but not for personal reasons); (2) it liberates us from giving our enemies space in our heads and becoming negatively fixated on them, what Buddhists call Upādāna (attachments); (3) it contributes to social harmony by avoiding the incivility stemming from grudges; (4) it shows recognition of the mutual human condition of being imperfect and dependent on God's grace. All of us are products of our genes, upbringing, environment, and choices--all rather fortuitous developments. And we're all flawed, some of us more deeply than others. We're really not in a position to judge others, because of our own vulnerability to judgment, and because we don't know the full circumstances that produced the flawed specimen that we dislike. (5) it sets an example of civility that will hopefully become contagious, as others see the harmony that results.(6) it honors and emulates Christ, to Whom unconditional love for all humanity, including sinners and society's rejects, was the central message. Agape is our prime directive.

Let me give examples from my personal experience. I used to work at an office that was a hotbed of political intrigue, backstabbing and grudge matches. There was one co-worker who was the principal instigator of this, and when I stood up to him, I became his "enemy", and acquired the enmity of his allies. I certainly didn't like him or any of them. However, as I got to know more about the ringleader and his early life, and met his mother, I could understand him better. She was a paranoid schizophrenic, divorced from his father, and she subjected the guy to horrendous emotional abuse and messed with his mind. Did this absolve him from personal responsibility? Maybe not, but it softened my attitude toward him. I continued to oppose his negative actions, but tried not get personal about it. One of his supporters, who regarded me as an enemy, was faced with losing his job, I thought unjustly. I offered to help him fight the action in a grievance proceeding, at the risk of my own job. He said: " I have no reason to trust you." But I convinced him that he had no choice. That was a good decision for him, and I think my support was instrumental in keeping his job. All I can say is that I think loving my enemies worked for me. And for them.

 

How about enough of the slaying, the vengeance, the conquering, the one ups man ship, the enemies. Chief Seattle said it best “we may all be brothers after all. We shall see.”

 

One notable thing about all those nasty passages is that they all are Old Testament. If we look at the Bible in historical perspective, and put aside the dubious notion that it was written by God, or that He at least gave dictation , we can make some sense of it. The Bible is a an anthology of writings by men purportedly seeking god, in different periods of history, with different agendas. It is record of the history and evolution of the Jewish God from a fierce tribal war God to the God of the Universe and a God of social justice. And then a history of the transition a legalistic religion of purism to one of compassion. It is not the "Word of God", but rather the words of men seeking (or claiming to be seeking) God. As a human enterprise, it's a remarkable achievement in many ways, but often betrays the frailties of its human authors. As Methodist pastor Adam Hamilton puts it: "If we take the Bible's humanity seriously, we find the possibility that he violence of scripture is a reflection of the values ans theological and moral vision of some of its human authors, and not the God hey sought to serve." (Making Sense of the Bible, p. 217.

One might say the same about the Vedic tradition. Some of the passages from the Indra-worshipping stage are less than inspiring. Many religions of the time, including Hiduism and Judaism, went through a transactional phase, when reliigion was mainly about priests performing sacrifices to bring material benefits to the believers, and the rituals had to be performed just right or the gods might be pissed. And there was the tribal war god phase, with such swashbuckling deities as Indra, Marduk, Zeus, and yes, Yahweh. That changed in the so-called Axial Age, when attention shifted to more transcendent, universalistic concerns.

In Jewish history, the Babylonian Exile was a major turning point. The southern kingdom was conquered, its elite deported, and the temple of its God was destroyed. Judaism was at a crossroads: give up or make lemonade with those lemons. It was at that point that God became Lord of the Universe, the only true God of all people. The new Yahweh appears in Gen. 1, which was added to previous books of the Bible, although it appears first. God creates the whole universe, and everything in it, including all of humanity. It isn't a science lecture. It's a refutaion of Babylonian religion and an assertion of God's superiority. Unlike Marduk, who has to fight a bloody battle with his mother Tiamat to create the world from her carcass, Yahweh simply speaks words, in the manner of the Memphite Egyptian god Ptah. Tiamat become Tehom, the Deep (representing chaos) which Yahweh proceeds to order by creating one by one the natural objects which the Babylonians worshiped as gods. And a new emphasis was placed on setting the Jews apart from their captors to preserve their identity. In Gen.1, God institutes the Sabbath , by resting on the seventh day. And of course circumcision and the dietary laws were re-emphasized. A new generation of prophets--Second Isaiah and Ezekiel--emerged to explain to Jews that their plight was a result of not keeping their covenant with God. Jews were to set themselves apart from Gentiles and follow strict purity codes. That was still the emphasis after the return to Palestine, as Jews acquired new foreign occupiers: Seleucid Greeks and Romans.

Jesus was subversive to this tradition in violating the purity laws, touching corpses, healing the unclean, and hanging out with publicans and lowlifes. He brought an emphasis on universal love and compassion to replace the emphasis on separation and purity. (to give credit where it is due, Rabbi Hillel, the pharisee, and his school seem to have been moving along similar lines.

Christian aren't Jews. We're heirs to the rebel tradition of Jesus. Christianity became a predominantly Gentile religion, although we retain the Old Testament for orientation to our history. Some atheists, like some Christians, tend to be fundamentalists and literalists when it comes to the Bible. Other Christians less so. I tend to follow the guidance of the late Marcus Borg Methodist pastor Adam Hamilton, who recommend that we interpret the words of Scripture in the light of Jesus' example and teachings of peace, love and understanding. That is the definitive hermeneutic that trumps all those violent words by those men of the ancient past.

 

every sect has its own perspective on that. not just of christianity either. most people who identify with a particular faith, aren't really scholars of it. especially if they are followers of whatever belief happens to be dominant where they live. so while it is possible to have these kinds of discussions, whatever their motivations might be, they're not really that generalizable to the populations of their faith generally. there are many places where it is christianity that has brought corruption and conflict where it had not been common before, but the same can sometimes be said of some other faiths also. for what its worth, i don't call myself a christian, or even any one name flavor of belief, but i felt that this kind of discussion, there's no one size fits all, and everyone's milage may vary.

 

For the most part, I agree with you. I call myself a Christian because I find the teachings and example attributed to Jesus are what I want to live my life by. But I draw on the perspectives of other religions to heighten my understanding of my own.

You're certainly right that most people who identify with a particular faith don't have a deep understanding of it. Most accept the predominant belief of the society or sub-group they grow up in. Others may be drawn in by twelve-step recovery programs, and cling to the life raft that keeps them afloat. Most struggle to make a living and let specialists (shamans, priests, preachers) figure out the transcendental stuff. In terms of places where Christianity has brought corruptions and conflict, I think right here in the Buckle of the Bible Belt would be a good example. Many Evangelical Christians make up the bulk of the MAGA movement, have sold their souls to Trump, and pose a major threat to American democracy. Jesus warned us about false prophets and how to tell them by their bitter fruit--in this case divisiveness. There certainly isn't "a one size fits all". But that doesn't mean anything goes, some belief systems are harmful in promoting beliefs and behavior that undermine the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

Evolution, whether biological or cultural, is a messy process. I think it would be useful to have wings and eyes in the back of my head, but unfortunately evolution works with the material it has available from the previous stages of the process. Christianity evolved from Judaism and carries baggage inherited from the previous faith, like the violence and dependence on a Bronze Age/Iron Age text.. Christianity succeeded by jettisoning Jewish rules on circumcision and dietary laws, and by developing a powerful metaphor of Jesus as the sacrificial Paschal lamb. That led to an unfortunate emphasis on doctrine and belief, which contributed to divisiveness. Human intelligence provides a possible means of overcoming evolutionary endowment, but it's an uphill battle.

 

Yes the bible says we should love our enemies and pray for those who spitefully persecute you (matthew 5:44)

"Vengeance is Mine, I will repay." Deut 32:35

This ties in to loving your enemies. It is obvious that God did not intend for us to avenge ourselves. We shouldnt avenge ourselves simply because we have no right to do so. We can begin to understand why it would be so inappropriate to be unforgiving if we look at the parable of the unforgiving servant. (Matthew 18:21) When he was forgiven his debts afterwards he went around trying to collect debts from his fellow servants. But he was supposed to have compassion like the compassion that was shown to him. We are all debtors, we have all done wrong, so then why would it be appropriate to convict someone else for their wrongdoing? God has done no wrong, and vengeance belongs to Him.

"I have trodden the winepress alone, And from the peoples no one was with Me."-isaiah 63:3

"I looked, but there was no one to help, And I wondered That there was no one to uphold; Therefore My own arm brought salvation for Me; And My own fury, it sustained Me." Isaiah 63:5

It could even be argued that anger is outside of our creative purpose.

"Pride was not made for men, nor furious anger for them that are born of a woman."-Sirach 10:18

So then pride and anger seem to be created for a purpose beyond humanity. Im not sure exactly.