I think most of the trouble people have interpreting the Bible can be explained by smooching.
If we can understand why people smooched in the Bible and what the Biblical commands about smooching mean for us today I think we’re well on our way to being good kissers. Well, maybe not good kissers. That might require a nice clean shave. It did in my case. My wife was becoming increasingly repelled by my facial hair. This meant that my attempts to get friendly with her were met with a prickly reception. The answer? I shaved. You should have seen the change then!
This makes me wonder if bearded men ever get to have any lip-smacking fun. Stranger still are certain Christian sects in which the men are bearded and engage in full on the mouth smooching because of Biblical commands.
Does 1 Thessalonians 5:26 say, or does it not say, “Greet all the brothers with a holy kiss?” It’s there in black and white, folks.
There are a few ways to interpret this:
- Find a brother and give him a holy kiss.
- Give everyone my greetings.
- Christians should always greet one another in a culturally appropriate way.
Which do you think is the proper interpretation of this verse? Even though I think most people today would choose #3, there is good reason to suspect that Paul was advocating #2. What’s the evidence? First, this is in the closing paragraph of his letter. “Greet one another with a holy kiss” is the New Testament equivalent of XOXOXO. Second, while the majority of the commands in 1 Thessalonians 5:14-28 are present imperative, the kissing command is aorist imperative. Present imperative is prototypically for commands that are always in effect while aorist commands are referring to one event. That means verse 26 is a one-time shot. Third, I think we can see in the behavior recorded in the gospels that kissing was not a standard greeting every time men met. Judas kissed Jesus as a very formal signal of respect (and betrayal).
Well, I’m satisfied that these pieces of evidence show that we don’t need to kiss one another as Christians if that’s not already a part of our culture. And I’m also satisfied that I’ve managed to put a semi-serious piece of Biblical scholarship on my blog after a week of blog-fluff and a very busy day of Bible translation. Finally, I’m happy because now I’m going to go home and kiss my wife.
XOXO to all of you!
This blog post is Sealed With A Kiss (SWAK)
HT: Stephen Levinsohn for the tip about aorist imperatives.
Other kissing posts:
There ya go makin my head hurt again!!
No seriously, I appreciate it. I always thought that a handshake was the contemporary version of the kiss. Not sure where I got that though.
good humor again, Lingamish. aftershave isn’t a bad idea either.
so, on what “the Bible says,” here’s something altogether opposite:
אנוש תוקישנ תורתענו בהוא יעצפ םינמאנ
Now, the NET Bible commentator says this on this Bible verse (Proverbs 27:6):
“Kisses” probably represents a metonymy of adjunct; the term describes any expressions or indications of affection. But coming from an enemy, they will be insincere – as indicated by their excessive number.
(and so I say the commentor’s own comment may represent a metonymy of adjunct, whatever that is. This comment on “kisses” is certainly excessive.)
But I do think Solomon (or whoever is speaking as “the Bible” here) is on to something. The value of kisses depends one who the kisser is.
And I think the LXX translators (speaking for Solomon as “the Bible”) have more fun with their kisses. They have word play between the affectionate friend and the affectionate kisses:
ἀξιοπιστότερά ἐστιν τραύματα φίλου ἢ ἑκούσια φιλήματα ἐχθροῦ
so we too could have translation fun (as if making the “Bible say” something with our lips in our tongue):
faithful are the wounds of a precious pal
or free-flowing the precious puckerings of an enemy
(if a Bible commenter, we might even comment on the Greek chiasm and the English alliteration with the all the kissing.)
We do remember Luke’s record of Judah Iscariot’s kiss of Joshua. And we take note that Paul (whether to those Thessalonians or to the Romans and to the Corinthians in both his letters) must qualify the man-to-man kisses as “holy,” while Peter qualifies them as “loving.” But (even if we’re wiseacrers in our commentary) I don’t think we’ll be wiser than Solomon: The value of (biblical) kisses depends one who the kisser is.
What I find interesting in looking at that section is trying to decide what the point is. Are we meant to learn something about both images or is the first a counter point for the second? I tend to favor the latter because of v.3. So, you could say that Proverb 27:6 isn’t about kissing at all.
And I’ve just added you to my blogroll. Is that a kiss or a wound?
I like your questions, Lingamish!
And your statement “I tend to favor the latter because of v.3.” has me puzzled. Nonetheless, whether v.3 of 1 Thessalonians 5 (and the stuff about destruction & labor pains?) or v.3 of Proverbs 27 (and the stuff on stones & sand & such provocations?), I will indeed join you to “say that Proverb 27:6 isn’t about kissing at all.”
Since Proverb 27:6 is about friendship, & since Paul’s and Peter’s one-shot greetings are about friendship, thanks for the honor of the blogroll with other friends. (You’ve been on my blogroll). But aren’t we glad we haven’t given one another excessively numerous komments?
Where to start…this post makes me smile. My husband is a bearded (actually goateed) man and I’m partial to the hairy smooch fest. In fact, during the time I was widowed, I really, really missed manly stubble.
As far as translations go, this is one passage I prefer to preserve the historical color, on no theological basis– just purely because it’s so rich. But a footnote or explanation about the aorist tense and the modern cultural equivalent would be important too. Or vice versa.
I’m sorry, I can’t imagine Paul telling folks to give each other a holy a high-five.
You just brightened my outlook on the Greek 101 studying I’m about to turn to! We haven’t hit imperatives yet, but the 13 tenses we have already covered allowed me to understand the difference in aspect between the present and the aorist! Hurray! God bless you, Lingamish!
You have my heartfelt sympathy.