Walls Are Anti-God
And the Bible won’t shut up about it.
When Christians talk about issues surrounding the U.S. border with Mexico, too often we get a tiny little verse here or there about “obeying the government” or stories that include walls in them that seem to undergird a “walls are good!” theology.
It’s all as thin as it is ignorant.
As always, we miss the forest for the trees.
The Bible may talk about a thing here and there, but we often miss its overarching themes for a few verses to lob at our opponent. And with 66+ books to choose from, there’s no shortage of ammo.
But I think it’s helpful to actually talk about what’s *in* the Bible — not what we’d like to be in there, or what biblically-illiterate charlatans have told us for generations is in there.
It’s easy to forget that the Bible is overwhelmingly rural. It was primarily written by and about poor nomads struggling to experience a semblance of stability.
And, generally, this translates into a bias against cities. And viscerally related to those ancient cities: walls.
It’s important to remember that this “anti-city” bias is NOTHING akin to today’s white supremacist bullshittery, with talk of “sketchy neighborhoods” and the “inner-city.” It is rooted in something entirely different: the inhospitality and cruelty of the city and its demonic walls.
We see this anti-city bias from the beginning. The Tower of Babel; Egypt; and Sodom/Gomorrah as a specific example of human degradation (which was inhospitality not sexual orientation, but I digress).
Walls are a part of this anti-city ethic. They formed an integral aspect of ancient cities. Walls to delineate where the city stopped, and — most importantly — keep them safe from the “violent chaos” beyond.
And this obsession with safety and an understanding of outsiders and nomads as ‘other’ goes against the very nature of the Divine identity and what it means to experience the overwhelming power of love and a justice-oriented peace.
So we see that even in extremely problematic books like Joshua — and its ethic of God-sponsored mass genocide — the main story that continues in the popular imagination is Jericho, with its walls tumbling down.
Now when it comes to Nehemiah, I can’t recommend Rev. Grey Maggiano’s perceptive Twitter thread enough.
Walls were not meant to be a part of God’s community, of Isaiah’s Peace-able Kingdom. Walls represented everything that the unpronounceable Deity stands against.
So once we hit the first-century context of Jesus, we still see this sense that cities are inherently broken because of the walls they surround themselves with. Jesus specifically *prays for the city.* It’s Jerusalem in this case, and it’s always Jerusalem in a theological sense — but that prayer also typifies his entire ministry.
Because it’s a prayer for the wickedness of the city.
And what is this wickedness? Genesis’ 19th chapter tells us in story form. Then Ezekiel reminds us as though the cranky prophet could tell that nobody would really get it.
“This was the sin of…Sodom: [they] were proud, had plenty to eat…but didn’t help the poor and needy.”
(That’s Ezekiel 16:49 for those keeping score at home.)
(Oh, and there’s ZERO in there about sex or sexual orientation, notice that?)
And then, in true biblical LISTEN UP, PEOPLE fashion, Jesus then refers to Sodom, too.
It’s because this whole argument is rooted in the narrative scope of the Bible, not a few piddly verses.
(Oh, by the by — Jesus does this by comparing the punishment for a town that wouldn’t welcome his disciples — he says it’ll be worse for them THAN FOR SODOM. If that city’s degeneration were about anything other than inhospitality, then Ezekiel and Jesus must suck at interpretation.)
(Oh, and Jesus does this in two separate Gospels: Matthew and Luke. He even does it in the exact same chapter — and damn near same verse — of each one, if that kind of numerology floats your boat. Matthew 10:15; Luke 10:12)
So this anti-wall bias — most notably present in the cities of the time — flows through Jesus’ ministry (which *should* be the standard-bearer for Christians, though many are stubbornly in love with Paul, que será).
Jesus is put through a kangaroo court, beaten by police, and lynched by government authorities in Jerusalem, the seat of Rome’s power in the desert — an empire built on the violent effects of walls and inhospitality. Of who’s in, and who’s out.
“But Jesus wasn’t against Rome, they were his protectors,” cry too many modern-day Christians. Even as an entire biblical book dedicated to the subject of the demonic violence that was Rome — Revelation — exists and is on speed-dial for numerous followers of Jesus today.
Rome crucified our Lord and Savior with the not-insignificant help of religious authorities, cheap jester charlatans, and bought-and-paid-for agents of the state, too afraid to speak up and speak out. (Not that we have any modern day examples or anything.)
And so we arrive at Revelation, our long journey from Genesis almost complete. And this 1st-century ‘Rules for Radicals’ ends with a stunning and downright revolutionary vision of what a “new city” would look like — what King called the ‘Beloved Community.’
This holy city, the ‘New Jerusalem,’ has walls, to be sure. Big ones. (As though John of Patmos needed to broaden his horizons and up his imagination a bit more.) But the kicker lies in 21:25 — “Its gates will never be shut by day, and there will be no night there.”
Are y’all with me? THE VERY PURPOSE OF THE WALLS IN THE NEW JERUSALEM IS TO NOT FUNCTION AS WALLS ANYMORE.
The walls are built with “jasper” and the city itself is 24-karat gold. Worry not, we tell the prophet — even at chapter 21 he’s still ranting and raving with his drug-addled fever dream of a new heaven and new earth. I’ll give it to him.
But the point remains: walls are the very antithesis of the Beloved Community. They are literally anti-God. The epic landscape of the Bible points to this unassailable fact.
All of this to say: Biblical “literalists” want to come at us all day with a few dinky, broken lines of a poem. Motherfuckers, we will answer with the Mahabharata.
