Why Meekness? I don’t really know why, but I began to think about the phrase in the Bible that the “meek shall inherit the earth”. I thought that it seemed a little odd using today’s definition of meek that those persons will be the ones to have an ultimate reward.

When I choose to research something I think the most important place to start is definitions and meaning. If you are going to make an argument then that argument must be characterized with a baseline of what the argument is about and the definitions of the terms used within the argument. If you refuse to define the terms you use then your argument is meaningless. It is meaningless because you are not bound by objectivity only subjective terms which you may define at will in response to a counter argument. This is a classic “moving the goal post” tactic to try to win a debate. It may make you feel good, but you look like a fool to any objective observer.

In society today “meek” seems to primarily be characterized by weakness. There are several commonly used definitions however. I copied and pasted those below from Miriam Webster:

Definition of meek

1 : enduring injury with patience and without resentment : mild a meek child dominated by his brothers

2 : deficient in spirit and courage : submissive “I don’t care,” came the meek reply— Annetta Miller

3 : not violent or strong : moderate his delivery varied from a meek, melodic patter to rapid-fire scriptural allusions— Bob Trebilcock

Those definitions/description do not appear to paint what I believe to be an accurate picture of what God meant by meek.

1. “Enduring injury with patience and without resentment” is an admirable trait. Modern society seems to fail miserably at this as it all seems to be about who is the greatest victim. What injustices have I had and who is going to fix those injustices for me? I think society could use a little more of this meekness.
2. “Deficient in Spirit and courage” this seems to contrary to what the Bible and God wishes for His people. The closest followers of Jesus and those written about in the Bible that furthered the kingdom were not consistently deficient in spirit and courage. On the contrary, they needed faith and courage to do things for God without knowing the potential outcome or in some cases they knew the outcome may be death but still pursued their task.
3. “Not violent or strong” again this seems contrary to to what is required of true believers. This definition implies to be meek is to be weak in strength. Not violent is a good trait unless it means failure to fight for what is good and right. I should also note that good and right have their own debatable definitions.

When it comes to identifying the meaning from an authors work I think it is very important to determine the common definitions used in the context of time. I think this is imperative in analyzing all prior literary works because the intent of the author and what they wanted the reader to learn from the writings is set in the time and the words they used when they put pen to paper. If you try to apply modern definitions or cultural interpretations to old texts you have completely failed to extract the possible wisdom that the author was trying to portray. Unless your intent is to interject your own narcissistic interpretation to usurp their original intent for personal gain. It does not always mean that the original author is right in their opinions or statements, but we will never know if we try to apply false definitions to the original authors works. I believe this is true when determining the wisdom of the US constitution and when extracting wisdom from works of literature which includes the Bible.

Why? Well, what if “freedom” today means prison tomorrow. I think a world with freedom from making your own decisions is like prison. All decisions are made for you. So, in a Owellian society a skewed view of freedom is that all things are decided for you. In that case if you take a presentism approach to freedom you would believe that the definition of freedom from the past no longer applies and the modern day interpretation of freedom is what is important. Seems a little dumb right? Correct, that is why the word for this is called presentism, and it is considered a logical fallacy.

So back to “Meekness”…

I did research to find what definition “meek” was the most likely to be used in the Biblical time that it was written as it related to Matthew 5:5 “The meek shall inherit the earth”. The New Testament was primarily written in Greek and some in Aramaic. The old testament was primarily in Hebrew. There may at times be a disconnect with definitions between the two. That is why I think it is important to take the definitions from when they were written in the language in which they were written to determine the intended meaning and wisdom being taught. Some scholars will co mingle the Greek definition with the Hebrew and try to come up with what was intended, which may be valid as well. However, I think that when a person speaks they speak to the audience that is present at the time. They don’t expect the listener or the reader to try to read into what they are saying if the speaker or author is trying to teach something. If I am telling someone that a person is gay. I don’t mean happy as it was once used. I am not going to use a term and intend it to be interpreted as an alternate or previous meaning and hope that the listener can surmise what I mean.

The original Greek word for meek used in the New Testament is, as best I can find, synonymous with “humble, gentle or mild”. The Hebrew terms of the Old Testament translates to: Lowly, poor, afflicted, wretched, weak, needy

One scholarly article I read tries to associate the Matthew 5:5 verse to mean the old testament meaning because Matthew quotes some teachings from the Old testament. I think that is completely wrong.

When Jesus entered the city on the donkey he was described as “meek”. The other times meek is used in the New Testament is to show a “calm or quiet spirit”. In the Greek, meekness is more akin to humbleness. Although Jesus was a King he did not flaunt it, he did not boast of it, he had great power but did not wield it unless necessary.

The more I read the more I believe the meek of Matthew are the humble leaders and warriors, and those thankful in spite of the problems the world’s chaos has them in. Those who can wield great power and strength but only do so with great wisdom and compassion. Those who carry powerful weapons but do not use them unless needed. When I say power, strength, and weapons I mean intellect, emotional strength, physical strength, the capacity to influence, the capacity to commit great violence, BUT wield them only with wisdom and for the good of His kingdom.

This seems more true to me than the belief that the social status of “Lowly, poor, afflicted, wretched, weak, needy” will “inherit the earth”. This is why the Bible is full of verses that talk about how we are to help and take care of the poor afflicted, wretched, weak, and needy. Those who have the power and strength to do so must use their strength for good. If they use it for evil or selfish intent the result is chaos and death. This played out historically in leaders such as Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and the leaders of the church who get corrupted by power and influence.

Meekness is more of an attitude than a state of being. To be poor, lowly, afflicted, wretched, weak, or needy you are often more appreciative of the things you have and you may be likely to have gratitude without the distractions of wealth, influence, power, and abundance. You may be less distracted with life and more apt to realize what is truly important in life and be closer to God as opposed to believing you are a god or better than others.

To believe that the old testament definition is what defines the meek who will inherit the earth is very wrong. They are using a social status or situational definition as opposed to an attitude or state of being definition. To be poor, lowly, afflicted, wretched, weak, or needy does not mean you are free from hate, anger, resentment, evil. Many in those situations spite God or spite the world and believe that the world is the cause of their troubles if that is the view of a believer then they believe that creation is bad and lacking good. They are Cain who complains that his punishment from his father is unbearable, and ends up killing the good (Abel) in the world with their malevolence (desire to harm others/evil/devil). This type of person may also have a nihilistic (no good or bad, moral or immoral, nothing has meaning) view of the world.

I believe that meekness is a state of mind and not a social status. Those who yield great power, and those who are afflicted but are humble and faithful will be those who inherit the earth.

.