When Holy Scripture Becomes a Weapon

A recent conversation on a neighborhood social media forum began with a familiar political declaration: the coming election was a battle between good and evil. Democrats, one participant insisted, had abandoned God and rejected Christian values.

When another participant challenged those claims, the response was revealing. The first declared that his critic could not understand true wisdom because his mind needed to be renewed.

He then quoted Proverbs 6:16–19, which identifies seven things the Lord hates, and asserted that those behaviors described today’s Democrats. He concluded by instructing his critic to repent before the opportunity for salvation was lost.

The exchange raises a much more important question than which political party is right: When Christians interpret Scripture, are they seeking wisdom or justification for beliefs they already hold?

What Does Proverbs 6 Actually Teach?

Proverbs 6:16–19 identifies seven things the Lord hates: arrogance, lying, shedding innocent blood, devising wicked plans, rushing toward evil, bearing false witness, and sowing discord.

These are serious moral warnings about behaviors that harm individuals and communities. But the passage does not identify political parties, religious groups, or particular individuals. Nor does it suggest that the reader is exempt from its warnings.

The Book of Proverbs is traditionally associated with King Solomon, although scholars recognize it as a collection of ancient wisdom teachings compiled over centuries. Its purpose was to cultivate sound judgment, humility, self-discipline, and responsible conduct.

It was written to teach people how to live wisely, not to provide accusations they could direct at their neighbors.

There is also an important distinction in the word hate. In this context, it expresses God’s strong moral opposition to wrongdoing. But does God’s condemnation of dishonesty, arrogance, or cruelty give believers permission to hate people they believe exhibit those behaviors?

That is an entirely different proposition. Condemning wrongdoing is not the same as condemning the person. And believing that God opposes certain behaviors does not make our personal judgments equivalent to God’s.

Where Is Jesus in This Conversation?

Perhaps the most striking feature of the exchange was its emphasis on what God hates, without mentioning Jesus or his teachings.

The Bible contains descriptions of divine anger, punishment, and judgment, alongside repeated affirmations of God’s compassion and mercy. But the New Testament also makes a remarkable declaration: “God is love” (1 John 4:8).

Jesus placed love at the center of his teachings. In Matthew 22:37–39, he identifies love of God and love of neighbor as the greatest commandments. In Matthew 5:44, he instructs his followers to love even their enemies. And in Matthew 7:3–5, he warns against noticing another person’s faults while overlooking our own.

Jesus did not avoid confronting wrongdoing. He challenged hypocrisy, exploitation, dishonesty, and the misuse of religious authority. But he did not teach that disagreement gives us permission to hate.

For Christians who understand Jesus as the fullest expression of God’s character, his teachings provide an essential framework for interpreting Scripture. If God is love, shouldn’t love guide our understanding of what God asks of us?

And if Jesus instructed his followers to love even their enemies, how can an ancient passage about the things God hates become permission to condemn entire groups of people?

When Belief Replaces Reflection

There is a fundamental difference between reading Scripture to discover what it teaches and reading Scripture to confirm what we already believe.

When someone begins with the conviction that their political opponents are evil, nearly any biblical warning can become evidence supporting that conclusion. Arrogance? That describes the other party. Dishonesty? The other party. Sowing discord? Again, the other party.

But what happens when we apply those same standards to ourselves, our preferred political leaders, or the people whose opinions we trust? Are we equally willing to recognize dishonesty, arrogance, cruelty, and divisiveness when they appear among people we support? Or do we find reasons to excuse those behaviors?

This problem becomes especially troubling when religious identity and political loyalty become intertwined. In some expressions of Christian nationalism, political disagreement is treated not simply as a difference of opinion, but as evidence of opposition to God’s will.

That leaves little room for reflection. If our side represents righteousness and the other side represents evil, why would we ever question our own beliefs? Yet questioning our assumptions is precisely what wisdom requires.

The Question We Should Be Asking

There is an irony in using Proverbs 6 to condemn political opponents. The passage warns against arrogance, dishonesty, false witness, and sowing discord, the very behaviors that can emerge when people use religious teachings to attack others.

That does not mean Christians should abandon moral standards or refrain from criticizing harmful behavior. It means those standards should apply to everyone, including ourselves.

Perhaps the most meaningful way to read Proverbs 6 is not to ask which people or political parties God hates, but whether we recognize the behaviors it condemns in our own lives.

Reading Scripture with an open mind does not require abandoning faith. It requires taking its teachings seriously enough to question our own assumptions, even when doing so makes us uncomfortable.

If our understanding of God makes it easier to hate our neighbors than to love them, perhaps it is our understanding, and not our neighbors, that needs to be examined.