Smoodock's Blog

At this point, Jesus mentions the first of five contrasts between what he taught and what was taught in the traditions of the elders, which was the Oral Law, and is today written down in what we know of as the Babylonian Talmud. Earlier Jesus said: “Think not that I have come to destroy the Law…” (Matthew 5:17). However, this is not so, as it pertains to the Oral Law or the “traditions of the elders.” Jesus pointed out, even to the Jewish authorities, that they spoke against the word of God, when they demanded obedience to the “tradition of the elders” (Matthew 15:1-6). Therefore, Jesus made a distinction between what God had commanded in his word, and what was commanded by men in an effort to build a hedge around the word of God, presumably to keep the people from transgressing the Law. Yet, we can see that men fail, when they begin to think, they know what is good and what is evil (Genesis 3:1-6). Only God always knows what is good and what is evil (Genesis 2:17). Therefore, let God be God, and he will reveal the path men should take. However, when men stand in the place of God, thinking to know what is good and what is evil, they will fail the one whom they claim to serve.

The tradition of the elders was concerned only with the act, itself, but God is concerned with a man’s heart (1Samuel 16:7). The Oral Law treated the illness that had violently possessed the man. “Thou shalt not kill!” Therefore, when a man murders another man, he is in danger of the judgment of the local court of law (the sanhedrin). Every Jewish community had a court or sanhedrin made up of seven judges who ruled upon normal local crimes. However, in complex cases an appeal could be made to the national supreme court or the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, which is made up of three sanhedrins and was presided over by the high priest. So, the local court systems were empowered with the authority of life and death, and could have a murderer stoned, if he was found guilty.

Nevertheless, Jesus treated the symptom, before it became manifest in a murderous act. So, according to Jesus, whoever was angry with another man, without just cause,[1] that man was in danger of the judgment of God as that pertains to common matters, like the local sanhedrin. However, a man can be destroyed without actually slaying him, and Jesus also addresses this kind of anger (Matthew 5:22).

Jesus said, if a man tells his brother he’s raca (G4469), meaning he is worthless, vis-à-vis he’s an imbecile, or a numbskull, such a man is in danger of the council, meaning the highest court in the land, the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, which put in the context of the judgment of God would be a high crime, something which God takes very seriously. When a person is constantly barraged with insults, which claim he’ll never amount to anything, or he can’t do anything right, or he’s nothing but a great disappointment, that kind of mental violence takes its toll on a person, especially the young. God will not hold such a culprit guiltless who attacks the innocent in such a manner that destroys his self-confidence.

There is a gradual graduation of the wrong that Jesus addresses in this text. The last thing he mentions is a person who refers to his brother as a fool. This doesn’t address the recipient in the natural sense. That would be what raca (G4469) mentioned above does. Instead, this is fool (G3488), mentioned in a wicked sense. The word of God says of a fool: “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God!’ They are corrupt; they have done abominable works; there is none that does good” (Psalm 14:1). This kind of anger destroys a man’s reputation, who he is in the world, what he has made of himself in the process of life. Destroy this and you’ve destroyed all but the man’s life, and for this, Jesus claims the offender is in danger of the hell fire, which is probably the most terrible punishment God would administer to an individual. Nevertheless, lest we get carried away in our thoughts about this, which are probably not what Jesus means (Isaiah 55:8), even here God’s judgment is tempered with mercy.[2]

Therefore, Jesus tells his disciples that the Lord will discipline them, if they come to worship God, when they know they have needlessly offended another man. The scribes and Pharisees were interested in ritual worship, and indeed this was important to Jewish life. However, Jesus placed the condition of a man’s conscience, the purity of heart above ritual worship. Yes, worship God, but be mindful of caring for the sensitivities of one’s brother (Matthew 5:23-24).

Therefore, whenever possible the disciple of Christ should take every opportunity to become reconciled with his brother, whom he has made his enemy. Agree with him before it is too late, because if the two of you permit the court to decide the matter between you, and you come up wanting, the court will have the officer put you in prison. The sense is: it is better to resolve one’s disagreement with one’s brother before God judges between the two, because the offender will be punished and won’t be released from his punishment until justice is fulfilled (Matthew 5:25-26).

_______________________________________________________________

[1] Jesus was not making light of self-defense. Defending one self from an attack by another is allowed, as is coming to the defense of the helpless. Jesus was concerned with being angry with another man, simply because the man assumes his ‘rights’ have been violated.

[2] See my earlier study in the Apocalypse: “What is the Lake of Fire?”