Smoodock's Blog

The Law states: “If there is harm, then you are to require life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, and bruise for bruise” (Exodus 21:23-25; Deuteronomy 19:21). So, what does Jesus’ “…but I tell you…” (Matthew 5:39) mean. Is he taking issue with what the Law states? Is he repealing the law of restitution? Is he unveiling a higher and more merciful standard of spirituality?

Today, the rabbis tell us that the Talmud, vis-à-vis the Oral Law, never required a literal interpretation of Exodus 21:23-25, while this may be generally true, it isn’t absolutely true, as we find in Judges 1:6-7. We need to understand that what Jesus preached wasn’t entirely a new way of life, because the scriptures tell us that the Gospel was preached to the ancients. For example, it was preached to Abraham (Galatians 3:8) and even to Israel in the wilderness (Hebrews 4:2). Folks had a general idea of what God required, but such an understanding, as a general rule, wasn’t mixed with faith. So, if Jesus wasn’t taking issue with the Law of Moses (cp. Matthew 5:17), and he wasn’t repealing the law of restitution, which, in effect, would destroy the law, and if he wasn’t introducing a new spirituality unknown to ancient Israel, what was Jesus’ point in: “But, I say unto you…” (Matthew 5:39)?

Jesus began by pointing his disciples to what they knew the scribes and Pharisees taught, vis-à-vis “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth…” (Matthew 5:38). However, the argument Jesus had with them wasn’t with the wording of their teaching, which, clearly is found in the Law, but their interpretation of what is said there.

A quick look at Jesus’ words: “But I say unto you…” (Matthew 5:39-41) shows his interest was in personal injury of a kind that doesn’t endanger life or the property of the group (family, etc.). Moreover, the personal injury, in reality, comes down to minor offenses. It seems the scribes and Pharisees had been teaching that strict adherence to the law of restitution was a requirement of all Jews at all times, if they wished to honor the word of God. Yet, the word of God under the Old Covenant is replete of evidence of mercy toward folks who injured another party. Abraham refused to treat Lot as Lot had treated him, and even gave his nephew first choice of the land (Genesis 13:8-9). Job had been insulted and rashly accused of wickedness by his friends, but instead of retaliation, he prayed for them, hoping God wouldn’t judge them (Job 42:7-8). Joseph forgave his brothers who had thought to do him harm, and instead blessed them (Genesis 45:1-7), and more instances could be added from the lives of Moses and David and others.

Jesus told his disciples they shouldn’t resist evil, and interpreted that as: “whoever would strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him.” Does this mean I should allow a burglar, for example, to maim or slay me or endanger my family by standing by, while an invader has his way with them? Of course not! Consider Jesus’ words. The Bible assumes a person is right-handed, unless otherwise indicated. Thus, to be stricken on one’s right cheek isn’t a blow from a left punch, but the back hand of the offender. In other words, it is in insult. Rather than seeking restitution, Jesus told his disciples that living in the Presence of God, required us to allow God to mend the breach, even to the point of allowing the offender to continue to insult the Lord’s disciple (Matthew 5:39).

Likewise, if someone sues the Lord’s disciple for his inner garment (like a shirt) offer him your outer garment (like a coat) as well (Matthew 5:40), for the idea is to mend the relationship. By giving up a shirt and a coat won’t destroy one’s financial status (cp. 1Corinthians 6:7). Finally, Jesus mentions what was considered a violation of one’s free rights. Roman law permitted a mail carrier to demand that a citizen of the land carry his burden for him for a mile. Jesus told his disciples that, not only shouldn’t they be offended with the practice, but demonstrate their freedom by carrying the mail carrier’s burden for two miles, or above and beyond what the law demanded.

Therefore, in the context of what Jesus had just been saying, give to him who asks and don’t consider one’s personal rights, and if one wants to borrow from you, vis-à-vis demands restitution for loss or services rendered, similar to the idea of borrowing by Israel, when they left Egypt (Exodus 11:2), give them what they demand, and more, in the hope of restoring the relationship (Matthew 5:42).