Fallout is continuing over a gaff from Health Canada this week in sending body Bags to a remote Manitoba First nations community. Although an apology was made by Federal Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq, Garden Hill Chief David Harper did not accept it. When we look at the history of relations between aboriginals and the rest of Canada, mistrust and resentment are prevalent. We see examples of pride, lawsuits, hostility and vengeance from both sides. We can see these things because the situation involves human beings.
When our supreme concern is getting and keeping what we think is rightfully ours, then whoever or whatever gets in our way-including the law-becomes expendable. Since it is not possible for everyone to have everything anyone wants, to insist on our own way invariably tramples on the rights and welfare of others. Respect for law and for the welfare of others is always among the first and major casualties of self-assertion. When self is in the foreground, everything else and everyone else is pushed to the background.
Probably no part of the Sermon on the Mount has been so misinterpreted and misapplied as 5:38–42. It has been misinterpreted to mean that Christians are to be sanctimonious doormats. It has been used to promote pacifism, conscientious objection to military service, lawlessness, anarchy, and a host of other positions that it does not support. The Russian writer Tolstoy based one of his best-known novels on this passage. The thesis of War and Peace is that the elimination of police, the military, and other forms of authority would bring a utopian society.
But Jesus already had made plain that He did not come to eliminate even the smallest part of God’s law (5:17–19), which includes respect for and obedience to human law and authority.
How can we come to grips with Jesus` extraordinary directives here while living in a world of hostility, greed and vengeance? The way not to do it, was the way of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). Their plan included was their insistence on personal rights and vengeance. In His fifth illustration contrasting their righteousness with God’s, Jesus again shows how rabbinic tradition had twisted God’s holy law to serve the selfish purposes of unholy people. Here he shows 1) The Principle of Mosaic Law. Matthew 5:38 and gives four illustrations on: 2) The Perspective of Divine Truth.
1) The Principle of Mosaic Law. Matthew 5:38
Matthew 5:38 [38]"You have heard that it was said, ’An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ (ESV)
Please turn to Deuteronomy 19
This quotation is taken directly from the Old Testament (Ex. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21) and reflects the principle of lex talionis, one of the most ancient law codes. Simply put, it required that punishment exactly match the crime. The same idea is carried in the expressions tit for tat and quid pro quo. The earliest record of lex talionis is in the Code of Hammurabi, the great Babylonian king who lived a hundred or so years before Moses. It is likely, however, that the principle was in wide use long before that time.
Deuteronomy 19:18-21 [18]The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, [19]then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. [20]And the rest shall hear and fear, and shall never again commit any such evil among you. [21]Your eye shall not pity. It shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (ESV)
• Most people, including the Scribes and Pharisees, have completely missed both the context and intent of this passage. Verse 18 specifies that it is the state who is to take action. This is not an issue of personal vengeance. This passage is meant as a guideline for state punishment to be proportionate to the crime.
The principle of punishment to match the crime had two basic purposes. The first was to curtail further crime. When a person is punished for his wrongdoing, “the rest will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such an evil thing among you” (Deut. 19:20). The second purpose was to prevent excessive punishment based on personal vengeance and angry retaliation. Punishment was to match, but not exceed, the harm done by the offense itself.
The law of an eye for an eye was a just law, because it matched punishment to offense. It was a merciful law, because it limited the innate propensity of the human heart to seek retribution beyond what an offense deserved. It was also a beneficent law, because it protected society by restraining wrongdoing.
Selfish overreaction is the natural response of sinful human nature. We are tempted to get more than just even.
Illustration: 7079 Revenge On Old Car
Human vengeance is ultimately self-destructive. La Liberte reported of a police incident where passersbys called police when they saw a man drive his new automobile into the fenders of a parked car. He explained that both cars belonged to him—that he was having revenge on the old car for giving him so much trouble. (Tan, Paul Lee: Encyclopedia of 7700 Illustrations : A Treasury of Illustrations, Anecdotes, Facts and Quotations for Pastors, Teachers and Christian Workers. Garland TX : Bible Communications, 1996, c1979)
We have seen: 1) The Principle of Mosaic Law. Matthew 5:38 and now:
2) The Perspective of Divine Truth. Matthew 5:39-42
Matthew 5:39-42 [39]But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. [40]And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. [41]And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. [42]Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. (ESV)
In the command do not resist the one who is evil Jesus rebuts the Pharisees’ misinterpretation and forbids retaliation in personal relationships. He does not teach, as many have claimed, that no stand is to be taken against evil and that it should simply be allowed to take its course.
The key to understand each of these directives is to understand the spirit of the command and not universally apply the letter. If the letter is rigidly followed, it defeats the spirit of each of the commands. For example, we are not to go two miles to help someone but not an inch further etc.
• In each of the situations Jesus mentions, we must look to how the concepts are further explained elsewhere in Scripture. We must let Scripture interpret Scripture.
Jesus is condemning the spirit of lovelessness, hatred, yearning for revenge. He is saying, ``Do not resist the evil-doer with measures that arise from an unloving, unforgiving, unrelenting, vindictive disposition``. (William Hendriksen. Matthew: New Testament Commentary. Baker Book House. Grand Rapids, MI. 2004. p.310).
Jesus and the apostles continually opposed evil with every means and resource. Jesus resisted the profaning of God’s Temple by making a scourge of cords and physically driving out the sacrifice sellers and moneychangers (Matt. 21:12; John 2:15). We are to “resist the devil” (James 4:7; 1 Pet. 5:9) and all the evil that he stands for and inspires (Matt. 6:13; Rom. 12:9; 1 Thess. 5:22; 2 Tim. 4:18).
That the principle of nonresistance does not apply to governmental authorities is clear from many passages in the New Testament. Civil government “is a minister of God to you for good,” Paul says. “But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil” (Rom. 13:4). Peter commands, “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right” (1 Pet. 2:13–14).
For the sake of God’s righteousness, as well as for the sake of human justice, believers are obligated not only to uphold the law themselves but to insist that others do so as well. To report crime is an act of compassion, righteousness, and godly obedience as well as an act of civil responsibility. To belittle, excuse, or hide the wrongdoing of others is not an act of love but an act of wickedness, because it undermines civil justice and divine righteousness.
Anthistçmi (resist) means to oppose, and in this context obviously refers to harm done to someone who is evil. ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Rom. 12:17, 19).
Vengeful retaliation has no place in society at large, and even less place among those who belong to Christ. We are called to overcome someone’s evil toward us by doing good to them (Rom. 12:21).
After establishing the basic principle in Matthew 5:39a, in verses 39b-42 Jesus picks out four basic human rights that He uses to illustrate the principle of individual non-retaliation: A)Dignity, B) Security, C) Liberty, and D)Property.
A) Dignity. Matthew 5:39b
Matthew 5:39b [39](But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil). But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. (ESV)
As human beings we have the right to be treated with basic dignity, respect, and consideration. Because every person is created in His image, God demands that we treat one another with respect. But he knows that we will not always be so treated. Often for the very reason that we belong to God and go by the name of His Son, we will be mistreated, ridiculed, and held in contempt (see Matt. 10:16–23; John 15:18—16:3; 1 Pet. 2:20–21; 3:13–17; 4:12–19; cf. 2 Tim. 3:12). It is the way we react to mistreatment and insult that Jesus is talking about here.
Among Jews, a slap or other striking in the face was among the most demeaning and contemptuous of acts (cf. Matt. 26:67–68; Mark 14:65; John 18:22). To strike someone elsewhere on the body might cause more physical harm, The word `slap` translates the Greek work rhapizo, which is a strike with the open hand. It is not a punch or physically assault but a slap in the face as an attack on one’s honor and was considered to be a terrible indignity. It was to be treated with disdain, as being less than a human. Even a slave would rather have been stuck across the back with a whip than be slapped in the face by his master’s hand.
To strike someone on the right cheek would then be a vicious angry reaction, indicating an act of insult. Yet when we are insulted, maligned, and treated with contempt-literally or figuratively struck on the cheek by someone-we are to turn to him the other also. But Jesus’ point pertains more to what we are not to do than what we are to do. Turning the other cheek symbolizes the nonavenging, nonretaliatory, humble, and gentle spirit that is to characterize kingdom citizens (cf. vv. 3, 5).
Please turn to 1 Peter 2
Jesus strongly resisted evil that was directed against others, especially His Father-as when He cleansed the Temple of those who defiled His Father’s house. But He did not resist by personal vengeance any evil directed at Himself. When the leaders of the Sanhedrin, and later the soldiers, physically abused Him and mocked Him, He did not retaliate either in words or in actions (Matt. 26:67–68). As Isaiah had predicted of Him, Christ gave His back to those who struck Him and His cheeks to those who plucked out His beard (Isa. 50:6). As Jesus hung from the cross, He prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34).
Peter sums up our Lord’s example
1 Peter 2:20-23 [20]For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. [21]For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. [22]He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. [23]When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. (ESV)
We may notice that, while Jesus most perfectly observed the spirit of this command, he did not slavishly follow the letter of it (cf. John 18:22, 23). Nor did St. Paul (cf. Acts 16:35ff; 22:25 23:3; 25:9, 10). We must remember that, while he clothes his teaching with the form of concrete examples, these are only parabolic representations of principles eternal in themselves, but in practice to be modified according to each separate occasion. “This offering of the other cheek may be done outwardly; but only inwardly can it be always right” (Spence-Jones, H. D. M. (Hrsg.): The Pulpit Commentary: St. Matthew Vol. I. Bellingham, WA : Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2004, S. 166)
When someone attacks our right to dignity, we too are not to defend that right by retaliation. We are to leave the protection and defense of our dignity in God’s hands, knowing that one day we will live and reign with him in His kingdom in great glory.
Illustration: People don’t always handle the situation properly.
One summer evening, a weary truck driver pulled his rig into an all-night truck stop. He was tired and hungry. The waitress had just finally served him his dinner, when three rough-neck, no-good motorcyclists decided to give him a hard time. Not only did they verbally abuse him, but consumed his dinner before him. One grabbed his hamburger, the other a big, greasy handful of fries, and the third his cup of coffee.
So, how did this trucker respond? Well, not the way you might assume. He calmly rose, picked up his check, walked to the front cashier, laid down his check and money and then went out the door. After picking up the money, the waitress stood and watched as he drove out into the night.
When she returned, growled the biker’s said to her, “Well, he’s not much of a man, is he?” She replied, “I don’t know about that, but he sure isn’t much of a truck driver. He just ran over 3 motorcycles on his way out of the parking lot.”
(adapted from Jeffery Anselmi, www.sermoncentral.com)
B) Security. Matthew 5:40
Matthew 5:40 [40]And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. (ESV)
The tunic/shirt mentioned here was an undergarment, and the cloak/coat was an outer garment that also served as a blanket at night. Most people of that day owned only one coat and probably only one or two shirts. It was the outer garment, the coat, that Mosaic law required be returned to its owner “before the sun sets, for that is his only covering; it is his cloak for his body” (Ex. 22:26–27).
Jesus is not speaking of a robbery, in which a person tries to steal your clothes, but of the legitimate claim of anyone who wants to sue you.
When a person had no money or other possessions, the court often would require the fine or judgment be paid by clothing. The attitude of a kingdom citizen, one who is truly righteous, should be willingness to surrender even one’s coat, his extremely valuable outer garment, rather than cause offense or hard feelings with an adversary. The court could not demand the cloak/coat, but it could be voluntarily given to meet the required debt. And that is precisely what Jesus says we should be willing to do.
• When someone is legally granted bankruptcy, they cannot be legally forced to pay back outstanding debts. For kingdom citizens, this does not morally negate personal responsibility to repay outstanding debt.
• For kids, even if a parent or teacher does not demand that you give back or compensate another child or adult for a loss (vandalism) Kingdom kids have a moral obligation (perhaps in chores or service for another) to compensate them for their loss.
Please turn to 1 Corinthians 6
If a legal judgment is fairly made against us for a certain amount, we should be willing to offer even more in order to show our regret for any wrong we did and to show that we are not bitter or resentful against the one who has sued us. In so doing we will show the love of Christ and that we are “sons of [our] Father who is in heaven” (v. 45).
1 Corinthians 6:1-8 [6:1]When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? [2]Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? [3]Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! [4]So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? [5]I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, [6]but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? [7]To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? [8]But you yourselves wrong and defraud--even your own brothers! (ESV)
• It is better even to be defrauded than to be resentful and spiteful.
• There should be a willingness to forfeit one’s due rather than be vengeful.
Jesus does not undercut civil justice, which belongs in the courtroom. He undercuts personal selfishness (characteristic of the false religionists listening to Him on the mountain), which belongs nowhere and especially not in the hearts of His kingdom people. Jesus taught us to have confidence in an almighty God who is completely aware of the injustices done to people and totally capable of evoking ultimate eternal justice. He must be trusted even when legal litigation goes against the believer.
Illustration: When he was an attorney, Abraham Lincoln was once approached by a man who passionately insisted on bringing a suit for $2.50 against an impoverished debtor. Lincoln tried to discourage him, but the man was bent on revenge. When he saw that the man would not be put off, Lincoln agreed to take the case and asked for a legal fee of $10, which the plaintiff paid. Lincoln then gave half of the money to the defendant, who willingly confessed to the debt and paid the $2.50! (Browns Book of Anecdotes)
C) Liberty. Matthew 5:41
Matthew 5:41 [41]And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. (ESV)
The third right the Lord indicates kingdom citizens are to be willing to sacrifice is that of liberty. God’s original intention was for everyone made in His image to live in freedom. Human bondage and slavery are consequences of the Fall and have no part in God’s original plan for His creation. The best of human governments have always tried to protect the freedom of their citizens, and sometimes even of foreigners. In light of God’s will and proper human justice, human beings have the right to certain freedoms. But like all other rights, freedom is not to be cherished and protected at the expense of righteousness or even of faithful witness.
Roman law gave a soldier the right to force a civilian to carry his pack for a milion, a Roman mile, which was slightly shorter than our modern mile. The law, designed to relieve the soldier, not only caused great inconvenience to civilians.
Yet even so despised a burden should be carried willingly, Jesus says-not only willingly but with a generosity of spirit. When we are forced to go one mile, we should willingly go two. When we are robbed of some of our cherished liberty, we should surrender even more of it rather than retaliate. The results in so doing we are obedient to our Lord and testify to His righteousness, knowing that in Him we have a dearer freedom that the world cannot take from us.
The believer is to be willing to “go the extra mile.” Doing double our duty not only proves the loyalty and faithfulness of our cooperation to human authority, but likewise proves the spiritual intention of our heart. It also provides an opportunity of conviction in order to witness effectively out of our life message. It would have been foolish for the believer of Jesus’ day to reluctantly go only a mile with a Roman official and then attempt to share the gospel with him (KJV Bible Commentary. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1994, S. 1892).
• When there is a need, do we do the bare necessity and expect results or do we go beyond the expected? Stingy efforts means stingy results.
• For kids, when you are asked to do something by your teacher or parents, not only are you to do it willingly (Eph. 6:1-3) but your effort to go beyond the bare minimum will show a character that can be trusted. Joyful, faithful obedience lends itself to greater privileges.
Illustration: There was a pastor named Peter Miller, who lived in Ephrata, Pennsylvania, and enjoyed the friendship of George Washington. But he had an enemy in town named Michael Wittman, an evil-minded man who did everything he could to oppose and humiliate Pastor Miller. One day Michael Wittman was arrested for treason and sentenced to die. Peter Miller traveled seventy miles on foot to Philadelphia to plead for the life of the traitor.
General Washington said. “I’m sorry, Peter. I cannot grant you the life of your friend.”
“The pastor said, “This guy’s not my friend! He’s my worst enemy!”
General Washington said, “You mean to tell me that you walked seventy miles on foot to save the life of a guy you don’t even like? That puts the matter in a different light. I will grant your pardon.” And he did.
Peter Miller took Michael Wittman back home to Ephrata—no longer an enemy but a friend.
You know, that’s what Jesus did for us. We were enemies of God. But He traveled all the way to earth to save our souls. We are called to go that extra mile that God may use us in a supernatural way in someone else’s life. (Adapted from Marc Axelrod @
http://www.sermoncentral.com/sermon.asp?SermonID=102050&page=0)
D) Property. Matthew 5:42
Matthew 5:42 [42]Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. (ESV)
The fourth right we are to surrender is that of property. Possessiveness is another characteristic of fallen human nature. We dislike giving up, even temporarily, that which belongs to us. Even as Christians, we often forget that nothing truly belongs to us and that we are only stewards of what belongs to God.
As far as other people are concerned, we do have a right to keep that which we possess. By right it is ours to use or dispose of as we see fit. But that right, too, should be placed on the altar of obedience to Christ if required. When someone asks to borrow something from us, we should not refuse/turn away from him. The implication is that the person who asks has a genuine need. We are not required to respond to every foolish, selfish request made of us. Sometimes to give a person what they want but does not need is a disservice, doing them more harm than good.
• Christians should help those who are truly needy. When we fail to be good stewards of what God has given us, then we are unable to fulfill the commands elsewhere in scripture of providing for our family and refusing to contribute to the delinquency of those who choose not to work (2 Thes. 3:10).
• It is a godly thing when kids see a need and have compassion to help. As adults we can help discern if there is a genuine need and the best way to help. We do a disservice if we do not allow kids to help according to their resources of time or possession, to ade others in need especially when they perceive such.
Also implied is the principle that we should offer to give what is needed as soon as we know of the need, whether or not we are asked for help. Jesus is not speaking of begrudging acquiescence to a plea for help, but willing, generous, and loving desire to help others. He is speaking of generosity that genuinely wants to meet the other person’s need, not tokenism that does a good deed to buy off one’s own conscience.
• Kids, do you only offer to help those who you want to be their friend? To be a true child of the King, help those who have a need whether or not you think that you can get something in return.
Quote: There must be wisdom in the application of these concepts. As Alexander Maclaren wisely said:
“If turning the cheek would make the assaulter more angry, or if yielding the cloak would make the legal robber more greedy, or going the second mile would but make the press gang more severe and exacting, resistance becomes a form of love and duty for the sake of the wrongdoer” (Alexander Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture: Daniel and the Minor Prophets, Vol. 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1974), p. 214.)
Yet, only person who is nondefensive, nonvengeful, never bears a grudge, and has no spite in his heart is the person who has died to self. To fight for one’s rights is to prove that self is still on the throne of the heart. The believer who is faithful to Christ lives for Him and, if necessary, dies for Him (Rom. 14:8). It is impossible to live for self and for Christ at the same time.
That is the spirit Jesus teaches in this passage, a spirit all men fail to possess apart from saving grace. It is the spirit Abraham manifested when he gave the best land to his nephew Lot. It is the spirit of Joseph when he embraced and kissed the brothers who had so terribly wronged him. Is the spirit that would not let David take advantage of the opportunity to take the life of Saul, who was then seeking to take David’s life. It is the spirit that led Elisha to feed the enemy Assyrian army. It is the spirit that led Stephen to pray for those who were stoning him to death.
Humanly speaking, such behavior as the Lord calls for here is impossible. Only as a person is controlled by the Holy Spirit can he live a self-sacrificing life. Only as the Savior is allowed to live His life in the believer can insult (v. 39), injustice (v. 40), and inconvenience (v. 41) be repaid with love. This is “the gospel of the second mile.” (MacDonald, William ; Farstad, Arthur: Believer’s Bible Commentary : Old and New Testaments. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. Mt 5:42)
(Format note: Outline & some notes from: MacArthur, John: Matthew. Chicago : Moody Press, 1989, S. 327).
