(Mat 5:38-42 ESV) “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ 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.”
“Do not resist the one who is evil” has led to countless interpretations. But I find myself in agreement with this reading —
Jesus is not teaching that one should lie down in the face of evil or submit to evil; rather, he is teaching that we should forego trying to “get back at,” or take revenge on a quarrelsome neighbor. As Proverbs 24:29 says: “Do not say, ‘I will do to him as he has done to me. I will pay the man back for what he has done.'”
Jesus is expressing an important principle which applies to our relationships with friends and neighbors. It does not apply when we are confronted with a murderer, rapist, or like person of violence; nor when we are facing the enemy on the field of battle. Jesus is not talking about how to deal with violence. He is talking about the fundamentals of brotherly relationships, about how to relate to our neighbor.
If, for instance, a neighbor dumps a pail of garbage on our lawn, we are not to retaliate by dumping two pails on his lawn. If someone cuts in front of us in traffic, we are not to catch up and try to run him off the road. Wanting to “get even” is, of course, a natural response; however, it is not our responsibility to punish our neighbor for his action. That responsibility is God’s. We are to respond to our neighbor in a way that will disarm and shame him for his actions.
Proverbs 25:21 says: “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat, and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. In so doing, you heap red-hot coals on his head, and the Lord will reward you.”
David Bivin & Roy Blizzard Jr., Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective (Kindle Locations 540-552). Kindle Edition. (1983, revised 1994) (paragraphing added).
Again the emphatic formula is used to introduce striking new teaching. “Do not resist the evil person” does not mean that we should let evil triumph throughout our communities. Jesus is referring to private retaliation, not to public order, and he is instructing his followers not to be intent on getting their own back when someone wrongs them. To be the victim of some form of evil does not give us the right to hit back.
Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Pillar NTC; Accordance electronic ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 126-127.
It helps, I think, to recall that Jesus is addressing an honor culture in which vengeance was often required to avoid shame and preserve honor. Of course, one problem with this culture is that there is no stopping point. Each retaliation gives rise to another demand for retribution — and a minor disagreement can lead to years and years of hatred and violence. Hence, the only cure is to be first person to show mercy.
This is why the kingdom of heaven is given to the poor in spirit and the merciful — it’s people who do not insist on their rights, who don’t seek retaliation, who forgive without being asked who will comprise God’s kingdom.
Of course, the most familiar line of the passage is “But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
The blow on the right cheek was the most grievous insult possible in the ancient world (apart from inflicting serious physical harm), and in many cultures was listed alongside the “eye for an eye” laws; both Jewish and Roman law permitted prosecution for this offense.
Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Accordance electronic ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 60.
The situation envisaged is thus one of insult rather than of physical violence, and it is possibly to be seen as an aspect of religious persecution (Jeremias, loc. cit.). The same verb is used in 26:67 or the ill-treatment of Jesus as a blasphemer, and the words of this verse recall Isaiah 50:6, the Servant’s acceptance of insult and ill-treatment. Such acceptance Jesus requires of his disciples, rather than recourse to either retaliation or the law.
R. T. France, Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale NTC 1; IVP/Accordance electronic ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 131.
Once again, we see that Jesus himself set an example of these teachings at his crucifixion. He is not demanding anything that he hasn’t done himself.
Regarding “And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well,” Jesus is again addressing the legal system. The Torah prevents a creditor from taking a person’s cloak (Exo 22:25-27), but Jesus says we should not rely on legalities to avoid paying our debts.
(OJ Simpson famously moved to Florida and bought a mansion, because Florida exempts homes from creditor claims. Of course, he was defeating the claims of the family of the woman he was proved to have murdered. It’s really hard to defend Florida’s policy of letting people exempt multi-million dollar assets from being used to pay money owed.)
To “go the extra mile” has made its way into American vernacular, not that we are actually inclined to obey the command.
Forces you to go (angareuō) is a specific term for the Roman soldier’s practice of ‘commandeering’ civilian labour in an occupied country. (It is used similarly in 27:32.) Here enforced service as a porter is envisaged. The Jews fiercely resented such impositions, and Jesus’ choice of this example deliberately dissociates him from militant nationalists. Rather than resisting, or even resenting, the disciple should volunteer for a further mile (the Roman term for 1,000 paces, rather less than our mile).
R. T. France, Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale NTC 1; IVP/Accordance electronic ed. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 132.
“Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you” is difficult unless you have read the Law of Moses.
(Deu 15:7-11 ESV) “If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, 8 but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. 9 Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the LORD against you, and you be guilty of sin. 10 You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. 11 For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.'”
Under the Law, the poor were to be supported by giving loans (v. 8). And every seven years, all loans were to be forgiven. Therefore, to make a loan near the end of the seven-year cycle risked having the Sabbath year occur before the loan could be paid back, and yet Moses instructed, “[Y]our eye [should not] look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the LORD against you, and you be guilty of sin.”
Again, this is an honor culture. Therefore, rather than giving a handout (which would be shaming to the poor man), the instruction is to lend, thereby saving face for him, and to do this even if there is no prospect of being paid back. It’s not that giving him the money outright would be sin but that it would take away his dignity. Even the poorest of the poor was to be treated with honor.
Jesus is commanding what the Torah had required for 1,500 years — generosity to the poor done in a way that doesn’t destroy their dignity and honor. Thus, Moses required farmers to leave a part of their fields and trees unharvested so the poor could glean — harvest the leftovers for their own use. It was free food — but free food that required backbreaking work — thereby preserving a modicum of honor.
On the other hand, the tithe (1/10th of gross receipts, not income) paid by each Jew went to support the poor and the priesthood.
(Deu 26:12-13 ESV) “When you have finished paying all the tithe of your produce in the third year, which is the year of tithing, giving it to the Levite, the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, so that they may eat within your towns and be filled, 13 then you shall say before the LORD your God, ‘I have removed the sacred portion out of my house, and moreover, I have given it to the Levite, the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, according to all your commandment that you have commanded me. I have not transgressed any of your commandments, nor have I forgotten them.”
This was an ancient welfare system in which the producers were taxed to support the poor, in addition to the system of private charity: gleanings and lending to the poor.
And so Jesus insists that we not take vengeance or retaliate. We should rather suffer loss. The tit-for-tat world of honor ends with the first Christian involved. No Hatfield and McCoys. No getting back. No getting even.
Rather, the command is mercy and forgiveness.
(Eph 4:31-32 ESV) 31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. 32 Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.
How are we forgiven? Well, for free. At no cost. In fact, God forgives even those sins we’re unaware of. God does not hold grudges. Therefore, we may not hold grudges. It’s simply not allowed for Christians.
It’s not about what we deserve from others. After all, if we got what we deserve, we’d all go straight to hell. And having received mercy, we are required to provide mercy.
Jay, there are many “reformed Christians” who made their fortunes by hook or crook, cheating others, who today try their best to live by the “golden rule” but they still have the financial gains that was gained by “evil” as the young rich man asked “what should they do” ?
If we are to forgive as God has forgiven, we are to forgive even when it costs us dearly. After all, we are forgiven through the blood of Jesus. To forgive in this way is to share with Jesus in his suffering and to fulfill what is lacking in his suffering. Sometimes, to forgive, we must simply suffer the pain of the sin against us without complaint or lasting ill will.
If we are to forgive as God forgives, this means we will have to forgive even when it costs us dearly. After all, we are forgiven at great cost – the blood of Jesus. Forgiveness means we must accept the pain of the sin(s) against us and go on with joy instead of resentful grudge-holding.
Thank you Jay especially for the section on helping the poor. The Law of Moses required all Jews of means, landowners, to help the poor in specific ways. In the Gospels we find Jesus presuming that all followers of God would be giving alms on some regular basis. Living in the inner city I see poverty every day and try to help others as I am able. But I am regularly distressed by the presumption of so many middle class and conservative Christians that the poor are poor entirely by their own fault, laziness and poor decisions and that there is no real obligation for Christians to help other than occasionally cleaning out closets and donating old clothes and maybe some canned goods to food drives. The rhetoric of many such Christians actually seems to suggest at times that they would receive satisfaction from seeing the poor starve and suffer.
I highly recommend the op-ed “How Expensive It Is to Be Poor” by Charles M. Blow that appeared in the January 19, 2015 New York Times. It lays out what I already knew from a lifetime of being involved with the poor. Rather than receiving breaks the poor actually have to pay more than the middle class in so many ways. For example the working poor spend on average between 4 and 5% of their payroll checks just to cash them. Bank accounts are out of the question because of minimum balance requirements. Another example is that the inner city poor who have no autos routinely have to buy their groceries at little corner stores that are much more expensive. Yes there are city buses but have you ever tried to use a public bus to get back and forth to buy groceries? I could go on and on but I will stop. Suffice it to say that there is no authentic Christianity in this world without regular and significant help being given to the poor.
Gary,
You are quite right. It’s a world most white professionals can’t imagine.
PS — The real solution to check cashing charges is for the employer to pay in cash or to require its bank to cash its checks for free as a condition to using the bank for its payroll. I know business people who help their workers out both ways. The employer just has to be aware of the problem and be willing to help out. The check cashing problem is most easily solved, not by legislation, but by employers caring enough about their employees to go the extra mile.
Laymond,
The Psalms address exactly the situation you mention:
(Psa 49:16-19 NET) 16 Do not be afraid when a man becomes rich and his wealth multiplies! 17 For he will take nothing with him when he dies; his wealth will not follow him down into the grave. 18 He pronounces this blessing on himself while he is alive: “May men praise you, for you have done well!” 19 But he will join his ancestors; they will never again see the light of day.
(Psa 17:14-15 NET) 14 LORD, use your power to deliver me from these murderers, from the murderers of this world! They enjoy prosperity; you overwhelm them with the riches they desire. They have many children, and leave their wealth to their offspring. 15 As for me, because I am innocent I will see your face; when I awake you will reveal yourself to me.
(Psa 39:5-7 NET) 5 Look, you make my days short-lived, and my life span is nothing from your perspective. Surely all people, even those who seem secure, are nothing but vapor. 6 Surely people go through life as mere ghosts. Surely they accumulate worthless wealth without knowing who will eventually haul it away.” 7 But now, O Lord, upon what am I relying? You are my only hope!
(Psa 119:35-38 NET) 35 Guide me in the path of your commands, for I delight to walk in it. 36 Give me a desire for your rules, rather than for wealth gained unjustly. 37 Turn my eyes away from what is worthless! Revive me with your word! 38 Confirm to your servant your promise, which you made to the one who honors you.
Have any of you noticed that as the scriptures speak of the poor, the picture that I see is individuals or families who were very short on the necessities of life, whether it be food or shelter. We do notice that many of these would be individuals who were not able to perform work which would provide them with the necessities. I get the impression in the messages of scripture that these poor are individuals who will attempt to use any substance that they are given in a manner that would lead to a more permanent future in their lives. Some of the verses cited above tell of assets of the rich or the landowner being left in a fashion that required effort or work on the part of the receiving individual to make the asset usable to them. Of course that would identify that the individuals receiving the asset were capable to perform the necessary work. These would be individuals who would not loose their dignity.
But, there are many individuals who do not have any dignity who are just lazy and would not perform work that was available which would provide their necessities. In all societies there are both classes of individuals.
Any help that was given to many of these individuals would have to be in a form which they could not easily convert to another form of asset to fulfill their desires. They live with a totally different concept of what is necessities. If you were to give them currency it would be first applied to their nicotine, liquor or gambling dependency (even the lottery that was designed to be a major support for schools) each of those are to them first priority above food or shelter. In fact many are exactly where they are just because of those priorities, and I am sure that you can visualize that their families definitely were not in the priority list higher than their dependencies. Oh, and by the way many times it is not the bread winner but the spouse of the bread winner. Being an employer the majority of my life, I have seen many of the dependents of a working bread winner in dire need for the basic substances of life (food and shelter) while the bread winner served self first and consumed all. Families like this have to be helped very cautiously or the one responsible for their condition will still remove any good works that you can do for their own benefit. It is impossible to help some individuals out of the present lifestyle in which they have become comfortable.
Evidently, Paul was aware of some of these situations.
(2 Th 3:10 NIV) For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “If a man will not work, he shall not eat.” 11 We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the bread they eat.
So my point, we not only have a responsibility to give to the poor, we must be just as vigilant in being sure that the help we give is serving the purpose that God would desire it fulfill.
As Laymond has noted there are many in this world who have gained wealth through dishonorable actions. To those individuals there will be some answering to be accounted for but we are not the judge.
But, thoughts like this sometimes causes us to view those have been blessed greatly by their endeavors as if all have engaged in that type of activity. But, as we read the account of God’s Word we will find many men and families who were well blessed with earthly goods who did not participate in not acceptable activities. Probably, most all of God’s servants are not poor, that is why the instructions to His people instruct them to be a provider for the poor.