Justice and Injustice (5:38 42) The Way of Wisdom

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Justice and Injustice (5:38 42) The Way of Wisdom"

Morgan Waters
6 years ago
Views:

1 Justice and Injustice (5:38 42) The Way of Wisdom This passage has received great attention in the centuries since it was first spoken. Through this period, there have been two major schools of interpretation, one, the literalists, and two, the hyperbolic. On the one hand, the literalists have provided the Church with the tradition and life-style of non-violence, passivism, poverty and selfdepreciation. From it came desert hermits, monasteries, monks, nunneries and an occasional socialist commune. Prominent advocates through the years have been the Waldensians, Francis of Assisi, the followers of Wycliff, Erasmus, Schwenkfeld, the Anabaptists, Mennonites, Amish, Quakers and other Christian pacifists. There have also been those who have been influenced by Christianity as well like Tolstoy, Gandhi and Jehovah s Witnesses. On the other hand, those that advocate the hyperbolic or at least symbolic interpretation, look upon the passage as a presentation of a life style that is not literally possible in a fallen world, but still an ideal that one should at least strive for in life. As a result, they speak in warm, spiritual and pietistic terms about this passage but do not embrace it literally. Because of the uncomfortable if not unreasonable demands of this material, as many understand it, this passage with its almost practical-sounding admonition, has been the occasion for numerous and influential efforts to weaken the commandments. Giving spiritual gifts is less painful, as Jerome inadvertently admits: Money that you don t miss when you give it away, namely wisdom. The greatest gift is compassion. One must always be careful to harm neither oneself nor anyone else with one s gift, or, stated somewhat more generally: dignity and justice must be foremost in keeping this commandment.. In short, a mocking objection from Julian the Apostate, which remained valid for many centuries, wondered what it would be like if Christians took this commandment seriously. 1 Most evangelicals embrace this weakened view, the ecumenical watering down of the text. So we end up with 1) it certainly means what it says or 2) it certainly does not mean what it says. And in the last two millennium, not a lot beyond this has been suggested. Yet, there is another view possible. It is not entirely different in that it is a literalist view but, one directed to the first century audience to which Jesus spoke. It is a view that recognizes that this passage is about the ideal of justice in an unjust world and what to do about that conundrum. As stated, this material in Matthew is about justice. It begins by reminding us of the demand for justice in the Old Testament through the statement: An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. This is not a demand for vengeance; it is a rejection of vengeance. This statement recognizes that on the one hand, justice must be commensurate to the crime but on the other, it must not be out of proportion to the offense. Hence eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. Justice is to be sought for and embraced, but, sadly, it is not always possible. This material by Jesus is what you do in a world in which justice is not possible. 1 Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1 7: A Commentary on Matthew 1 7 (ed. Helmut Koester; Rev. ed.; Hermeneia a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007), 280.

2 That was the world in which the Jews of the first century lived. It was the world of Rome. In Israel, with the heavy hand of Roman officials, tax collectors, police and legions ever present, justice was more a dream than a reality. For some, the Zealots, the answer was revolution, hate and the killing of Romans. But for members of Jesus kingdom, how does one live in this world of injustice and hate? It is in this passage that Jesus provides that answer. But, this is not simply a study in the history of Jews in Roman Israel and Jesus teachings on how to bear up under such tyranny. There is also application today for those who live under governments that oppress their citizens. Around us are constant reminders of injustice by bureaucrats, government agencies, courts, police and armies. For many there is oppression a constant desire for revenge. Political revolution for many people is always in the air, as it was for the Zealots and other first century revolutionary groups and leaders. So there are lessons here for our day as well. Matthew 5:38 You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. (Exodus 21:23 25, ESV) If anyone injures his neighbor, as he has done it shall be done to him, fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; whatever injury he has given a person shall be given to him. (Leviticus 24:19 20, ESV) This was the message of justice in a just nation Israel under the law of God. Punishment will be meted our proportionally in keeping with the crime. Some see this as a demand for the maximum penalty of the law, a desire for vengeance. It was the opposite. The OT prescription (Exod 21:24; Lev 24:19 20; Deut 19:21) was not given to foster vengeance; the law explicitly forbade that (Lev 19:18). Rather, it was given, as the OT context shows, to provide the nation s judicial system with a ready formula of punishment, not least because it would decisively terminate vendettas. 2 It meant evenhanded justice without respect of persons. No matter how great the offender, he could not escape just punishment, and no matter how small, no more could be exacted of him than his offense merited. It took punishment out of the realm of private vengeance, but Jewish practice tended to put it back. 3 It restrained the oppressor and required a just punishment for the offender. This is most desirable. But under the rule of Rome this will not happen, things have changed. The hope for justice is just that, a hope; little can be found in practice under this Roman dominion. Therefore. Matthew 5:39 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. 2 D. A. Carson, Matthew, in The Expositor s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke (ed. Frank E. Gaebelein; vol. 8; Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew (The Pillar New Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1992), 126.

3 Do not resist 4 This word resist has the meaning of setting oneself against someone; it has the notion of hostility 5 The antithesis consists of two parts: 1) an eye for an eye and 2) do not resist the one who is evil. Historically, the first part resisted evil demanding justice for the offense. The second part turns this on its head and requires that evil not be resisted. Normally justice would be pursued, but under the conditions, that Israel is now living with, this is dangerous. Instead, one should turn the other cheek. By this phrase, Jesus removes from the table the option of revolution. This would fly in the face of the teachings of the Zealots whose goals were resistance, retaliation and revolution. one who is evil or evil or the evil one The best translation is not entirely clear. One thing is certain, not to resist evil in all places and at all times is to turn the world over to Satan. This, Jesus is not advocating. Justice, the resistance and judgment of evil continues to be the goal of scripture, but not always a present option. Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world. (1 Peter 5:8 9, ESV) Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. (James 4:7, ESV) slaps you on the right cheek The slap on the right cheek was a backhanded blow. It was not the way to strike someone if you wanted to do maximum harm. That would be a direct and more powerful blow to the left cheek (by a right-handed man). Instead, this act is an attempt to demean and disgrace. In this passage, Jesus does not address an attack designed to do serious harm, perhaps to kill. I would not expect Jesus to suggest that we simply stand there and let ourselves be murdered. This is the slap of humiliation. The mortification of slapping the lower class, in this case Jews by Romans, was an ancient behavior. To respond by lashing out and attacking the villain is second nature. But to do so will bring the full response of Roman police and their armies. If not killed on the spot, one would find themselves arrested, dragged into court and possibly sold into slavery, never to see one s family again. So, under such circumstances the command is Do not resist the one who is evil. Be wise enough to endure the injustice and then go home to your family. turn to him the other also In fact, this is exactly what Jesus did not do when struck. 4 resist ἀνθίστημι (anthístēmi) to resist by actively opposing pressure or power to resist. Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains. New York: United Bible Societies. 5 Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

4 When he had said these things, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, Is that how you answer the high priest? Jesus answered him, If what I said is wrong, bear witness about the wrong; but if what I said is right, why do you strike me? (John 18:22 23, ESV) He did not turn the other cheek, he protested. This suggest that we must be careful in explaining what he meant in Matthew 5 for surly he would not violate it in John 18. In fact, Paul did much the same thing. And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting to judge me according to the law, and yet contrary to the law you order me to be struck? (Acts 23:2 3, ESV) In these cases, neither acted like a pacifist. In both, we see the propriety of resisting evil but in these cases, in very limited ways. The actual and physical act of turning the other cheek would probably not go down well with the thug. He would probably see this as an act of insolence and respond accordingly. No, this is symbolic language for not acting in a hostile defiant fashion but instead one that shows you are taking the abuse without a violent response. Not only are you to not resist, but you are do it not visually stewing in your hatred of this evil servant of your oppressor, and thereby incite additional retaliation by this enemy. Instead, act in such a way as to demonstrate that you are not a threat to the tyrant. Be servile, not confrontational. Demonstrate that you are not a threat to this government. And then get on with your life instead of surrendering it to your hatred. The message is to endure under oppression. Would we do these things in a free country where laws are justly enforced? No. The Old Testament laws of justice would take precedence and equity sought. These are not instructions for all circumstances and all times. They are instructions for this time in Israel and others like it. Matthew 5:40 And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. sue 6 The unjust judge was proverbial in Israel. How much more so in a pagan world. This is what the Jew is facing, the unjust judge. Their hands are on what is evil, to do it well; the prince and the judge ask for a bribe, and the great man utters the evil desire of his soul; thus they weave it together. (Micah 7:3, ESV) they have grown fat and sleek. They know no bounds in deeds of evil; they judge not with justice the cause of the fatherless, to make it prosper, and they do not defend the rights of the needy. (Jeremiah 5:28, ESV) 6 κρίνω.to pass judgment, to make a judgment. This verb describes the act of carrying out a judicial process or making a judgment. Matthew Aernie, Judgment, Final, ed. Douglas Mangum et al., Lexham Theological Wordbook (Lexham Bible Reference Series; Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014).

5 Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Everyone loves a bribe and runs after gifts. They do not bring justice to the fatherless, and the widow s cause does not come to them. (Isaiah 1:23, ESV) And as you can see from James, it is not simply Romans that are oppressing the poor, it is the rich Jew as well as James makes clear. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? (James 2:6, ESV) tunic 7 This is the under garment. The fact that the lawsuit results in the loss of such a common entity shows that this is not a well to do person. The suit is not so much to gain wealth as it is to oppress. cloak 8 This is the outer garment that went over the tunic; it was of greater value to the man. This he would not give up if he could avoid it. For the poor, this was their coat during the day and their blanket at night. Yet, Jesus recognizing the danger of the moment advises that this be done that the tyrant might be placated. If these instruction were followed literally, they would leave most Christians stark naked (v. 40). 9 That very fact suggest that something other than a literal explanation is meant. What is meant is that one must respond to highhanded thugs and murders in such a way as to appease them. If it is not likely that you are going to win in a lawsuit in a crooked court, don t expose all your wealth to the process. Give the appearance of thoroughly losing the case by agreeing to the loss of more than what was first put at risk and thereby secure the remainder of your property. This is called, skill in living or simply wisdom. Be wise as a serpent but harmless as a dove. Make the best deal you can. Don t bet the farm in an unjust court. Matthew 5:41 And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. If there was any question that this Roman-oppressor approach was the correct one to these teachings, this verse puts that to rest. Here Jesus advocates not only compliance but cooperation with a member of the occupying army who might be borrowing a worker from his livelihood (5:41) Χιτών The first garment mentioned is the basic garment worn in some form or other by everyone. Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: A commentary on the Greek text. New International Greek Testament Commentary (258). Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press. 8 ἱμάτιον The second garment is a supplementary outer garment, able to serve a number of practical functions (e.g., for carrying grain or objects), essential in cold weather, and serving in some cases for the poor as a night blanket as well. Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: A commentary on the Greek text. New International Greek Testament Commentary ( ). Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press. 9 Craig S. Keener, Matthew (vol. 1; The IVP New Testament Commentary Series; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), Mt 5: Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of Matthew: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2009), 195.

6 forces ἀγγαρεύω 11 or compels The only other place in the Bible where this word is used is also in Matthew where Roman soldiers forced Simon to carry Jesus s cross. As they went out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name. They compelled this man to carry his cross. (Matthew 27:32, ESV) mile 12 This example refers to the Roman practice of commandeering civilians to carry the luggage of military personnel a prescribed distance, one Roman mile. 13 the attitude of Jesus disciples under such circumstances must not be spiteful or vengeful but helpful willing to go a second mile. This illustration is also implicitly anti-zealot. 14 Note the advice of the Stoic philosopher Epictetus, Disc : If there is an angareia and a soldier seizes your donkey, let it go. Do not resist or grumble, or you will be beaten and lose your donkey just the same! 15 One must not underestimate what a tyrant can do to you. Remember that and live in his presence in such a way as to make friends with this one who can do you such great damage. Instead of throwing down his baggage with vengeance at the one-mile marker, which most Jews posted from their home, keep walking. Leave a good taste in the mouth of the oppressor it may serve you well later. This teaching suggests that Jesus advocated a response to the Roman occupation which not only full-blown Zealots but even the ordinarily patriotic populace would have found incomprehensible. 16 Wisdom is incomprehensible to fools. Matthew 5:42 Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. A basic rule of thumb in Biblical interpretation is that the ridicules is probably not the right answer. That comes into play here. Begging was a common if not respectable way of making a living in this first century context. You generally could not go far 11 To press into service, to send off an ággaros or public courier. This word is of Persian origin, and after being received into the Gr. language, passed also into use among the Jews and Romans. The ággaroi, couriers, had authority to press into their service men, horses, ships or anything which came in their way and which might serve to hasten their journey. Zodhiates, S. (2000). The complete word study dictionary: New Testament. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers. 12 μίλιον a Roman mile, lit. a thousand paces, then a fixed measure=eight stades=about 4,854 feet or 1,478.5 meters. William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer s Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), Carson, D. A. (1984). Matthew. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke (Vol. 8, p. 156). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 14 Carson, D. A. (1984). Matthew. In F. E. Gaebelein (Ed.), The Expositor s Bible Commentary: Matthew, Mark, Luke (Vol. 8, p. 156). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House. 15 R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007). 16 France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew (p. 222). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.

7 without someone, or perhaps many someones, begging. For others borrowing was more acceptable than begging, although the mark was no more likely to receive his property back from the borrower than from the beggar. But if you literally did this, you would soon be living on the street with the one who was only recently begging from you. Those who have understood the true thrust of Jesus teaching here have often declared it to be not only extreme and unwelcome, but also practically unworkable in the real world. You cannot live like this. It would be to encourage the unscrupulous and the feckless and so to undermine the proper ordering of society. 17 So, If Jesus is not genuinely advocating nudity and living on the street that is, if he is speaking the language of rhetorical overstatement 18 how are we to interpret it? Why would you be so quick to loan or give your wealth away and to people that were probably most undeserving? Well you might keep in mind the possible repercussions of refusing to do so, as Nabal did after he experienced the result of such a refusal. Abigail was smarter and made sure that David received the loan he requested. Indeed, throughout human government it was common for kings and emperors to borrow from their subjects. Lots of luck on collecting that loan. Today governments are more sophisticated than this, instead they simply print money for their own use and let the citizen experience the same effect, a loss of wealth in his remaining but diminished purchasing power we call this inflation. This can only be caused by two entities, privately run criminal counterfeiters, gangs, or collectively run criminal counterfeiters, governments. The second will do you far more damage than the first. Living under such a government was tough; loans greased the gears of government and made life a lot better. This may be the point Jesus is making here. Keep in mind, the enemy here is not the Jewish neighbor in need of a helping hand; it is the everpresent Roman official. This is the man you must keep happy. So, what is the antithesis? An eye for an eye, justice, is most desirable, but sometimes justice is not possible. You can die trying to achieve it, or you can go along and get along. Sometimes there are circumstance where it is best to not make such a big fuss over justice. Do what you have to do and then go home to your family. 17 R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (The New International Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 2007), Craig S. Keener, Matthew (vol. 1; The IVP New Testament Commentary Series; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), Mt 5:38.

Today s Reading Matthew 5:38-48

Today s Reading Matthew 5:38-48 38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn