# 22: 3-20-18 1

Matthew 5:38-48

Jesus had been showing a crowd of Jews who were following Him just what it would take for them to enter
the kingdom of heaven, based on their own good works; their righteousness would have to exceed that of
the scribes and the Pharisees.

Jesus had given the Jews several examples from the Law, showing them just how comprehensively God
intended His Law, in order for it to be kept - it went deep down to the heart, to the will of a man; to his
motives, his intentions.

Anger, lustful thoughts, and the intent to deceive could not necessarily be observed by men; but such
lawlessness could be seen by God, and would be judged by Him, as the violations against His righteousness
requirements that they indeed were.

If a Jew was determined to seek acceptance by God based on his keeping of the Law, then God must judge
him by the Law - by the letter and the spirit of it - and the Jew must then keep it perfectly.

So far, the commandments that Jesus had brought forth from the Law of Moses were essentially negative,
pertaining to things a Jew was not to do; don’t murder; don’t commit adultery; don’t swear falsely. But as
we continue, we’ll see that Jesus now ventures into positive territory in the Law - positive in the sense that
these were things that a Jew should actively do, in order to fully keep the Law.

We continue in verse 38.

[Matthew 5:38-42]

We see the familiar form here, that Jesus has been using in this discourse, to the Jews. He cites a
commandment from the Law, and then qualifies it, “But I say to you”; or “I tell you”, here in the NKJV.
What Jesus then gives them is a particular explanation of the commandment.

Previously, Jesus had revealed that anger, the lawless state of the heart behind the act of murder, would
result in the identical judgment of God, upon the Jew, as for murder. The same was true with adultery, and
lustful thinking. The Jews were learning that their hearts could violate the Law as readily as their bodies
could, in God’s estimation.

Similarly, God would see right through the Jew’s attempts to skirt around His name when taking an oath;
God would look directly at the heart, and see the Jew’s attempt to deceive others, there - and judge the Jew,
for that.

But now, Jesus begins to reveal to the Jews that God doesn’t just judge their hearts based on seeing things
in it that shouldn’t be there; God will also judge them for things that should be in their hearts - but aren’t
there - and again, the basis for this is the Law, that Israel has been given - by which the Jews were seeking
justification before God.

Now, the portion of the law that Jesus quotes in verse 38 - “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth” - is
actually cited by the LORD to Israel on three different occasions (Ex 21:22-25, Lev 24:17-20, Deut 19:15-
21). We’re just going to look at two of the places in the OT where it’s mentioned.

Turn first to Exodus chapter 21. This was the first occasion this law is mentioned. Notice that verse 1 says
that these are the judgments which Moses was to set before the children of Israel.
# 22: 3-20-18 2

Judgments were the part of the Law that pertained to the civil governance of Israel; that is, these laws were
used to decide cases among the people in society by judges, who would be appointed in every city in the
land.

[Exodus 21:22-25] Clearly, this is a very specific case. The idea is that the fight of the men has resulted in
injury to one man’s pregnant wife. If this causes her to give birth prematurely, but the baby was unharmed,
then a monetary fine was imposed by the woman’s husband on the man who was fighting with him, through
the court.

But if the child was harmed in any respect, the punishment was to be commensurate with the loss. As an
aside, notice that this shows that the LORD values the life of the unborn child as fully as the life of any
person who has already been born; a person is a person, from the moment God brings that soul of spirit
being into existence.

We see that the appointed judges were to mete out justice as the LORD does. It is retributive; that is,
proportional to the offense; a man gets back what he gives out.

Sometimes there were extenuating circumstances described in the Law, through which the LORD mitigated
the severity of some these judgments. But the law as laid out here expresses the upper limit that the
judgment was to have, as administered objectively by a court of law.

In this way, these fair, limited judgments issued by an objective court of law served to eliminate the
tendency toward personal blood feuds that are found in some societies, in which there are often repeated
retaliation and escalation, on both sides.

Now turn to Deuteronomy chapter 19. Through Moses, the LORD was reviewing the Law with Israel when
they were about to go into the land. This passage gives an overview of how justice was to be administered
by the judges, and how judgments were to be determined.

[Deuteronomy 19:15-21]

v. 15 This was a protection for the defendant, to lessen the possibility that he was falsely accused.

v. 16-17 So this was the case where just one witness came forward; here he is a false witness.

v. 18-19 If they are able to ascertain it is a false witness, then whatever would have happened to the
accused, happens to him.

v. 20-21 Did we see this idea stated in the judgment in Exodus, of the judge’s eye having no pity? No.
Only here; why? Because it would be natural for a judge to be lenient, since the false witness had not
caused any loss of life, or eye, or tooth, or hand, or foot - but had instead lied about someone else doing it.

But the LORD extends no mercy to the liar, who was intent on bringing such an evil judgment on an innocent
brother, in Israel. And the severity of the judgment ensured that few would consider bearing false witness.
So we see that this served as a crime deterrent, in Israel - those who remained, heard and feared.

[Return to Matthew 5]
# 22: 3-20-18 3

Now, what we have seen is that this law was one of the judgments, given by the LORD to Israel, which their
judges were to administer in cases that were brought before them. Jesus quotes the law only in part -
enough to bring it to the mind, of His Jewish listeners.

And what does Jesus indicate, about the civil ramifications, of this law? Nothing; nothing at all. He
doesn’t address it from the perspective of its application, in a court of law. Instead, He uses this civil law to
reflect upon the individual responsibility of Jew, in light of it; how it should speak to his heart, as a person;
more specifically, as a son of his Father, in heaven (v. 45).

The truth is that most Jews viewed this law a sanctioning of personal retaliation; of revenge. But the LORD
never intended for each man to take the law into his own hands! Think about it; the lawlessness in their
hearts would not permit objective judgment.

Through Moses, the LORD reminded Israel of this: “Vengeance is Mine, and recompense” (Deut 32:35); and
later the idea was incorporated into their wisdom literature: “Do not say, ‘I will do to him just as he has
done to me; I will render to the man according to his work’” (Prov 24:29). “Do not say, ‘I will recompense
evil’; wait for the LORD, and He will save you” (Prov 20:22).

So the judgments - the civil law of Israel - was never intended to sanction personal retaliation. But in verse
39, Jesus takes this much further than concluding the Jews were not to retaliate; they were not even to
resist.

There is a difference between retaliating and resisting. When you don’t retaliate, you don’t try to get back
at the person who’s trying to harm you. But if you go so far as to not resist him, now you are letting him
have his way with you - and remember, his intent is to harm you.

Jesus is saying, don’t defend yourself against him; don’t stand up to the evil person who is intent upon
injuring you.

To begin with, the Jews would not have liked that Jesus was depriving them of their reading of personal
vengeance, into the civil law of retribution. But for Jesus to suggest that they should not even resist the one
trying to harm them, but let him have his evil way - Jesus couldn’t really mean that!

But by His example, we can see that’s exactly what Jesus means. To slap someone on the cheek -
especially the right cheek - was considered the most grievous insult possible in the ancient world, short of
inflicting serious bodily harm. Both Jewish and Roman law permitted prosecution for this offense to one’s
dignity and honor.

But not only is Jesus sweeping aside the legal implications - He is advocating accepting the insult without
response - and further - even offering the other cheek, for further insult!

This would have been completely incomprehensible to the Jews - and is almost equally incomprehensible,
to us. Surely, a person has a right to protect himself from harm! Every person has the right to that; and to
be treated with honor and dignity. For what reason should anyone submit to such abuse? Well, Jesus
doesn’t say, does He? Instead, He gives another example.

v. 40 Again, this is within the context of the evil person (v. 39). Jesus is presenting someone - perhaps a
creditor - who is pressing a lawsuit against the Jew - and he’s trying to take all the advantage that the Law
can give him.
# 22: 3-20-18 4

The Jew is being sued for “the shirt off his back”, so to speak; his tunic. Most of the Jews who were not
wealthy had two garments - the tunic, which was the inner garment, and the cloak, which was the thicker
outer garment.

Now, the Law of Moses did allow for a man to be sued for his tunic. Let’s take a quick look at that in
Exodus chapter 22. This was part of a section of the Law which dealt with lending money.

[Exodus 22:25-27] The garment here is the outer garment; the cloak in our passage. When sleeping, men
used to wrap themselves in their cloak at night like a blanket, to keep warm.

Since there was really no point in the creditor taking the outer garment only for part of the day, this law
was essentially ensuring that a man would always have at least his outer garment, to be clothed in - a
compassionate ruling.

[Return to Matthew 5]

In this example of Jesus, the legal opponent would not have bothered trying to sue the Jew for his cloak; the
Law wouldn’t allow ithat. But Jesus says to the Jews, offer it freely; give him everything you have.

But that would leave the Jew with just his loincloth - how shameful! And how was he to bear the cold
nights? Why should the Jew relinquish all of his clothing - particularly to one who was trying to take from
him everything he had, already? Why should he endure such shame and suffering?

And that’s our question, too, isn’t it? Why? But still Jesus gives no answer - just another example.

v. 41 This word for “compel” is a military term that refers to a ruling authority that enlists a member of the
subject population into forced labor. Jesus clearly intended to bring the Roman oppressors to the minds of
the Jews, by His mention of the mile, which was a Roman measure.

The Jew in His example is being enlisted as a porter, presumably to carry a load. By Roman law, the Jews
had to comply with this forced labor, up to the legal limit, which apparently was one mile. It was a deeply
resented practice.

And what is Jesus calling on the Jews to do? To do a double stint. This must be where the expression, “Go
the extra mile” comes from.

Why on earth should a Jew, who is being forced to carry a load as it is, volunteer to carry it even further
than required? And to do this for his enemies? Such an idea was beyond the Jews’ understanding - and we
find ourselves coming up short of explaining it, too.

Jesus gives one final example to illustrate this idea of personal non-resistance.

v. 42 Does this have to do with alms-giving - giving to the poor? Or the borrowing of a fellow Jew, in
need? Jesus doesn’t say, does He? He is deliberately unspecific here. Luke records His words as, “Give to
everyone who asks of you” (Lk 6:30). And Matthew uses the verb form which reflects continuous, or
repeated action - “Give to him who asks repeatedly of you; and from him who continually wants to borrow
from you, do not turn away”.
# 22: 3-20-18 5

Jesus was saying to put no limit on the amount, or number of times, or the people or situations in which you
give; give unconditionally, no strings attached, whether someone wants to borrow, or take. Give freely;
share freely.

But wait a minute! The Jew had to be sure there was something left for himself, didn’t he? He worked to
make provision for himself and his family - shouldn’t they come first?

And what about the unscrupulous people who, when they realized the giving was so open-handed, would
try to take it all? Surely Jesus couldn’t mean that the Jew was to give it all! And we wonder, did He mean
that?

It is here that this idea of personal non-resistance is actually seen to be the spirit of an entirely different
command, in the Law - which Jesus brings up next.

v. 43-45 In verse 43, Jesus is quoting from a passage of the Law found in Leviticus chapter 19; let’s take a
look at it.

[Leviticus 19:18] So we see the part that says “you shall love your neighbor”. The standard for this love is
man’s natural love, for himself. He is to treat others the way he wishes to be treated.

And these “others”, in the context here, suggest fellow Jews - against whom the Jew should not take
vengeance, or bear a grudge - which ties love of neighbor together with not retaliating - just as Jesus had
done, in His teaching.

Is there anything in this verse about hating one’s enemy? No; that’s not in the verse. And it’s not anywhere
in the Law of Moses, if you were to search it.

Although the LORD occasionally worked through the nation Israel to bring about one of His judgments upon
a wicked nation (Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-6), He never commanded the children of Israel to hate their enemy.
Instead, we find exhortations in the OT for the benevolent treatment of personal enemies (Ex 23:4-5, Prov
25:21-22).

[Return to Matthew 5]

So the Jews have heard it said - in the Law - that they are to love their neighbors. And they, or their
teachers, had added to the Law what they considered to be the corollary to this - you shall hate your enemy.

Jesus directly refutes what the Jews had added to the Law; they are to instead love their enemies. Notice
that Jesus has now made this plural; He is not speaking only of a personal enemy, but all enemies - enemies
of the Jews. Certainly the Jews would immediately think of their Roman oppressors, but they would have
regarded all Gentiles as their enemies, as well.

Jesus is saying, love them all. This is agapao, the Greek verb for love that expresses good will;
benevolence; it means actively doing good, in this case, to one’s enemies.

And how is the Jew to do that? Remember what it said in the commandment - by loving them, as they love
themselves. By treating them, as they wished to be treated; speaking graciously to them; helping them with
their needs; seeking God’s blessing, for them.
# 22: 3-20-18 6

And the Jews are to do this, despite the fact that their enemies are not at all responding in kind - their
enemies despise and hate them, abuse them, and actively cause them harm.

We can see that this is where Jesus has been going, all along, with the evil person, seeking to harm the Jew.
Jesus has taken them beyond not retaliating, beyond not resisting, to actively doing good to their enemies,
seeking their welfare, praying for them.

This was diametrically opposed to the heart of the Jews, concerning their enemies - as it is to the heart of
all natural men. No one loves their enemies; why should the Jews be any different?

The Gentiles were sinners, slated for hell fire. The Romans specifically were the Jews’ oppressors. And
personal enemies infringed on their rights, their honor, their dignity - and sought to deprive them of their
possessions, their income. Why on earth should the Jews love their enemies?

Jesus has told them why, hasn’t He? In verse 45 - that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. Literally,
it could read, that you may begin to be sons of your Father in heaven.

As sons of Abraham, the Jews claimed God to be their Father (Jn 8:33, 39, 41). A son possesses the
character of his father; like father, like son. For a Jew to be a true son of the kingdom, he should manifest
his heavenly Father’s heart - which is filled with love for others.

That love has no thought, for self. And that love does not discriminate - it is love for all - agape - giving
them what they need, for their good - whether friend or foe. Like sunshine; like rain showers - the Father’s
heavenly love through His sons is to be available for any and all, to receive.

Jesus contrasts the Father’s love with love to be found in this world.

v. 46-47 Think about Matthew sitting there, listening to Jesus that day, using the fellow members of his
profession as examples of the worst sinners. But Matthew would well know how tax collectors are - and
how he used to be.

The tax collectors were generally locals - in this case, Jews - who were willing to be hired by the Roman
government to tax fellow Jews. The problem was that they usually collected more taxes than were due, and
then kept the difference for themselves; and everyone knew it.

So the tax collectors were considered, extortioners, hucksters - among the most disreputable of sinners, and
bitterly hated and despised by their fellow Jews. Yet Jesus points out that even tax collectors loved and
welcomed those who were members of their own circle.

Why would these disreputable individuals love anyone? Because doing so served their own selfish
purposes; they knew they would get something out of it. Worldly love is rooted in personal gain. There is
nothing commendable, in worldly love; it’s the love of self, in disguise.

Jesus is showing that the love of heaven is different; it does not seek to gain, but to give - and give, and
give - without consideration of itself at all, but only of the other. This is the quality of the Father’s love.
The love of His sons should be like His.

Which brought Jesus to His conclusion.

# 22: 3-20-18 7

v. 48 Jesus had already shown the greater righteousness that was required in order to enter the kingdom of
God, based on the Jews keeping the Law.

But in this last section of His discourse - concerning the love of one’s enemies - Jesus now revealed this
greater righteousness in all of its “otherness”.

The Jew’s standard was not to be the Law at all; his standard was to be the One who gave the Law. And if
the Jew hoped to enter the kingdom by his own righteous doing, he had to measure up to that standard,
perfectly.

But how could he? How could anyone possibly comply with the things that Jesus has revealed, as the spirit
of the Law, concerning love? Each one of them seems impossible, let alone all of them! No man could do
them!

But in fact, One would. His life would be a perfect manifestation of love and righteousness, yet evil men
would dishonor Him, insult Him, and abuse Him. But would He resist them? No; He would utter no word
in His own defense (Is 53:7); He would turn the other cheek.

And those evil men would press their false charges against Him, in an illegal trial; they would try to strip
Him of everything He had - His very life. And He would let them have it.

His enemies would compel Him to bear the very instrument of His death to Calvary; but He would go the
extra mile for them with it, becoming the Substitute for their sin.

On the cross, He would give, and give; the labor of His soul (Is 53:11), until He poured out His soul unto
death, bearing the sin of the many, making intercession for the transgressors (Is 53:12) - the enemies of His
holy Father; His enemies - who cursed Him and hated Him, spitefully used and persecuted Him.

Through one Man’s righteous act on the cross, the free gift of righteousness would come to all men,
resulting in justification of life (Rm 5:18). And He would freely give that perfect righteousness - sharing it
- with whomever asked to receive it.

One Man would keep the Law perfectly - to love even His enemies, to the death - the Man, Christ Jesus.
Believing into Him is the only way to become a son of God; and to be perfect, as your Father in heaven is
perfect.

Reading: Matthew 6:1-15; Lk 11:2-4, 18:1-8; James 1:12-16; 1 Cor 10:13-14.