– Matthew 5.38-48 –

The Sermon on the Mount 8: Vengeance and the Kingdom

Introduction

Having addressed murder, adultery, and falsehood, Jesus now takes up vengeance. Once again, Jesus brings the Law near and reacquaints the people with what it really says.

Lesson

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth (38).” “You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy (43).” Verses 38 and 43 should be considered together because they both deal with vengeance. In vs. 38, Jesus refers to the Scribes’ and Pharisees’ spin on the lex talionis, the so called law of retribution, which applied in certain criminal cases of homicide and maiming (Ex 21.22-24; Lv 24.20). “An eye for an eye” was being taken out of its criminal context to justify a “tit for tat” attitude toward personal wrongs and slights (39b-42). In vs. 43, Jesus refers to the Scribes’ and Pharisees’ spin on the second great commandment (Lv 19.18). They were contextualizing that commandment with unrelated texts where the Lord commanded Israel to execute his vengeance on certain peoples (Dt 25.19). “Love your neighbor as yourself” became “love your neighbor and hate your enemy” (43). Thus, the meaning and effect of the second great commandment was being obscured and perverted. The lead in to “love your neighbor as yourself” is, “you shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people” (Lv 19.18a). As it was, Israel was full of personal grudges and vengeance.

“But I tell you not to resist an evil person . . . (39).” “But I say to you, love your enemies . . . (44).” Verse 39 is one of the chief reasons why many Christians have concluded that the Sermon on the Mount supersedes the Law with a radical, new ethic involving strict pacifism and non-resistance, and why many other Christians have concluded that the Sermon on the Mount presents an ideal but inapplicable ethic. Neither view is correct. Peter Leithart has argued (correctly, I think) that vs. 39 is properly rendered, “Do not resist with evil means.” If Jesus is requiring strict pacifism and non-resistance, it creates a number of textual problems: (1) Jesus would be annulling the Law contrary to his adamant claims to the contrary (17-19), (2) he would be breaking his sermonic pattern of reaffirming the Law to correct popular misinterpretation, (3) he would be implicitly contradicting himself and John the Baptist, neither of whom saw any inherit inconsistency in being a Christian and a Roman soldier (Lk 3.14; Mt 8.8-13; Act 10.1-2, 34-48), and (4) he would be implicitly condemning himself and Paul, both of whom protested being unjustly struck and who, in Paul’s case, asserted his Roman rights and used the Roman court system to thwart his Jewish adversaries (Jn 18.22-23; Act 23.2-5; Jn 8.40-44; Act 16.37; 22.25; 25.11; 26.25).

So, what is Jesus saying? Jesus is telling us not to avenge ourselves, but to leave that to God (Rm 12.19; He 10:3). A slap on the right cheek is a backhanded slap, a slap to insult rather than injure. Jesus’ examples concern situations where our dignity or property are threatened by someone who seems to have it in for us.

Jesus is not saying anything new. Jesus is reminding the people of what God had already told them: “Vengeance is Mine” (Dt 32.35). “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; And if he is thirsty, give him water to drink” (Pr 25.21-22). The texts where God commanded Israel to wipe out a nation were aimed at the Lord’s enemies, not personal enemies (Gn 15.16; Rm 2.5). God’s people were not to take personal vengeance: “You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Lv 19.18a-b).

“[B]e sons of your Father in heaven . . . (45).” “[B]e perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect (48).” God takes vengeance but he is not vengeful. He gives good gifts to the unjust as well the just (45; Rm 5.8, 10). In Christ, God laid aside his privileges and humbled himself to extend mercy (Ph 2.6-8). That’s not just what he did but who he is. And we are called to be his sons, to be perfect as he is (45, 48).

Loving honor not to much but too little. The mind set Jesus is condemning is the one that once made dueling “honorable” among “Christian gentlemen.” Though Jesus “despised the shame” of the cross, he laid aside his honor that he might receive greater honor from his Father (Hb 12.2). Jesus was concerned at once with showing mercy to enemies and receiving honor from God. The two go together. We should not be concerned with preserving the honor we have, but with giving it up if necessary to receive the honor that God alone can give (Jn 5.44). The Bible is very concerned with honor and dignity (Ti 2.2, 3, 7; 1Tm 3.2, 4, 8, 11 ). But true honor and dignity imitate God. Their portal is humility (Pr 15.33; 18.12; 22.4; 29.23).

A new kind of warfare. Far from teaching pacifism and non-resistance, Jesus promotes “spiritual violence” and “kingdom warfare”: “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat; And if he is thirsty, give him water to drink; For so you will heap coals of fire on his head, And the LORD will reward you” (Pr 25.21-22). This is how we “overcome evil with good,” and thus avoid being “overcome by evil” (Rm 12.20-21). This is clearly warfare, and we are clearly on the offensive. The Sermon on the Mount is not a lesson in pacifism, but a council of war. But not conventional war. It is a council on kingdom warfare. It is instruction in the use of spiritual weaponry, the only weaponry sufficient to topple the strongholds of unbelief and rebellion toward God (2Cor 10.4-5).

Hard to understand. It is hard to grasp exactly how kingdom warfare, which means loving one’s enemy, dovetails with conventional warfare in a fallen world. C.S. Lewis helps point us in the right direction: “We may kill if necessary, but we must not hate and enjoy hating. We may punish if necessary, but we must not enjoy it… Even while we kill and punish we must try to feel about the enemy as we feel about ourselves - to wish that he were not so bad, to hope that he may, in this world or another, be cured: in fact, to wish his good. This is what is meant in the Bible by loving him: wishing his good, not feeling fond of him nor saying he is nice when he is not.” (Mere Christianity, pp. 119, 120.)

Even harder to do. We will never be able to obey Jesus’ words unless we believe they are in fact the way to joy and glory (Hb 12.2). We will never believe that until we truly believe with Joseph that what our enemies mean for evil, God means for good and in fact works for good (Gn 50.20; Rm 8.28; Jm 1.2-4).