Seeing "An Eye for An Eye" Jesus' Way

We are continuing in the Sermon on the mount, and in Jesus’ examples of what True, heart righteousness looks like. From murder, to adultery, to divorce, to truth-telling, Jesus has over and over again revealed that we cannot think we are righteous simply because we skate by according to the letter of the law. He has also been repudiating the common misinterpretations of the laws that He addresses along the way.

Warning: this is one of those Long introduction kind of messages.

The example that we come to today begins with a common principle that has become known in history as Lex Talionis, that is, the law of retribution.

Some form of the law of retribution, or “punishment fitting the crime” has been part of many societies throughout history. We first read the “eye for an eye” principle in the Hammurabi Code, which was written around 1800 years before Christ. The principle existed in Babylonian culture as well - where equal retribution was to guard against abusive or sever revenge. By the time it came into Roman culture, “eye for an eye” was interpreted more loosely to include monetary payments for physical or material harm done.

By Jesus day, In the Jewish Mishnah, there were certain prescriptions similar to the Roman concept of monetary payments that should be made for harming someone else. For instance, on example states, “He who boxes the ear of his fellow pays him a sela” or two shekels. “if he smacks him, two hundred zuz or denarai.”

These were all cultural interpretations of the original version of “an eye for an eye.”

Because of Jesus’ words here in Matthew 5, many people repudiate the concept of “an eye for an eye” in any way, shape, or form. But again, Jesus was not repudiating the law, and this concept was clearly in the Law of Moses. And although it was written in the Hammurabi code before the Law of Moses, the fact that it exists in the Old Testament indicates that it existed in the economy of God’s order before Hammurabi wrote it down.

In order to understand Jesus’ explanation, we need to understand the Mosaic use of this principle. It is found in three different places, in Exodus, Leviticus, and deuteronomy.

Exodus 21:22–25 ESV

“When men strive together and hit a pregnant woman, so that her children come out, but there is no harm, the one who hit her shall surely be fined, as the woman’s husband shall impose on him, and he shall pay as the judges determine. 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.

Here, the “eye for an eye” principle is seen in the case of a physical altercation between men that affects the wellbeing of a pregnant woman. There is a judgment of a fine imposed if there is no physical harm to the baby, that fine is determined by a judge. If there is harm, the repayment should be “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, etc...”

So we see this principle here, in a judicial context, to enact a worthy punitive measure for a crime of physical nature.

Leviticus 24:18–20 ESV

Whoever takes an animal’s life shall make it good, life for life. 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.

Here, the principal puts the onus on the guilty party to make their wrong right by an “eye for eye” type repayment. This is in the context of society, and again stresses the importance of a measure that fits the crime.

Deuteronomy 19:15–21 ESV

“A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. If a malicious witness arises to accuse a person of wrongdoing, then both parties to the dispute shall appear before the Lord, before the priests and the judges who are in office in those days. The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. And the rest shall hear and fear, and shall never again commit any such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity. It shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

Here, in another example of eye-for-eye retribution, we find an example that really qualifies all three of the examples. All of these societal, punitive actions must be on the basis of multiple witnesses, and they are always in judicial context.

In fact, the severity of punishment against a false witness only strengthens the idea that this kind of punishment and judgment is only to be undertaken in the context of a legitimate, legal proceeding. There was no room for these principles to be put forth in personal disputes in Israel’s society. By God’s standard, every accusation and repayment had to be well-established an ordered.

So, “an eye for an eye” in God’s law was legitimate, and protective in two ways. It protected the victim by prescribing an appropriate legal punishment for the perpetrator, and it also protected perpetrators of minor crimes from receiving undue punishments from an overreacting victim.

Why, then, does Jesus address this principle here?

Well, “lex talionis,” or retributive action, always becomes more than a judicial action in human society. We always tend toward personal retribution, personal repayment. We are eager to stand up for our personal property, personal belongings, personal space, and personal rights. This is especially true in our culture. Now, it is true and legitimate that our founding documents in America grant us these freedoms, and there is nothing evil in that - it is good insofar as it is not placed as a priority so high that it promotes individualistic selfish responses, and repudiates the love of neighbor that is at the heart of God’s law.

Jesus is not repudiating the Old Testament law, or the legitimate use of “an eye for an eye.” He is not negating the original intent of the principal, nor is He calling for political pacifism, nor is He teaching the abolishment of judicial sentencing.

There are two legitimate uses of the “eye for an eye” principal that we see in scripture.

Firstly, we see God’s Ultimate revenge.

Romans 12:19 ESV

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”

And secondly, we see the Government’s Just Dealings

Romans 13:1–4 ESV

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.

So the government still bears the sword as God’s agent for good, and our government is no more or less corrupt than the Roman government in Paul’s day. And ultimately, God as the righteous Judge will enact due justice on all evildoers - so we are called to not avenge.

Jesus, then, is speaking in this passage of our personal attitude in the case of disputes, punishment, conscription, and requests for help. He is pointing us away from being hyper-focused our personal rights, and pointing us to the righteous act of dealing graciously and with mercy. We see several of the beatitudes played out here, namely, Meekness, Mercy, and Peacemaking.

Christ’s true righteousness compels us to take an open-handed approach to life while trusting the One who judges justly.

1. Retaliation - Revenge is the Lord’s - Vs. 39

We are all incredibly familiar with the principle here - usually shortened to the phrase, “Turn the other cheek.” This is one of the timeless sayings of Jesus, (although I suppose they are all timeless) - the classics.

Many have taken this statement to build ethical principles and to take a stand against wars, and disputes on an international or national level. That is part of a bigger conversation, but I don’t think Jesus is addressing those issues in this passage. As we have already noted, there is a distinct purpose in the government “bearing the sword” as part of God’s ordination of that institution, and it is not in vain so long as it suppresses evil and promotes good.

We must view Jesus’ words here as they were intended. Jesus wasn’t addressing the congress of the united states or the parliament of England or the Cabinet of North Korea. He was addressing individuals, addressing the individual desire for retaliation, retribution, revenge.

“Turn the other cheek” is certainly a principle that is easier said than done. We have been calling Jesus’ teachings “radical” in this section - and they certainly were and are radical compared to the common understanding of these principles, but Jesus didn’t introduce new teaching here - he simply reinforced the heart of God in all of scriptures.

Proverbs 24:29 ESV

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.”

Proverbs 20:22 ESV

Do not say, “I will repay evil”; wait for the Lord, and he will deliver you.

The principle of “an eye for an eye” as we have seen it in the Old Testament was and is a good and right principle in the context of a public, legitimate legal proceeding to protect both parties and allow justice to be served - but it is never a personal principle. That is what Jesus is teaching here, and that is what was taught in the Old Testament as well, like in those proverbs we just read.

Jesus says “don’t resist the one who is evil.” That is, don’t resist in a hostile way, don’t oppose them in the way that they have injured you. Don’t be known as a fighter, a brawler, as explosive or reactive or retributive.

Whenever “an eye for an eye” crosses from public, due process justice into the personal sphere, we have crossed over the lines that God has drawn in His wisdom.

Now, what does “an eye for an eye” look like in a personal, non-legal context? If you were part of our “anger” study a few weeks back at Collide, you will remember that we saw that one of the clear marks distinguishing righteous anger and sinful anger is the mark of retribution. Personal retribution is simply not commended in scripture, and in fact its spoken against quite regularly.

As soon as we say, “I am hurt, so I will hurt” we have crossed that line. As soon as we say, “I was mistreated, so I will mistreat” we have taken matters into our own hands. As soon as we say, “I just want to get even” then we have missed the mark of God’s ethical righteousness in this regard.

Now, revenge and retribution are not always played out in physical violence. There are cases where one person commits adultery in marriage, and the other person in their pain and betrayal goes out and does the same to “get even.” This is the “eye for an eye” principle applied in an unrighteous way.

There are disputes and disagreements in relationship, where one person might just totally shut down for a number of days and refuse to communicate - this is often a wall of protection, but it is also a kind of “eye for an eye” retribution.

There are cases where a discussion turns to a disagreement which turns to an argument, and one person might belittle and criticize the other person’s character because they feel they are being disrespected because of the disagreement - this is totally psychological, but it is “eye for an eye” retribution applied in an unrighteous way.

There are cases where, driving down the road, you being tailgated by a person, and when they finally pass you, you speed up so they can’t get by, or tailgate them when they are ahead of you - that is road rage, and it is a form of “eye for an eye” retribution.

We could go on and on, but do you see how we all struggle with this in one way or another? Its not normally the big things like physical attack or harm that we are wanting to avenge, it is usually the small things. But small instances of personal revenge reveal a bigger problem.

Now, those are negative examples - but what about a big, positive example?

1 Peter 2:22–24 ESV

He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 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. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

Do you see that phrase in the middle? “he continued trusting himself to him who judges justly.”

Romans 12:19–21 ESV

Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Jesus calls his followers to not avenge themselves, because He was the kind of righteous man that did not avenge himself. Why did Jesus say the meek are blessed? Because He Himself is meek.

Righteous Meekness in this area is not a “lay down and die” meekness, it is a “trust yourself to the one who judges justly” meekness.

Whenever we are in a dispute, or a disagreement, or feel hurt, or betrayed, or wronged - and it is ok to feel those emotions. It is ok to cry out to God in those emotions, they may be very valid and represent the situation well - but as soon as we turn to “an eye for an eye” attitude, we have missed the likeness of Christ that we are all being formed into as the body of Christ.

Now, that takes a lot of faith - faith to not act out. Faith to not have a mental breakdown. Faith to not curse someone under your breath. Faith to take the next step forward in life even though you can’t get over the pain. It takes an immense amount of faith, but it is not just blind faith - it is faith in the faithful and just God. He will avenge all evil in His way, in His time. We can even recognize that in our prayer - “Lord, You know how betrayed or hurt I am feeling - and I know you are a God of justice - so please take the burden of vengeance from my heart, and give me instead the burden of love and trust.”

As we go through the rest of the examples, we see that it all comes down to this same principle - faith in the Lord who deals justly. Faith in the Lord who provides. faith in the Lord who ordains all things.

2. Belongings - The Earth is the Lord’s - Vs. 40

So we must trust the Lord with revenge, and we must trust the Lord with out possessions - our belongings.

Exodus 22:26–27 ESV

If ever you take your neighbor’s cloak in pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down, for that is his only covering, and it is his cloak for his body; in what else shall he sleep? And if he cries to me, I will hear, for I am compassionate.

Now, here is the law that Jesus was referencing. There was a law, to protect the abjectly poor, that said their cloak - their heavy outer garment - could not be taken from him in a pledge or lawsuit. The idea is, this person does not have a home, or even if he has a home, this cloak would serve as his shelter and blanket as well as a simple outer garment. To take that from Him would be to despise his dignity as a human being.

Again, Jesus isn’t negating that law here - but he is saying that the principles of righteous living go beyond that. “If someone sues you for you tunic” that would be a lighter garment, like a shirt, “give them your cloak also.”

Jesus speaks against guarding our property jealously. Here it is in the case of wrongdoing - apparently this lawsuit is just, and the tunic is awarded in the lawsuit. Jesus says, “don’t hold so tightly to you possessions.” This can go both ways. If someone is suing you for the shirt off your back, perhaps they don’t have a shirt for their back. Or, if someone is suing you for the shirt off your back, perhaps you don’t have much more than the shirt off your back.

Rich or poor, we should not hold our possessions ins such high regard that we view them as the ultimate sign of doing well. “He who dies with the most toys wins” is a destructive principle.

Whether rich or poor, guilty or innocent, we ought to have an “open hand” with out possessions. This, too, is a sign of trusting the Lord who deals justly. Remember the parable of the rich fool? The one who tore down his barns to build bigger, and found his security with his wealth?

Luke 12:15 ESV

And he said to them, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”

3. Time - Each Day is the Lord’s - Vs. 41

This one is tough for me. I don’t have a lot of money or possessions to harbor and hold tightly to, but we all have the same number of hours and minutes in a day. And we usually find that there are not enough!

The actual situation Jesus’ was referring to was a form of conscription or forced service in the Roman rule of Palestine. We see this in the crucifixion narrative, where the soldier commanded Simon to carry Jesus’ cross for Him.

It was common for a Roman soldier to conscript a citizen, including the Jews, to carry some equipment or burden for one mile. That was the allowable conscription. Now, talk about a politically charged issue. Not only are many Jewish people very upset about the Roman Government’s place in their society in general, but then to add this forced labor was to add insult to injury.

There was a whole class of people who we can read about in the New Testament, and other history books, called the Zealots, who resisted all this tyranny. These people were fiercely devoted to the liberation and independence of Israel as a nation in that day. They would have fought tooth and nail to avoid this kind of conscription, even for a mile.

And to them, Jesus says “don’t just go one mile, go another mile.” Now, the ways this could be applied are seemingly endless - but I considered it in the realm of time.

We live in a culture of independence - we value it and treasure it. To be compelled to “go a mile” for someone that we didn’t know, and probably didn’t like, would be an offence to us as well. But Jesus says our attitude toward our time and independence should not be so brash - we must consider even this within the realm of trusting the one who judges justly.

Maybe this conscription was inherently wrong - maybe it was government overreach - maybe it stemmed from wicked rulers and magistrates - but Jesus said, “go the second mile.” Go above and beyond to portray the meekness of Christ in your life.

This is the kind of “overcoming evil with good” that Paul speaks of in Romans 12. This is the kind of living that heaps burning coals upon people’s heads. They don’t understand it. Its like when you go grocery shopping and get to your car and realize the cashier didn’t scan one of your items. When you go back into the store to say, “There was a mistake - I need to pay for this.” They usually look at you like you have two heads - especially if its a small item. It can be easily justified as, “their mistake - not my problem - i don’t have time to fix their errors.” But we are compelled to go the second mile.

You never know when loosening your grasp on your time and individual preferences can portray the meekness and love of Christ and lead to a Gospel conversation, a conversation about trusting the one who judges justly.

4. Finances - Our Security is The Lord’s - Vs. 42

The last example has to do with giving and lending - and touches the most sacred of all things in our life. Our money.

We all appreciate a good return on investment. We all appreciate our money working for us. We all appreciate a good deal, saving a buck, stretching a dollar. We should be good stewards of every gift that we are given, including our finances. We are called to “count the cost” before making large decisions.

But there is a place where stewardship of God’s gifts includes actions and attitudes that don’t always result in a good Return on Investment, at least in terms of dollar for dollar.

Now, do Jesus words here teach us that we have to give to every professional beggar who could be gainfully employed, but refuses to do so? I don’t believe so - there are clear cases in scripture against this kind of enablement. But, if in every case of someone in need, the first question we ask is, “what did they do to get here?” then it is possible we are thinking too selfishly in this regard.

When we remember that all we have is the Lord’s, and we remember that we are ultimately trusting in Him who deals justly, then we might have a little softer grasp on that $5 bill when we see someone in need.

Again, it comes down to “who or what we are trusting in.”

Proverbs 11:28 ESV

Whoever trusts in his riches will fall, but the righteous will flourish like a green leaf.

1 Timothy 6:17 ESV

As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy.

1 John 3:17–18 ESV

But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.

So be it revenge, belongings, time, or money, is there a place where you grasp is dangerously tight? We convince ourselves that while God is good and ultimately in control, our hands grasp is more secure than his providence. We might never verbalize that, but how many areas in our lives could we be exhibiting this kind of unrighteousness simply because we desire control?

In the irony of all ironies, we fight and strain and grasp for security in our time, belongings, finances, and retribution - but in doing so we neglect the one who can provide all security. Like a little child who gets a dollar bill, and insists that they must carry it, because they don’t want to lose it, in stead of letting their mother put it safely in her purse. So many times, that Is my attitude with my life. Jesus doesn’t call us to reckless abandon in all areas - but He does call us to live with an open hand, trusting in the one who deals justly, just as He taught, and just as He has shown us.

Proverbs 3:5–6 ESV

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.