An Eye For An Eye
Insight into The Kingdom of God and Retaliation
© 2000 William R. Cunningham
April 9, 2000
Introduction
Should we retaliate every time someone wrongs us? Should we
seek retribution every time someone offends us or causes us grief or pain?
Should you legally pursue payment every time someone wrongs you and you have a
legal right to do so? Can we say for certain that the will of God is that we
always retaliate for the wrong that is done to us? We will find that it is
indeed not the will of God that we seek retribution for being wronged for every
situation. Sometimes what is right is not the right thing to pursue. Sometimes
justice is not the optimal thing to seek even though it appears to be the just
thing.
We are going to examine the law of "an eye for an
eye" relative to retaliation. We will then use the information gained to
help us govern our lives particularly during those situations when we are
wronged by someone else. Our main text will be Matthew 5:38-42.
Lesson
Matthew 5:38 (NKJV) 38"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an
eye and a tooth for a tooth.'
The "eye for an eye" and "tooth for a
tooth" are part of the widespread ancient Near Eastern law of retaliation.
In Israel and other cultures, this principle was enforced by a court and refers
to legalized vengeance; personal vengeance was never accepted in the Law of
Moses, except as a concession for a relative's murder (see Numbers 35:18-21).
The Old Testament did not permit personal vengeance. Vengeance was actually the
prerogative of God (See Deuteronomy 32:35).
The primary purpose of the "eye for an eye and tooth for
a tooth" law was to ensure that the punishment for a crime was indeed
fitting for the crime. It was designed to provide fairness or justice in the
penalties for crimes committed. For example, consider the following scripture.
Exodus 21:22 through Exodus 21:25 (NKJV) 22"If men fight, and
hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm
follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband
imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23But
if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, 24eye
for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25burn for
burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
The penalty must be fitting to the crime. That was again the
whole purpose of "an eye for an eye." This was important because in
some cultures the penalty for a crime could have far exceeded what would have
been considered just or fair. So it appears at first glance that the Bible
supports the idea of just retaliation. Let's continue though.
Turn the other Cheek
Matthew 5:39 (NKJV) 39But I tell you not to resist an evil person.
But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Here is that famous scripture regarding turning the other
cheek. It is believed that this scripture suggests that Christians are not
supposed to respond to offense. For example, if someone slaps a Christian in the
face then the Christian is not supposed to respond or retaliate. However, this
is not true. Yes there are times when retaliation would not be in the best
interest of the person slapped or perhaps the slapping person. This however does
not mean that we should not respond in all cases. If this were so then Jesus
would not have had to give us instruction of dealing with offenses against us
(See Matthew 18:10-14). So what does Jesus mean by turning the other
cheek?
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. A prophet might
endure such ill treatment (1 Kings 22:24; Isaiah 50:6). Let's continue
with the other lesson text before we discuss this any further.
Being Sued
Matthew 5:40 (NKJV) 40If anyone wants to sue you and take away
your tunic, let him have your cloak also.
The tunic was an undergarment and the cloak was a loose
fitting outer garment.
The poorest people of the Empire (such as most peasants in
Egypt) had only an inner and outer garment, and the theft of a cloak would lead
to legal recourse. Jesus seems to hyperbolically (we will discuss hyperbole
later) imply the turning over of one's possessions to avoid a legal dispute
affecting only oneself. Jesus gives this advice in spite of the fact that, under
Jewish law, a legal case to regain one's cloak would have been foolproof: a
creditor could not take a poor person's outer cloak, which might serve as one's
only blanket at night as well as a coat (Exodus 22:26-27).
Go the Extra Mile
Matthew 5:41 (NKJV) 41And whoever compels you to go one mile, go
with him two.
Roman soldiers had the legal right to impress the labor, work
animal or substance of local residents (see Mark 15:21). The Roman
government could press anyone into its service to carry a load as far as one
mile. Matthew records a Roman officer doing this to Simon of Cyrene in Matthew
27:32. In the subject scripture, Jesus suggests that a person go an extra
mile even though the law only required that the person was only legally
obligated for one mile.
The Jewish hierarchy favored the status quo with Rome; some
revolutionaries wanted to revolt. Most Palestinian Jews in this period wanted
freedom but were not revolutionaries. But by a.d. 66 Jewish Palestine was caught
up in a war, and by A.D 70 the wisdom of Jesus' course was evident: Rome won
the war, and the Jewish people, led to defeat by the revolutionaries, were
crushed. Jerusalem was burned down and destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70, which
was brought on by Jewish resistance.
Unselfish Giving
Matthew 5:42 (NKJV) 42Give to him who asks you, and from him who
wants to borrow from you do not turn away.
Beggars were widespread. The Bible stressed giving to those
in need (Deuteronomy 15:11; Psalm 112:5, 9; Proverbs 21:13). God
would take care of the needs of those who helped the poor (Deuteronomy 15:10;
Proverbs 19:17; 22:9; 28:8). Biblical laws against usury and especially
about lending to the poor before the year of release (Deuteronomy 15:9; Leviticus 25)
support Jesus' principle here, but Jesus goes even farther in emphasizing
unselfish giving (especially Luke 6:35).
The Message
Jesus seems to be speaking in hyperbolic terms to teach the
lesson of non-retaliation. Generally He commands us to have a generous and
compassionate attitude toward the needy. He makes this application in four
areas: physical attacks (verse 39), legal suits (verse 40), government demands
(verse 41), and financial requests (verse 42).
Jesus uses hyperbole to make his point about retaliation.
Hyperbole is a rhetorical exaggeration, a figure of speech often used by Jewish
wisdom teachers to underline their point. The point of Jesus' hyperbolic
illustrations is generally to grab the hearer's attention and force that
hearer to take his point seriously. So Jesus' hyperbolic illustrations should
not be considered as teachings on what to do when slapped or sued but as a means
of rhetorically getting his point across about the primary message, which in
this case is non-retaliation.
The Bible gives us more insight into the principle of
non-retaliation. Consider the following scripture.
1 Corinthians 6:7 (NKJV) 7Now therefore, it is already an utter
failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather
accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?
Many philosophers who believed that property did not matter
could advocate ignoring offenses rather than going to court. Paul prefers the
Jewish method of settling disputes within the community, which serves both
justice and the community's witness to the outside world.
There are two sides to this concept. Christians should be
able to settle disputes amongst themselves within the Christian community.
However, the Christian community must be worthy to operate in such a fashion.
The Christian community today in general is not up to par with this type of
operation. The Christian community has unfortunately degraded to a church
community, which is not always exclusively Christians. Therefore, the church has
generally failed in this area and people are left to pursue legal action or
justice outside of the Christian community. However, the judicial system is
wrought with just as much unworthiness as the general Christian community. There
are many churches that have the integrity and respect of its congregation so
that disputes amongst its Christian members can indeed be settled within that
community.
In any case, Paul advocates that Christians should settle
disputes among themselves without going to the Gentile community. He also
suggests that it is not necessary to go to the law when we are wronged. Why not
be wronged or cheated? Why do we have to retaliate whenever we have been
wronged? The suggestion here by Paul is the same as Jesus' in our lesson text.
Application
Now let's apply what we have learned to help us govern our
lives more according to God's Way. Should we retaliate every time we are
wronged? We see that Jesus taught the practice of non-retaliation. However, this
should be construed as an all-encompassing law. There are times when we must
retaliate and there are times when we shouldn't. The Bible records many
instances where retaliation was condoned and others when it was avoided.
Jesus used the technique of hyperbole to give a lesson on
non-retaliation. However, we recall where he overturned the tables of the
moneychangers, where he confronted the religious leaders, and where he escaped
out of town. In general, Jesus does not condone retaliation for all situations
even when we are legally or even morally justified. Non-retaliation might be the
best mode of action for many situations if not most.
If we would weigh what the offense really means to us then we
may find that it is very meaningless. Most of the offenses that we endure may be
insignificant if we consider all that is going on in our lives and the potential
that we have. It may take more energy to retaliate instead of just letting it
go. Dealing with a situation doesn't always mean to retaliate, take revenge,
or otherwise get even. Sometimes we can just take the hit and move on.
So think before you retaliate when someone offends you.
Determine if retaliation is really the best course of action even if it is a
justifiable course of action. Just because you have the right to something doesn't
mean that you should pursue it. Analyze and determine by prayer and sensitivity
to the voice of the Holy Spirit if you should pursue a certain thing. You may
find that it is better to just take the blow, be shamed, or be wronged.
Governing our Lives
So how do we apply the non-retaliation principle to our
lives? Simply. Treat each situation separately. Evaluate the impact of the
situation and pray to God to determine what to do. You may not hear a voice from
heaven instructing you on what to do but you will be guided from within on the
proper course of action.
There may be times when we are legally justified to take a
certain legal action against someone. However, we should slow down and evaluate
the situation. Is it worth it? What difference would retaliation really make in
my life. These are questions that we can ask ourselves. We may find that
retaliation is not a desirable course of action though it is the justified
course of action.
So don't think that it is necessary to retaliate every time
you are wronged or think that you are wronged. However, it is also not necessary
for Christians to lie down and be walking mats to the rest of the world just for
the sake of being a mat. Christians will be persecuted for their faith and in
that we will find that non-retaliation will be very effective. Consider all that
Jesus suffered even though he was "justified" to take action and
retaliate. We should examine the life of Christ and govern our own lives
accordingly. There were times when he did retaliate such as the incident when he
turned over the moneychangers' tables and confronted the religious leaders. So
learn how the Kingdom of God operates and do more to govern your life according
to it. Amen
|
