Matthew 5:38

Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: YE HAVE HEARD THAT IT HATH BEEN SAID ( ; ; ), AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH - that is, whatever penalty was regarded as a proper equivalent for these. This law of retribution-designed to take vengeance out of the hands of private persons and commit it to the magistrate-was abused in the opposite way to the commandments of the Decalogue. While they were reduced to the level of civil enactments, this judicial regulation was held to be a warrant for taking redress into their own hands, contrary to the injunctions of the Old Testament itself ...

Matthew 5:38._An eye for an eye. Here _another error is corrected. God had enjoined, by his law, (Leviticus 24:20,) that judges and magistrates should punish those who had done injuries, by making them endure as much as they had inflicted. The consequence was, that every one seized on this as a pretext for taking private revenge. They thought that they did no wrong, provided they were not the first to make the attack, but only, when injured, returned like for like. Christ informs them, on the contrary, that, though judges were entrusted with the defense of the community, and were invested with authority to restrain the wicked and repress their violence, yet it is the duty of every man to bear patiently the injuries which he receives....

38-42 The plain instruction is, Suffer any injury that can be borne, for the sake of peace, committing your concerns to the Lord's keeping. And the sum of all is, that Christians must avoid disputing and striving. If any say, Flesh and blood cannot pass by such an affront, let them remember, that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God; and those who act upon right principles will have most peace and comfort....

Verse 38. _AN EYE FOR AN EYE_] Our Lord refers here to the law of retaliation mentioned Exodus 21:24, Exodus 21:24, (see the note there, and Leviticus 24:20, Leviticus 24:20,) which obliged the offender to suffer the _same injury_ he had _committed_. The _Greeks_ and _Romans_ had the same law. So strictly was it attended to at _Athens_, that if a man put out the eye of another who had but _one_, the offender was condemned to lose _both_ his _eyes_, as the loss of one would not be an _equivalent_ misfortune. It seems that...

AN EYE FOR AN EYE ... - This command is found in Exodus 21:24; Leviticus 24:20, and Deuteronomy 19:21. In these places it was given as a rule to regulate the decisions of judges. They were to take eye for eye, and tooth for tooth, and to inflict burning for burning. As a judicial rule it is not unjust. Christ finds no fault with the rule as applied to magistrates, and does not take upon himself to repeal it. But instead of confining it to magistrates, the Jews had extended it to private conduct, and made it the rule by which to take revenge. They considered themselves justified by this rule to inflict the same injury on others that they had received. Our Saviour remonstrates again

EXPOSITION MATTHEW 5:1 AND SEEING THE MULTITUDES; _i.e. _those spoken of in Matthew 4:25—the multitudes who were at that point of time following him. HE WENT UP. From the lower ground by the lake. INTO A MOUNTAIN; Revised Version, _into the mountain _(εἰς τὸ ὄρος);_ i.e. _not any special mountain, but "the mountain nearest the place spoken of—the mountain near by" (Thayer); in contrast to any lower place, whether that was itself fairly high ground (as probably Luke 9:28) or the shore of the lake. The actual spot here referred to may have been far from, or, and more probably ...

YE HAVE HEARD THAT IT HATH BEEN SAID,.... That is, to, or by them of old time, as is expressed in some of the foregoing instances, AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH, Exodus 21:24. This is "lex talionis", the "law of retaliation"; which, whether it is to be understood literally, or not, is a matter of question. The Baithuseans, or Sadducees, among the Jews, took it in a literal sense, and so does Josephus, who says b, he that shall blind, i.e. put out a man's eyes, shall suffer the like. But the Jewish doctors generally understood it of paying a price equivalent to the damage done, except in case of life. R. Sol. Jarchi c explains the law thus: "He that puts out his neighbour's eye, must give him עינו דמי, "the price of his eye", according to the price of a servant sold in the market; and so the same of them all; for, not taking away of th

Matthew 5:17. _Think not that I am came to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill._ The life, work, and words of Christ are not an emendation of the Old Testament, or an abrogation of it. It stands fast and firm, fulfilled, carried to perfection, filled to the full in Christ. Matthew 5:18. _For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven._ It is vain to teach the commandments without first doing them. The doi

5. THE PROCLAMATION OF THE KING CONCERNING HIS KINGDOM. CHAPTER S 5-7 _ 1. The Characteristics of the heirs of the Kingdom.(Matthew 5:1 .) 2. The Confirmation of the Law and its Expansion.(Matthew 5:17 .)_ CHAPTER 5 In the closing of the last chapter we saw our Lord Jesus Christ surrounded by a great multitude of people, which followed Him and who were attracted by the King's presence, before whom the various diseases had to flee. If we turn to the eighth chapter we find the continuation of these scenes we had in the last half of the fourth chapter. Between these two Chapter s are three very important ones, which are as such found only in this Gospel. The contents of the fifth, sixth and seventh Chapter s are in the form of a continued discourse of our Lord, commonly called “t

RETALIATION (_cf._ Luke 6:29 f.). Like the law of divorce, the law of the _ius talionis_ (Exodus 21:24 f.*) was more restrictive than permissive; it limited revenge by fixing an exact compensation for an injury. Jesus penetrates behind this just principle without abrogating it. His disciples, in virtue of a higher principle, are not to desire human justice for themselves. To take His words literally is to exalt the letter at the expense of the spirit, which He would surely deprecate. Paul appealed to legal justice (Acts 16:37; Acts 25:8), and there are occasions when to decline it would mean wronging and betraying others. RV in...