Ye have heard that it has been said, Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.
The words "an eye for an eye" come from Israel's law books. Why does Jesus begin with a rule God Himself gave — and what does He do with it?
The saying was not advice for a bruised individual deciding how to get even. It belonged to the courtroom, and the Old Testament passages that state it name the judges who were to apply it.
Once that rule leaves the bench and enters private hands, it stops being justice at all.
In verse 38 the Lord quotes from Exodus 21:24. "An eye for an eye" is fully righteous recompense, expressing the firm inflexibility of the law. Of course the sentence must be passed by a judge, not by the offended party. If one takes the law into his own hands, he will practically in every case inflict worse treatment than he received.
Modern ears hear this rule as savage. Set beside what an injured man really wants, it works the other way round.
Under the old economy we find that the law laid down the principle, in righteousness, "An eye for an eye" (Ex. 21:24), thereby restraining the wrath of man. Otherwise he would have demanded two eyes for one, in vengeance.
Jesus does not sharpen this rule or improve it. He names it so that what comes next will stand out against it.
This is not a stricter law. It is a different principle, and it rests on what the hearer has already received.
The law demands an exact equivalent — no more, and no less. But grace can cancel every claim. God has dealt with us in grace and cancelled our whole debt, so we must act on the same principle towards one another. But never forget that righteousness is the deep foundation of grace itself. That is why grace reigns through righteousness (Rom. 5:21), on a basis that is everlasting and unchanging.
Giving up personal payback is not the same as abolishing courts and rulers. Commentators keep the two apart.
Here the Lord instructs His disciples in their own personal path, not in their dealings with rulers. He sets their calling to walk in grace — in what they do and in what they bear — against that of the Jews, who were called to act in the righteousness of the law. It is absurd to apply such a passage to a government or a court of this world. If it did apply, it would prove that magistrates ought to pamper and reward every criminal instead of punishing any.
One writer says the people of that day were misusing the rule: "It was not for them to avenge themselves, but it was given as instruction to the judges" (The Bible Treasury). Another writer disagrees.
The principle "an eye for an eye" was valid only before the judges in Israel. We see this too in that the Jew was not allowed to take vengeance: "You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Lev. 19:18). It is not correct to suppose the Lord Jesus was referring to it because the Pharisees might have allowed it.
Jesus did not only teach this yielding. He lived it.
He presented far more than the other cheek, for they spat in His face, and beat Him, and struck Him with the palms of their hands with the utmost contempt. No! the Lord yielded to wrong instead of resisting it; and such is the true calling of the Christian.
- Measured — the law asked for an exact equal, no more and no less: a ceiling on revenge, not a licence for it.
- Judicial — God gave the rule to Israel's judges, not to the injured party. Left to the injured man, it always overpays.
- Quoted — Jesus names the rule and then leaves it behind.
- Grace — people whose own debt is cancelled release claims instead of collecting them. And grace itself stands on righteousness.
- Limited — the surrender is personal. Courts and rulers still carry out justice. Christ Himself is the pattern of the yielding.
But *I* say unto you, not to resist evil; but whoever shall strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
Jesus has just quoted the old rule of "an eye for an eye." Now He tells His disciples to meet a personal insult with the other cheek. Two questions follow at once: is He overturning justice itself, and did He mean this literally?
The words Jesus repeats come from Israel's law. They belonged in a courtroom, not in a private quarrel.
This law contained moral directions for the life of each Israelite. It contained ceremonial directions too — the laws of the offerings, so that the children of Israel could serve God. And it contained legal directions to regulate the daily life of the people. The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" belongs to the last group. It is not a principle for one person's conscience. It is a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. This is clear from Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18, where the judges are expressly mentioned. The direction rested on absolute fairness in repaying the deed. It was also meant to warn the people and hold them back (Deut. 19:20).
So Jesus is not calling the old measure unfair. He is asking for something the law never asked.
It is not that it is wrong for a man to punish according to the injury that has been inflicted on another. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is perfectly righteous. But our Lord shows that we ought to be much more than righteous. We ought to be gracious… It is clear the Lord has no reference here to what governments have to do… He is speaking of personal injury. The evil done may be ever so undeserved, but it has to be overcome with good. Show that you are willing to take even more for Christ's sake.
The detail of which cheek is struck is not decoration. It marks the blow as an insult rather than an injury.
At that time a slap in the face was a deep insult. It was even more humiliating when it came with the back of the hand and so landed on the right cheek. According to the Jewish Talmud this offence "weighed double" compared to an ordinary slap. The disciples of the Lord Jesus ought not to look for reparation before men, but to suffer offences (compare 1 Peter 2:20). It reminds us of what Isaiah foretold about our Lord: "I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting" (Isa. 50:6).
The command has a boundary, and the wording draws it — every case Jesus lists happens to you.
There is no supposition that the law or its penalties are abolished. The government of the world is not in question. What is in question is the path of disciples in it… We may still turn the left cheek to the man who strikes the right. We may let the man who sues us have the cloak as well as the coat he took by fraud. That is clearly within our rights. If the cause were someone else's, we would have no such right. We may not help men escape justice or make light of it. The Lord could never lay down a general rule that His people should allow lawlessness, or shrug at the rights of others. He speaks only of what is personal to oneself — "slaps you," "sues you," "forces you."
Many soften the saying by pointing to Jesus' own reply when a servant struck Him at His trial. Kelly answers that objection:
Some pare down and whittle away His words. They are not ashamed to argue that He did not mean them literally. Their reason: when He was struck on the face for His answer to the high priest, He protested calmly while bowing to the insult. Was this paying evil back in its own coin? On the contrary. This was One who did no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth. When He was reviled, He did not revile in return. When He suffered, He did not threaten. In fact He presented far more than the other cheek. They spat in His face, beat Him, and struck Him with their hands in utmost contempt.
This life is not a stricter rule to try harder at. It is a different path altogether.
The saint is given a path through this world which has nothing to do with the world, but which displays the character of Christ in it. … This would not be righteousness, but Christ displayed.
- Law — "an eye for an eye" was a fair rule handed to Israel's judges, never a licence for the injured man to settle his own score.
- Grace — Jesus does not call that rule unjust. He calls His disciples past justice into grace, ready to bear more wrong instead of repaying it.
- Christ — the standard is His own face, given to those who struck and spat. The disciple follows a Master who took far more than one blow.
- Limits — the wording keeps it personal: he slaps you, sues you, forces you. It gives no cover to lawlessness and no right to give away what belongs to someone else.
- Life — this path is not law kept better but Christ displayed: a way through the world that has nothing to do with the world.
and to him that would go to law with thee and take thy body coat, leave him thy cloak also.
Jesus takes a case that any listener could picture: a lawsuit that strips a man of his clothing. His answer goes beyond the measured justice of "an eye for an eye." But how far does it reach? Does it bind the courts, or only the person wronged?
The two words mean different things. The tunic is the inner garment, next to the body. The cloak is the outer coat. Israel's law protected it, because a poor man slept in it.
Under the law it was forbidden to take as a pledge a poor debtor's cloak overnight. The debtor had to have his cloak returned so that he might have a covering for the night (Ex. 22:26; Deut. 24:12-13). This is probably what the Lord Jesus was referring to. He instructs His disciples not to resist and to give even more than the other man demands. This is grace.
So the surrender Jesus asks for is the one thing the law itself would have handed back.
The old rule was just. Jesus does not tighten it. He brings in something different.
Under the old economy the law laid down the principle, in righteousness, "An eye for an eye" (Ex. 21:24), thereby restraining the wrath of man. Otherwise he would have demanded two eyes for one, in vengeance. But here an entirely new principle comes in... It is the very opposite of nature, which loves to avenge itself. It is different from righteousness, which measures out even-handed justice. It is the beautiful spirit of grace... the disciple should be more than righteous: he should be gracious. As he walks through this world, it is better to lose his cloak than to give up those lovely principles of grace. They mark him out as one who belongs to Christ.
This is often read as though Jesus were dismantling courts and law enforcement. Commentators are careful here: the verbs are all personal.
Nothing here assumes that law is abolished, or its penalties. The government of the world is not in question, but the path of disciples in it... We may still turn the left cheek to the man who strikes the right. We may let the man who sues us have the cloak as well as the coat he has gained by fraud. That is clearly within our rights. If the cause were another person's, we would have no such right. We have no right to help people escape justice or treat it lightly. The Lord could never lay down a general rule that His people should allow lawlessness. He would never have them share in an indifference to the rights of others. He speaks only of what is personal to you — "strikes you," "sues you," "forces you."
You may give away your own coat. You may not give away someone else's protection.
One objection comes from the trial of Jesus Himself.
Some pare down and whittle away His words. They are not ashamed to argue that He did not mean them literally. Their reason: when He was struck on the face for His answer to the high priest, He protested calmly, while bowing to the insult. Was this paying evil back in its own coin? On the contrary, it was One who did no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth, who when reviled, did not revile in return, and when suffering, did not threaten. In fact He presented far more than the other cheek, for they spat in His face, and struck Him, and hit Him with the palms of their hands with the utmost contempt. No — the Lord yielded to wrong instead of resisting it; and such is the true calling of the Christian.
Luke's version of this saying names the outer garment first, then the inner. The difference is deliberate, and it widens the teaching.
In the Gospel of Matthew the case is of one who sues at law... Luke, on the contrary, writes, "from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either." It is not a case of legal suing, but of illegal violence... The apparent discrepancies of the Gospels are therefore their perfection, if indeed we value the entire truth of God... The Jewish disciple would especially need guarding on the side of law. But there is also violence in the world that breaks the law. The disciples needed to see this: it was their calling and privilege to hold fast their heavenly principles in the face of man's force, and not only in the face of law.
Everything turns on what a coat is worth next to what you lose by clutching it.
How much better to lose one's clothes than consistency with Christ? The spirit of the instruction goes further than the one cheek or the outer coat. What men want is to escape all suffering and keep their human rights, in defiance of His words. So they lose the reality of Christianity, and they keep not even its appearance.
- Grace, not equity. "An eye for an eye" was righteous restraint; Jesus asks His disciples to be more than righteous — to be gracious.
- Grace gives more. The law itself told a creditor to return a poor man's cloak by nightfall. The disciple hands over even that.
- Grace is personal. The words are "sues you," "strikes you," "forces you." Forgive your own wrong. Never hand over another person's protection.
- Grace has a face. Christ offered more than the other cheek. He yielded to wrong instead of resisting it. That is the standard.
- Grace costs cloth. Losing a coat is cheap. Losing consistency with Christ leaves you without even the appearance of Christianity.
And whoever will compel thee to go one mile, go with him two.
Jesus is still answering the old rule of "an eye for an eye." This time the demand is legal: an official can claim your time and your feet, and the answer is to go twice as far.
The verb here is not about bullying. It is the language of official demand.
The word used for "compel" (Greek: angareuo) first meant to press someone into a service. This is how Simon of Cyrene was pressed into carrying the cross of the Lord Jesus. So even when a service is unwanted and unpleasant, the disciple should not only do it willingly, but do more than the job demands.
The demand was familiar, and people hated it.
The imperial government let its officials, while out on their errands, demand that a man come along in certain cases, and bring his pack animals too. How easily men are annoyed by what is, after all, no great burden! And none more so than a people like the Jews under their pagan rulers. The Lord would raise His disciples above all such self-will.
The second mile is not a new limit to defend.
With what simplicity and force He gives His own a spirit that carries them in quiet dignity above the squabbles of the world! It would be unworthy of Him to hold to the letter and refuse to go four or five miles, if that was the demand, just because the Lord had said, "Go with him two miles." The real mind of the Lord is that the disciple should willingly go beyond what he was asked. It is grace in patience.
The old rule was not unfair. Jesus does not correct it. He asks for something higher than justice.
"An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is perfectly righteous. But our Lord shows that we ought to be much more than righteous. We ought to be gracious, and He presses this as the high point of this part of His teaching... It is clear the Lord has no reference here to what governments have to do. The New Testament is written for the Christian... Personal injury is what is meant here. The evil done may be entirely undeserved, but it has to be overcome with good... The great principle our Lord marks here is this: according to the law you might go one step, but according to the gospel you would go two. This holds whether it is human violence, or the law applied however harshly or wrongly. Grace does twice as much as the law, whatever the point in hand.
There are three ways to meet a wrong, and only one of them is grace.
It is the very opposite of nature, which loves to avenge itself. It is different from righteousness, which measures out even-handed justice. It is the beautiful spirit of grace.
One objection points back to the Lord's own trial.
Some who would whittle away His words are not ashamed to argue that He did not mean them literally, because when He was struck on the face for His answer to the high priest, He calmly protested, while still bowing to the insult. Was this paying evil back in its own coin? On the contrary, He was One who did no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth; when He was insulted, He did not insult in return, and when He suffered, He did not threaten. In fact He offered far more than the other cheek, for they spat in His face, and beat Him, and struck Him with the palms of their hands in utter contempt. No — the Lord yielded to wrong instead of resisting it; and that is the true calling of the Christian.
No one can do this by willpower. It takes a new life.
He saves by giving not only redemption, but a new and divine nature. That nature hates self-will, and loves and does God's will. So you obey under the law of liberty, not as the Jew did under the law of bondage.
The mile is gone. The principle is not.
Going the extra mile has a wide application. Someone may be very inconsiderate of our welfare or our feelings. How good it is if we can answer by being extra considerate of him! This is grace, in contrast to legality. In this we rightly represent the character of our blessed Lord.
- Compelled — the word means an official demand for service, the very word used when Simon of Cyrene carried the cross.
- Grace — eye for eye was righteous; Christ asks His disciples for more than righteous. He asks for gracious.
- Beyond — the second mile is not a new limit but a direction; grace does twice what the law asks, and gladly more.
- Christ — He is the standard: He gave far more than the other cheek, and yielded to wrong instead of resisting it.
- Life — only a new nature makes this walk possible: it hates self-will, and obeys in liberty, not bondage.
To him that asks of thee give, and from him that desires to borrow of thee turn not away.
This verse closes the Lord's teaching on not repaying injury. It moves the disciple from enduring wrong to doing good. And it raises a question every honest reader feels: does Jesus mean I must hand over whatever anyone asks me for?
The command does not stand alone. It closes a run of sayings about being struck, sued, and forced to serve. One writer warns against softening it.
In this verse we have a great principle for the Christian. It comes at the close of the call not to resist evil, but to suffer it. The wrong may be private, or come through twisted uses of the law, or at public demand. Christ is the pattern for the disciple. No sound explanation can explain away His word, however unpleasant it is to human nature. The new nature stays loyal to it, as the perfect law of liberty. Only the selfish nature looks for a way out by every dishonest means.
Why can a disciple afford to be open-handed? Another writer points to who looks after him.
The disciples are under a higher government than any earthly one, and it will take abundant care of them. They no longer need to plead their own cause or take up arms in their own defence. And they share in such royal bounty that they are to be bountiful themselves.
Why should a disciple give like this? Because of what he has already received, and in a measure far past what he ever requested.
He did not stop there, but told the disciple to give habitually to the one who asked. For what had he himself not received from the divine Giver, beyond everything he asked? He was the object of countless rich mercies — was he to turn away from someone who would ask or borrow?
Another writer notes that Israel's law already restrained hard dealing with a needy fellow Israelite, and that Jesus goes further still.
Even under the law the Jew could not lend anything to his brother at interest (Lev. 25:35ff; Deut. 23:19); rather, he was to open his hand wide to him (Deut. 15:7-8). The Lord Jesus here places no restrictions on giving and lending. For God, the great Giver, did not spare His own Son but delivered Him up for us all.
The measure is not the worth of the person in front of you. It is the character of God, seen in the Lord's own dealings with crowds who brought Him nothing.
I am not to ask questions about whether the person is worthy, and I need not give the amount he asks — but I am to give, because God gives. People brought their sick to the Lord, and having power and grace He healed them, requiring nothing, asking nothing. Many did not deserve it at all; yet He was the display of the giving God, and He gave freely.
Commentators differ in emphasis here. One insists that nobody may explain the Lord's word away. Another warns that a strictly literal reading misses the point.
This does not mean that we are to give everyone whatever he chooses to ask, or to lend whatever he wants to borrow. Rather, we must always be in a giving state — always ready to give, never tired of giving. Then, when a case of real need comes before us, we may enjoy the privilege of meeting it. So we are givers even as God Himself is a giver. This does not free us from the responsibility of our stewardship — from acting as God would have us act before Him, and for His glory.
Does that mean giving without thought? One writer says no.
Suppose someone came and asked you for something, and you had reason to think he would spend it wrongly — you must limit it. Why not? He might say to you, "Didn't the Lord command, 'Give to the one who begs from you'?" Certainly He did. But He has also given other words. By them I judge whether giving is right in each case. What the Lord has in view is real need.
A single bad experience tends to close the hand for good. One writer meets that reflex head-on.
Do you count up how often you have been deceived? Even then, why feel bitter about it? The word of Jesus entitles you to give as to your Father. The person who receives your gift may put it to a bad use — that is his responsibility. I am bound to cultivate an unsuspicious generosity, and this quite apart from mere friendship.
The verse can be quoted in a self-serving direction, and one writer answers that trick with its own logic.
One man who professed faith said to me, "I ask because I want to give my brothers an opportunity to fulfil Matt. 5:42." I said, "Be consistent then. Go about hitting them, taking them to court, and forcing them to come at your bidding. That will give them the chance to fulfil the three previous verses." Let us make sure that when we read "Love," we love, and when we read "Give," we give. The one who yields everything gets everything; the one who keeps everything loses.
- Received — God gave first and did not spare His own Son; the disciple gives out of what he received.
- Released — A higher government guards him. He need not defend himself, so his hands stay open.
- Ready — The command builds a settled readiness to give, not a duty to hand over whatever anyone asks.
- Real need — Judgement is right. The Lord has real need in view, not funding folly.
- Responsibility — If the receiver misuses your gift, that is his account, not yours. Stay generous without suspicion.
Ye have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy.
The Lord takes up a saying His hearers had grown up with — and the second half of it is not in the law at all. Two questions follow: who counts as my neighbour, and where did the permission to hate come from?
The first half of the quoted saying comes straight from Scripture. The second half, one writer argues, came from the human heart:
"It was said, You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy." This last clause was a deduction, the inference of an evil nature. The law said, "Love your neighbour"; but there was no instruction to hate an enemy.
Kelly traces where they drew it from. The Jews took it, he writes, from "the general tenor of the law," because God had once sanctioned the destruction of their enemies.
One writer traces, step by step, how Jewish teaching narrowed the word "neighbour":
The question of the scribe in Luke 10:29, "And who is my neighbour?" shows that the Jews had restricted the meaning of this commandment. God intended them to see a neighbour in every fellow-man. They did not want that. They counted only their own people as their neighbours. In this way the Gentiles, the "uncircumcised," were excluded from their love. The strict scribes and Pharisees went even further. They did not want to count ordinary Jews as their neighbours. They considered them cursed because they did not know the law. Finally they excluded personal enemies from this commandment too. Only a very few "privileged" ones were left to be treated as "neighbours."
Notice what the human heart added: not a loophole, but a positive obligation. And notice how far the Lord's reply goes past merely being civil:
Men understand, at least, that they ought to love their neighbour: but their qualifications narrow even their idea of such a duty, while they have invented a duty of hate, which no lawgiver would perhaps dare to write on his tables, but which is nevertheless obeyed all too readily in practice. "You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy" is what a man would justify to his conscience, as he approves it in his heart. But the law has no other word than "neighbour" here, as it has no other duty than to love him; and the Lord specifically puts even our enemies into this class. "But I say to you, Love your enemies" — not merely do them good, though that might seem much, but "love them."
The command is not about warm feelings towards people who hurt you. And the law itself already pointed this way:
But the Jews deliberately overlooked something. In the law God had also commanded them to love their enemies (see Exodus 23:4-5; Leviticus 19:33-34)... the Lord Jesus does not give His disciples new commandments. He judges the fleshly narrowing of the old commandment, and the human addition to it. In God's thoughts, every person we have dealings with is our neighbour. That holds even if he or she turns out to be our personal enemy. The Lord Jesus does not demand an emotional love or a friendly affection for enemies. He demands the much higher divine love.
The law kept certain nations at a distance for generations. What Christ asks stands on different ground:
To love our enemies, to pray for those who persecute us, is wholly above the law or the duty of a people in the flesh. An Edomite or an Egyptian was not to be despised. Their children could enter the congregation of the Lord in the third generation. An Ammonite or a Moabite could only enter in the tenth. But Christ brought in grace and truth... As He came to seek and to save the lost, those who were His were to love their enemies and pray for their persecutors.
This verse asks more than what a person may do. It asks what he keeps in his heart:
Here was a thing that the law never could teach — it is grace. In a thousand practical instances, the question is not whether the thing is right. We often hear Christians asking, Is such a thing wrong? But this is not the only question for the Christian. Suppose wrong is done to him; what is he to feel then? If there is enmity towards him in another, what is he to cherish in his own heart?
The promised outcome — being sons of the Father — is not a wage earned by loving well:
It is a question of moral conformity or suitability to the character and ways of our Father. In everyday life we sometimes hear the saying, "You would not be your father's son if you acted like that." It is as though our Lord had said, "If you want to be the sons of your heavenly Father, you must act in grace to all; for that is what He is doing."
- Half-quoted. The love command is Scripture. The hate clause is not — one writer calls it a deduction of an evil nature.
- Half-defined. "Neighbour" shrank from every fellow-man down to a privileged few. In God's thoughts it covers every person we deal with, even a personal enemy.
- Half-hearted. The law itself commanded Israel to love their enemies, and they overlooked it. Christ asks for divine love, not a friendly feeling.
- Whole grace. This stands above what the law asked of a people in the flesh. It is what Christ brought in when He came to seek and save the lost.
- Whole likeness. Acting in grace to all does not earn sonship; it shows whose children you already are, because grace to all is what the Father is doing.
But *I* say unto you, Love your enemies, [bless those who curse you,] do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who [insult you and] persecute you,
Jesus takes a saying His hearers knew by heart and turns it inside out. Instead of marking off who deserves love, He points to the two hardest people to love: the enemy and the persecutor.
The command to love your neighbour comes from the law, but the words attached to it here do not. Commentators point out that religious teachers added the second half themselves:
The rabbis first narrowed the word "neighbour" wrongly. Then they went further. If you must love your neighbour, they said, you must hate your enemies — and by "enemies" they meant everyone else: the other nations, Jews without religious training, and personal enemies too... Love fulfils the law, as Romans 13:10 says. Out of that command they had made its exact opposite. You only had to love the few who shared your views. Everyone else you could meet with pride, contempt and hatred.
Loving an enemy is not a harder version of law-keeping. Christ asks for something the law never asked for:
To love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us is far above the law, and far above what the law asked of people in their natural state... But Christ brought in grace and truth. In the light of the Son of Man all were lost, even the sheep of Israel. He came to seek and to save the lost, so those who belonged to Him were to love their enemies and pray for those who persecuted them. It was the mind of heaven for His saints on earth.
This love is not a warm feeling towards someone who hurts you. It is an active interest in their real good, and their hostility is the very reason to care:
Love is not just a kind feeling. It is real concern for another person's true welfare. If that person returns hatred, that is all the more reason to care for him, because he needs special help. When you return good for evil, you represent God rightly. You also set an example that should reach the hearts and consciences of others.
This is not justice, and it is not just staying clean of evil. It is good sent out into a hostile place:
He takes up the principle of the law, which deals with evil in order to hold it down... Then He brings in a vast principle, made known when Christ came into the middle of evil: good that is entirely above evil, yet acts inside it... It is not righteousness, in the sense of justice; it is not what presents us to God... it is goodness in the middle of evil.
The command is not a theory. Christ Himself prayed for the men who were killing Him:
The Lord Jesus showed this love of God to us. "But God shows His love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). While He hung on the cross He prayed for His tormentors: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34). So the Lord Himself is the perfect example of the command He gave.
The verse links this behaviour to being sons of the Father. Writers stress that the point is family likeness, not how someone becomes God's child:
When it is a question of "sons" it refers to our position... while here it is a question of character... God calls us to have the family character and to show the same grace, as sons of such a Father. The person who loves his enemies and does good to those who hate him shows the character of a son. His Father makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good. Think how people treat Him and blaspheme His name... Yet He still treats them this way, and He is "your Father."
These words sound beyond anyone's reach. Commentators answer that the command still stands, and that God supplies what it asks for:
If we are His sons, it is not arrogance to hold feelings higher than human nature can reach. This is our new standing, and it should be our delight. Grace alone can make it real. But Christ has obtained everything we need for this. The Holy Spirit is here to see it through and to guide us to Christ's glory.
- Distortion. "Hate your enemy" was never God's word. Religious teachers added it, shrinking the circle of "neighbour" until it held only a favoured few.
- Elevation. Loving enemies and praying for persecutors stands above the law. It is the mind of heaven, brought down to earth by Christ.
- Definition. This love means caring about someone's real welfare. Their hostility becomes the reason to care, not a reason to stop. It is goodness working inside evil, not justice measured out.
- Pattern. The Father makes His sun rise on evil and good alike. The Son prayed for the men crucifying Him. The command asks only for the family likeness.
- Power. The standard is not lowered for us. Grace alone makes it work. Christ has secured all we need, and the Holy Spirit is here to carry it through.
that ye may be [the] sons of your Father who is in [the] heavens; for he makes his sun rise on evil and good, and sends rain on just and unjust.
Sunrise and rain fall on people who have earned nothing. That is the pattern Jesus sets for disciples He calls to love their enemies, and it raises a question: what does that family likeness look like day by day?
The phrase "sons of your Father" here is not describing how someone enters God's family. Commentators note that the people He spoke to already belonged to Him.
The Lord here presents a high standard. In the Sermon on the Mount the word "son" has a practical meaning. The Lord Jesus is not speaking of the gospel here, or of how to become a child or son of God. He shows His disciples, who were already born again, how they could copy their Father in heaven by loving their enemies. In that way they would show in practice that they were His sons.
An everyday comparison makes the same point about resemblance:
Some think this passage teaches that a person can gain the relationship of children by a certain line of action. It does not. It is a question of moral conformity or suitability to the character and ways of our Father. In everyday life we sometimes hear the saying, "You would not be your father's son if you acted like that." It is as though our Lord had said, "If you want to be the sons of your heavenly Father, you must act in grace to all; for that is what He is doing."
Loving enemies is not a stricter version of an old rule. It goes past anything the law required of Israel.
To love our enemies, and to pray for those who persecute us, is far above the law or the duty of a people in the flesh. Israel was not to hate an Edomite or an Egyptian, and their children could enter the assembly of the LORD in the third generation. An Ammonite or a Moabite had to wait until the tenth generation. But Christ brought in grace and truth… In receiving Him they receive life, His life, and they are to show it this way.
The two halves of the verse are not saying the same thing twice.
Such love and devotion, to be worth anything, must be no mere form but a living reality — so that they might be sons of their Father in the heavens. That is their place of dignity. And what a pattern He sets! For He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. What rich grace in the first comparison, and what faithful goodness in the second!
God gives this daily kindness to people He has every right to condemn.
He has the right to condemn the evil and the unjust. Instead of doing so, He shows them His goodness during their life on earth in the same way that He does to the good and the just. Nothing shows the love of the eternal Creator-God for His enemies more movingly.
Jesus does not point to a distant Ruler. He points to your Father, whose family has its own character.
When it is a question of "sons" it refers to our position… here it is a question of character. "The sons of your Father", "your Father who makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good" — not simply God, but your Father. He calls us to have the family character and show the same grace, as sons of such a Father… Think how people treat Him and blaspheme Him, and what man's character is! Yet He treats them so, and He is "your Father."
The sun that teaches disciples to give also leaves ungrateful people without excuse.
Out of His own goodness, as our Lord put it, He causes His sun to shine on the evil as well as on the good. He sends His rain on the just as well as on the unjust. Yet the man who profits by all these benefits and never thinks of God is a most wicked man, the greatest enemy of God alive on the earth… He shows less gratitude than even the poor animal that knows its master's kindness and care.
Loving enemies sounds impossible. The answer is not effort but grace.
Let us therefore be in earnest to keep up the family character… If we are His sons, it is no presumption to cherish feelings above human nature. This is our new status, and it should be our delight. Grace alone can make it good. But Christ has obtained all that is needed and effective for this. And the Holy Spirit is here to see to it, and to guide us to Christ's glory.
- Family character — the verse is about resembling the Father, not joining His family. Those He spoke to were already His.
- Family generosity — sunrise is rich grace to the undeserving. Rain is steady, faithful goodness. Neither one sorts people first.
- Family reach — the family standard goes past neighbours to enemies. The law never asked that of a nation.
- Family power — this life is above human nature, so grace alone makes it real. Christ's work and the Holy Spirit supply what is needed.
- Family witness — living this way puts the Father's ways on public display. Those who take His gifts and never think of Him show less gratitude than an animal.
For if ye should love those who love you, what reward have ye? Do not also the tax-gatherers the same?
Jesus has just told His disciples to love their enemies, and now He tests the quality of the love they already have. He does it by pointing to the men everyone despised: if your love matches theirs, what is it worth?
The comparison only works if you know how people saw these men.
The Jews hated paying taxes to the Romans, and they thought the men who collected them deserved no respect. That is why "tax collectors and sinners" are often grouped together. Religious people mocked the Lord for entering their houses. They called Him "a friend of tax collectors and sinners." But God's grace was for all, and Matthew was called from his tax office to be one of the apostles.
Returning love for love is not a Christian achievement. It is the ordinary human floor, and that is why it earns nothing.
The Lord Jesus then gives two examples, in verses 46 and 47. They show that loving your neighbour as the Pharisees practised it was no different from the way the world behaves. Even the tax collectors knew how to love their friends... There was nothing in that behaviour which would lead anyone to expect a reward.
What these men had was real, but it was only natural feeling. The Lord looks for love of a different kind.
Even in the time before the cross, the Lord insisted on a love wholly above mere human nature with its likes and dislikes. The hated tax collectors had natural affection, and loved those who loved them. The Lord told the disciples to love far beyond Jew or Greek. The family were to love as their heavenly Father did. It could not be equal in degree, but it was the same kind of love. That love must be in God's children by divine grace. It rises above every question of what a person deserves or what can be gained from them.
Christ sets His word here against what the people had been taught. The change He brings is not a tighter rule.
Here was something the law could never teach — it is grace. In a thousand practical situations the question is not whether the thing is right. We often hear Christians asking, Is such a thing wrong? But that is not the only question for the Christian. Suppose someone wrongs him; what is he to feel then? If someone is hostile to him, what is he to hold in his own heart? "Love your enemies… pray for those who persecute you… so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven." In this way they show in practice that they belong to such a Father.
The tax collector is only the floor. Verse 48 sets the ceiling: the Father Himself. One writer explains what that does not mean.
The name of Father reveals to us the fullness of grace. According to this sweet name they were already children, accepted in Christ as Christ is accepted by the Father... It is not said: Present to God a character of perfection, so that He may accept you through it and be pleased with you. Rather, you are the children of your heavenly Father — so display His character to the world. "For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust." He acts according to His grace, and not according to the law: you saved sinners, you are and ought to be witnesses of it. The tax collectors love those who love them, but your heavenly Father loves His enemies... It is not said, Be perfect before Him, or with Him, as if you were without sin, but like Him, act in love towards your enemies.
The test comes first with fellow believers who rub us the wrong way.
If I love the brother who is nice and agreeable to me, I am only doing what anybody might do. "If you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?" Suppose my brother is not nice and agreeable to me. If I love him because he is born of God, I am displaying the love which is the nature of God Himself. And nothing is greater than that.
- Floor — Returning love for love is the world's baseline; even the most despised men in Israel managed it, so it proves nothing about a disciple.
- Kind — What marks God's children is not warmer affection but a different kind of love, one that rises above what a person deserves or what can be gained from them.
- Source — This is grace, not law. The question stops being "was I wronged?" and becomes "what will I hold in my heart toward the one who wronged me?"
- Measure — The standard is the Father who sends sun and rain on evil and good alike; being "perfect" here means acting like Him toward enemies, not being sinless.
- Test — It begins with the believer you find hard to like. Love him because he is born of God, and you are showing the very nature of God.
And if ye should salute your brethren only, what do ye extraordinary? Do not also the Gentiles the same?
Here the Lord sets a simple test for His disciples. The Lord names two groups nobody in His audience admired — tax collectors and Gentiles — and points out that both manage the same warmth toward their own circle.
One reference work explains why tax collectors were so despised:
The duty of paying taxes to the Romans was deeply resented by the Jews, and those who collected them were thought unworthy of any respect. So "publicans and sinners" are often grouped together. The Lord was mocked by the religious people for entering their houses; they scornfully called Him "a friend of publicans and sinners." But God's grace was for everyone, and Matthew was called from his tax office to be one of the apostles.
The word "brothers" here reaches wider than family:
Even the tax collectors, those despised people who enriched themselves at the expense of their own people, knew how to love their friends. And the Gentiles also greeted their brothers — that is, everyone they knew well. There was nothing in this behaviour that would lead anyone to expect a reward.
Natural affection is real. But it reaches only the people already tied to us.
Even in the time before the cross, the Lord insisted on a love wholly above mere human nature with its likes and its dislikes. The detested tax collectors had natural affection, and loved those that loved them. The Gentiles greeted tenderly those bound up with themselves in mere ties of flesh and blood. The disciples were told to love far beyond Jew or Greek. The family were to love as their heavenly Father did. This could not be equal in degree. But it was the same kind of love. It must be in God's children by divine grace, rising above any question of what a person deserves or of hidden motives.
The question "what more are you doing?" invites a comparison — but not with the people next door.
It is God, not man, whom the Lord makes the standard. He points to the heavenly Father — not the fearful moral ruler made known to Israel, but our Father. What are His affections, what is His will about us?
Kelly presses both questions and refuses any lower standard:
If they loved those that loved them, did not the hated tax collectors do the same? If they greeted only their brothers, the despised Gentiles did the same too. This was altogether beneath the Christian according to Christ. "You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect." The Saviour would not tolerate a lower standard of feeling and conduct.
So the call is to family likeness. Kelly points to how the Father Himself acts:
Let us therefore be in earnest to keep up the family character. Does not our Father who is in the heavens make His sun rise on evil and good? Does He not send rain on just and unjust? If we are His sons, it is not presumption to cherish feelings above human nature; it is our new standing, and it should be our delight. Grace alone can make it good.
Another writer draws the line between display and earning acceptance:
It is not said: present to God a character of perfection, so that He will accept you on that basis. Rather: you are the children of your heavenly Father — therefore display His character to the world. He acts according to His grace, and not according to the law. You saved sinners, you are and ought to be witnesses of it.
The test bites hardest among fellow believers. Easy company proves nothing.
By upbringing and habits we may have very little in common. We may also disagree on many matters connected with the things of God. Now these are just the ones who put us to the test. Are we free to say they are no concern of ours, and pass by on the other side? We are not. If I love the brother who is nice and agreeable to me, I am only doing what anybody might do... If I love my brother because he is born of God, even though he is not nice and agreeable to me, I am displaying the love which is the nature of God Himself.
- More — a greeting kept inside your own circle is not more. Tax collectors and Gentiles already do that.
- Source — the standard is not the neighbours but the Father. God, not man, is the measure.
- Kind — children cannot match His love in degree. But it must be the same kind of love, above any question of what a person deserves.
- Reach — the Father sends sun and rain on evil and good alike. His children's kindness must go past where natural affection stops.
- Result — this is not how you earn acceptance. It is how accepted children show the family character to a watching world.
Be *ye* therefore perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Jesus ends a run of sayings about loving enemies with a command that sounds impossible. Everything turns on one word: perfect. Does it call for sinlessness in us, or likeness to God?
Many read this as a demand to become sinless. It points somewhere else — to a name, and to the family likeness that comes with it.
This text has no bearing at all on the question of perfection in the flesh. It is the revelation of the name of our Father who is in heaven, and the character that suits the kingdom of heaven in practice. The Jew of old was responsible to bear witness to the righteousness of Jehovah. The believer now is responsible to show the grace of "our Father." … The children are bound to sustain the family character. … Other Scriptures prove, if anyone needs proof, that sin still lives in the believer here below. It stays there, however much he must refuse it and put it to death. This text simply urges us to imitate our Father's grace, even toward those who deserve His judgment.
The word does not describe a flawless finish. It describes a character with nothing missing.
We speak of a thing as perfect when it has all its parts, without considering the finish of those parts at all. So the Lord tells us that as children we must resemble our Father, and to do this we must display all the features of our Father's character. We must not only love those who love us. He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends His rain on the just and on the unjust. We must display this feature of His character too.
God told Abraham and Israel to be perfect before Him. Here the wording changes. The relationship comes first, and the conduct flows out of it.
It does not say, Be perfect "before me," or "with your God," as was said to Abraham and to the Israelites, because the name of Father reveals to us the fullness of grace. … Now it does not say, Present to God a character of perfection, so that He may accept you through it and be pleased with you. Instead, you are the children of your heavenly Father — so display His character to the world. … He acts by grace, not by law. You are saved sinners; you are witnesses of it, and you ought to be. … It does not say, Be perfect before Him, or with Him, as if you were without sin, but like Him — act in love toward your enemies.
The Father is not naive about evil. He sees it and still holds a steady course. That steadiness, not blindness, is what we copy.
The Father notices and understands all the evil in the world. Yet He keeps an even course toward all. He sends His rain for the just and the unjust, and gives the evil a share in all His benefits. He Himself stays apart from all evil and always remains in His own perfectness. So we see things as they are. We are not to be blind to them, and not to be shaken by them. We go steadily on, taking what meets us in the spirit in which the Father bears with things. Then our hearts hold no answering evil. In this way we are perfect according to the pattern shown in the ways of the Father Himself.
A command like this can sound beyond reach.
The answer to all this is that our blessed Lord does not ask us to do impossible things. He never gives a command without supplying the grace needed to carry it out. So when He calls us to be perfect as our Father, it is plain that He is granting us a holy privilege and clothing us with a high dignity. It is our place to seek to understand and take hold of both.
Other passages give the same call in different words. Set side by side, they show two sides of God joined here.
God is the perfect example of true love for one's enemies. As the heavenly Father He is our example not only in this but in everything. In the parallel passage in Luke 6:36 we read, "Be merciful, even as your Father is merciful." In 1 Peter 1:16 we find the quotation of Leviticus 19:2, "You shall be holy, for I am holy." God is love and He is light (1 John 4:8, 16; 1:5). Mercy is an expression of love, and holiness is a mark of light. In our verse both are joined together.
- Father first. The command rests on a name already given — you are children before He tells you to act like one.
- Family likeness. To be perfect is to carry the family character: showing His grace, not reaching sinlessness in ourselves.
- Complete, not polished. Perfect means every feature is present. The missing one is love that goes beyond those who love us back.
- Reach. His own love sets the measure: sun and rain for the undeserving, and a steady course toward evil with no evil in return.
- Grace supplied. He never commands without giving what the command needs. This is a privilege held out, not a weight laid on.