Matthew 5:39–44

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).

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.

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).

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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."

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."

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.

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.

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?

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."

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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."

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.