What did Jesus say about an eye for an eye?

Our Lord comes next to the case of any practical injury that may be done us. It is not that it is wrong for a man to punish according to the injury that has been inflicted upon another. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is perfectly righteous; but our Lord intimates that we ought to be much more than righteous, we ought to be gracious; and He presses this as the climax of this part of the discourse. First, He had strengthened the righteousness of the law, extended its depths, and put aside its license; now He goes further. He shows that there is a principle in His own ways and life which teaches the Christian that he is not to seek retaliation. "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." It is clear the Lord has no reference here to what governments have to do. The New Testament is written for the Christian, for that which has a separate existence and a peculiar calling in the midst of earthly systems and peoples. It belongs to those who are heavenly while they are walking upon earth. We become such by the reception of Christ, and to such the Lord says, "Resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." Personal injury is meant here. 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. "And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." There the law is evoked: that is, a man lays a claim, perhaps falsely, to one part of your clothing, and if he will "sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." Here it seems not exactly a man appealing to the law, but the public officers themselves. "And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain." The great principle our Lord marks in this — whether it is human violence, or the law ever so hardly or wrongly applied, — that while, according to the law, you might go one step, according to the gospel you would go two. Grace does twice as much as the law, whatever may be the point in hand. It was never intended in anywise to supplant obligations or to lower responsibilities, but, on the contrary, to give power and force to everything that is righteous in the sight of God. The law might say, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth;" here there is not only the endurance of that which is positively wrong, but grace that gives more than is asked. "The law was given by Moses; but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." And this is one way of practically showing how far we value grace. It is not a question of the mere letter of our Lord's words. If you were to limit it merely to a blow on the face it would be a very poor thing; but the word of Christ is that which conveys to me the spirit that pleases God, and gives me the reality of grace. And grace is not the vindication of self nor the punishment of a wrong, but the endurance of evil and the triumph of good over it. Christ is speaking of what a Christian has to put up with from the world through which he passes. He is to receive tribulation as the discipline which God sees to be good for his soul; the great spectacle before men and angels — that there are men on this earth who are allowed and rejoice to suffer for Christ, because they have learned to give up their own will, to sacrifice their own rights, and to suffer wrongfully, looking onward to the day when the Lord will own whatever has been their sorrow for His sake, and when all evil shall be judged most solemnly at His appearing and kingdom.

Two things only need be noted, leaving the details for the reader himself. The first is, that all these enactments reveal the tenderness of God in protecting the bodies of His people — and specially of those occupying a subject position. The second is, that we find here the true character of law. Grace is absent. It is eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth, etc. Our blessed Lord especially cites these provisions to point out their contrast with grace. He says, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matt. 5:38-39.) On the ground of law an exact equivalent is demanded — no more, and no less; but grace can remit every claim; for dealt with in grace ourselves, our whole debt remitted, we must act on the same principle in our relationships with one another. Be it, however, never forgotten, that the foundation of grace itself is laid deep in righteousness, and hence it reigns through righteousness (Rom. 5:21), having thus been established upon an everlasting and immutable basis.

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. But here an entirely new principle is introduced. "I say unto you that ye resist not evil." 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, manifested in all perfection in Him who "when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not." Even so the disciple should be more than righteous: he should be gracious, and while walking through this world, it is better to lose his "cloke" than give up those lovely principles of grace that mark him out as one who belongs to Christ.

The Lord here advances beyond all Jewish and indeed human thought, when He enjoins on His disciples patient grace on all kinds of inflicted wrong. To resist it is forbidden. He cites from the law the principle of talion, as it is styled, or retaliation, expressly to abandon it. It was particularly open to abuse; but even when applied with the strictest justice, and acting as a powerful check on human vindictiveness, how far was it from the mind of heaven which Christ was manifesting on earth, and laying down as the only conduct proper to the sons of His Father! Can we conceive a greater shock to Jewish feeling?

"Ye heard that it was said, Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. But I say to you not to resist evil; but whoever striketh (or shall strike) thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And to him that would go to law with thee and take thy vest (or tunic), leave him thy coat (or mantle) also. And whoever shall impress thee for one mile, go with him two."

Then again the law stipulated retribution of a very even kind for injury inflicted. It enjoined what we should call "tit for tat"; as also, while calling for love to one's neighbour, it permitted the hatred of an enemy. This the Lord reversed. He inculcated forbearance and the grace that gives, rather than the insistence upon one's rights; and also the love that will bless and do good to the enemy. And all this in order that His disciples may be quite distinct from the sinners of the world, and come out in the character of God Himself.

(5) The Lord now takes up the necessary principle of law, to contrast it with that non-resistance of evil which He enjoins upon His disciples. The righteousness of the law of course remains righteousness, but it does not require of any that they should exact for personal wrongs. There is no supposition of the abrogation of law or of its penalties. The government of the world is not in question, but the path of disciples in it. Where they are bound by the law, they are bound, and have no privileges. They are bound, too, to sustain it in its general working, as ordained of God for good. Within these limits there is still abundant room for such practice as is here enjoined. We may still turn the left cheek to him that smites the right, or let the man that sues us have the cloak as well as the coat which he has fraudulently gained: for that is clearly within our rights. If the cause were that of another, we should have no right of this kind, nor to aid men generally in escape from justice or in slighting it. The Lord could never lay down a general rule that His people should allow lawlessness, or identify themselves with indifference to the rights of others. He speaks only of what is personal to oneself, ― "smite thee," "sue thee," "compel thee:" and here the law itself would recognize one's liberty.

The "law of requital" is the fifth of those the Lord Jesus refers to from the law and the traditions of those of old. "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" (Ex. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21). This well known expression of requital is often considered as characteristic of the law of Moses. However, this is too simple a way of looking at the law which had been given by God Himself on Mount Sinai, and which Paul considers not only just, but also holy and good (Rom. 7:12).

This law contained moral directions for the life of each Israelite, ceremonial directions (i.e. the laws of the offerings) for the children of Israel to serve God and also 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 latter group. It is not a principle for the conscience of a particular individual but 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 was based on the principle of absolute fairness in requiting the deed and was to be a warning and deterrent to the people (Deut. 19:20).

That the principle, "an eye for an eye," was only valid before the judges in Israel is also seen in the fact that vengeance was not permitted to the Jew. "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (Lev. 19:18). It is not correct to suppose the Lord Jesus was referring to it because the Pharisees might have allowed it.

Then in verse 40, it is the spirit of the thing, not the literal turning of the cheek, etc. In the Epistles we have what is even higher — to be forgiving, not self-assertive, meek and lowly, following the Lord, not answering railing for railing (1 Peter 2). This should be our character; not yielding, however, where there is evil, for then we ought to be as firm as a rock. Yet should it be a quiet firmness, not a lot of clatter like a horse's hoof, but like the clean animal which had a divided hoof (Lev. 11). There was never one so unresisting as the blessed Saviour Himself. Such a spirit is what the world despises, tramples under foot, and thoroughly misunderstands, they put graciousness down as cowardice, yet never was one so faithful as He who is the pattern of grace. Look at Ps. 40:9. The great congregation was Israel, when all the males had to appear before Jehovah and He went up with them. "I have preached righteousness in the great congregation" — the very opposite of cowardice. And quite compatible with the most perfect faithfulness is His meekness and gentleness. The faithful man of this Ps. 40 is the poor man of Ps. 41. I have no doubt, too, the spirit of Christ in the remnant is also there. A greater number have gone astray in the proper under standing of the Psalms than in any other part of the scripture. They call for greater subjection of mind to rightly divide them, than perhaps any other book of the Bible. We shall be kept right if we have the Lord ever before us, as revealed in the word. Christ is the key to it all.

I have no doubt they were making a misuse of that communication: "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." It was not for them to avenge themselves, but it was given as instruction to the judges in their administration of justice. But we are called to more than righteousness. The Christian standard is vastly higher than the Jewish. "The grace of God that brings salvation to all men has appeared, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly [as to ourselves], righteously [towards others] and godlily" [as regards God]. We should never act unrighteously, but graciously, and godlily. The principles of the kingdom of heaven show us we are to act graciously. The kingdom of heaven was "at hand" when the Lord was here; it is in "mystery" now that the King is on high; and by and by the kingdom will be in "power."

The Lord Jesus does not speak against a false exposition of this part of the law, but He sets it against a totally different principle: "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away."

The Lord Jesus in His grace does not speak of a less harsh requital or renunciation of requital. He teaches the exact opposite of requital: not to recompense evil for evil but to overcome evil with good (Rom. 12:17-21). In this world which is full of injustice, the disciples of the Lord Jesus are to exhibit the same attitude of grace and mercy which their Lord, the rejected King, has shown in His life. We have already seen this in the Beatitudes which show us the features of those who have entered the Kingdom of God by new birth.

Nothing could show more clearly than these words of our Lord that the "Sermon on the Mount" was never intended to be a programme for governing authorities in the world. What chaos would arise if, in a society which consists mostly of sinners, grace instead of justice were to rule! But the Lord Jesus did not at all intend to do away with justice in this world. Romans 13:1, 4 tell us that "the powers that be are ordained of God" and that "he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

Some Christians would like to take away a little of the sharpness (for the flesh) of these words of the Lord Jesus and to practice them only in certain circumstances. They seek to prove their view from John 18:22-23, saying that the Lord Jesus rebuked the officer but did not turn the other cheek to him. They add that on certain occasions in the Book of Acts Paul claimed his rights as a Roman (Acts 16:35-40; 25:11). But the Lord Jesus put His justified rebuke in the form of a mere question, and bore all other abuses silently (Matt. 27:27-31; John 19:1-3). It also remains to be seen if the attitude of the apostle Paul in Philippi and before Festus was according to the will of the Lord. Some argue that a Christian ought to report injustice done to him in order to prevent criminality. But as Christians in this present evil world, from which we have been delivered according to Galatians 1:4, we are not called to seek justice for ourselves. Of course, we must not renounce our duty in relation to others if the authorities so demand it (i.e. as a witness in court, etc.) We must submit ourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, as Peter writes in his epistle (1 Peter 2:13).