---

Of this we have here two sorts, viz. the retaliation of kind and that of kindness. These are not necessarily inconsistent. For Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil the Law. Properly understood, "Eye for eye and tooth for tooth" is the co-relative of "Do unto others as you would they should do unto you." We propose to view the lea talionis -

I. AS A DIRECTION TO THE MAGISTRATE.

1. The spirit of its teaching to him is to minister judgment in equity.

(1) The law of retaliation was a question for the magistrate. Private vengeance has no sacred approbation (see Deuteronomy 19:16-21; Romans 13:4). The scribes conceded to private revenge what the Law permitted to the magistrate as a civil penalty; but this was an evil perversion.

(2) It would be an outrage upon equity were a magistrate to give the sentence of death for the destruction of an eye. Or, on the contrary, were he to assign a trifling exaction for a serious crime. The magistrate must not refuse justice to the poor; or favour the strong against the weak (cf. Luke 18:3).

2. The doctrine of Christ strengthens his hands.

(1) The prohibitions of our Lord have reference to private resentments. They do not interfere with magisterial functions. The sermon on the mount was addressed to the disciples (see ver. 1).

(2) The scribes, however, had interfered with them in sanctioning private revenges. And these revenges were often carried far beyond the limits of equity.

(3) In absolutely forbidding private revenges Jesus restored the magistrate to the Law. In this he fulfilled the Law.

II. AS A PERMISSION TO THE INJURED.

1. The Law did not impose retaliation.

(1) It simply made it competent to one who had suffered to exact from the person who caused his injury a corresponding or equivalent suffering. Except in cases of life and death, he might commute the exaction of "an eye for an eye" for a money satisfaction (Exodus 21:23-25). Or the sufferer might decline to prosecute. The Law was strictly permissive.

(2) Hence it is evident that the precepts of Jesus do not destroy the Law. The spirit of the Law is not in favour of revenge. It is rather intended to limit and check it.

2. The rule of Christ is against the spirit of revenge.

(1) "That ye resist not evil." In this Christ does not say that we may not avoid evil. He himself went from Judaea into Galilee to avoid the resentment of the Pharisees (John 4:1-3). He instructed his disciples when persecution should arise against them in one city to pass on to another (Matthew 10:23).

(2) He does not say that we may not even resist it simply for our own security or for the security of others, within certain limitations (cf. John 18:23; Acts 16:37; Acts 22:25; Acts 23:2, 3, 17; Acts 25:10, 11).

(3) The law of retaliation must be made consistent with the law of love. This is best secured by forgiveness. To prosecute a knave or a rowdy for his moral benefit might consist with love; but the motive might be misunderstood (cf. Matthew 26:52; Romans 12:17; 1 Corinthians 6:7; Galatians 5:22).

(4) This is the gospel method. It embodies the spirit of the Law (cf. Proverbs 20:22; Proverbs 29:25).

III. AS A MORAL TO THE WORLD.

1. The end of Law is the public good.

(1) Licentiousness must be restrained or society must dissolve. Retaliation is sanctioned to restrain it. So for public reasons, without any feeling of resentment, a Christian might prosecute a knave or a rowdy.

(2) Retaliation is sanctioned, moreover, to convey moral lessons to the conscience of the transgressor. In this view a Christian might prosecute an offender with benevolent intention.

2. The public good is also the design of the gospel.

(1) It wins victory by patience. Conquering the resistance of a foe by the restraint of a stronger arm does not vanquish his spirit of resistance. The peaceful victory turns the foe into a friend.

(2) It wins victory in patience. The patient sufferer has vanquished all the devils of pride, selfishness, and cruelty in his soul

IV. AS AN INSTRUCTION TO THE CHRISTIAN.

1. When he suffers bodily injury.

(1) This class of injury is represented in the case of the blow upon the cheek. Here is affront as well as injury (cf 2 Corinthians 11:20).

(2) It must be taken patiently. Jesus, though the Judge of Israel, when smitten, did not smite again (cf. Micah 5:1; John 18:23).

(3) Submission, in rare eases of excessive brutality, may expose us to a repetition of the injury. If so, still bear it. "Turn the other cheek."

(4) Generally the first forgiveness will prevent the second blow (Proverbs 25:22). Note: It is the return blow that makes the quarrel.

2. When he suffers wrongs to property.

(1) This class of injuries is represented in the case of the coat. We may forfeit property through suits at law instituted by knaves who make no conscience of forgery and perjury (see Ecclesiastes 3:16; Ecclesiastes 5:8).

(2) Suffer wrong rather than go to law. If the sufferance should lead to further greater loss - the loss of the cloke in addition to the coat - suffer it still. The cost of both may be less than the cost of litigation. The loss of both is less than the loss of the spirit of meekness.

3. When he suffers outrages upon liberty.

(1) This class of injuries is represented in the case of the compulsion to go a mile. This also should be taken patiently. Go "twain" rather than contend.

(2) History teaches that our liberties have been won by sufferings rather than by resistance. This is the very principle of the cross of Christ, by which we are liberated from the slavery of sin. So in the interests of liberty is the cross of patient self-denial to be taken up.

4. Moreover, our beneficence must be active.

(1) We must be free to give. The request of the poor should be taken as an opportunity for the duty of almsgiving. We may see the hand of God in the hand of the poor. Who would refuse God?

(2) We must be free to lend. Thereby we may relieve a present exigency. We should not "turn away" from or shun the poor whom we know to be needing our help.

(3) But beneficence must be with discretion (Psalm 112:5), else the idle and worthless may carry away what should have been reserved for the worthy. All must be consistent with the claims of creditors, of family, and of the household of faith. - J.A.M.

---

---

KJV: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

WEB: "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.'