Sunday Morning Greek Blog

March 3, 2024

The Eighth Commandment, the Eighth Amendment, and Cancel Culture

Filed under: 1 Peter,Biblical Studies,Courage,Exodus,Government,Hebrew,Romans,Spiritual Warfare,Ten Commandments (Decalogue) — Scott Stocking @ 5:37 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Abstract: This article looks at the Eighth Commandment (“Do not steal”), the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment in the Bill of Rights (prohibitions against excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment), and how cancel culture and the radical Left’s “lawfare” are violations of those sacred rights and obligations. (NOTE: Copublished on both my sites: Sustainable America and Sunday Morning Greek Blog.)

Background and Basis

Why do so many want the Ten Commandments and depictions of Moses receiving the tablets on Mount Sinai displayed in public buildings? Is it because that event is the most accessible ancient account we have of any kind of law making or law giving, especially as it relates to a standard established by someone beyond ourselves? Is it because many people recognize that our standards of behavior and our culture should not come from the fleeting whims of flawed mankind? Is there a difference between being a “Christian Nation” and a nation founded on enduring Judeo-Christian values?

How are those of us who are followers of Christ to understand Paul’s exhortations in Romans 13:1–7 and 1 Peter 2:13 about being “subject to [human] governing authorities,” especially if those authorities themselves show no evidence of following Christ or even respecting a Judeo-Christian worldview? The United States is, after all, a nation founded on the concept that “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them” “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station” that all other nations have. The Founding Fathers appeal “to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of [their] intentions” and cite the “Authority of the good People of these Colonies” to declare their independence from the British Crown.

The result of the Declaration of Independence is that the United States adopted the foundational governing document, the U.S. Constitution, in which the United States agrees to “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” (Article IV, Section 4). Given what both these founding documents say in regards to our form of government, what responsibilities do we bear as we live and work in this Republic?

Because the United States is supposed to be a Republic (“if you can keep it”; Ben Franklin), the Representatives we elect by a democratic process govern at the consent of the governed. So we DO have a say in what our government does and how our government acts. We have a God-given RIGHT to freedom of speech and religion; we have a right to bear arms; we have a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances; we have a right to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause.

One important caveat here that I’ll address later: Nowhere in these two documents is the United States ever described as a “democracy.” In a democracy, all citizens vote on everything. We do not have a true democracy in that sense. True democracies in Ancient Greece often led to the power flowing to those who had money and influence and not to the benefit of the people.

One of the practices in those democracies, ostracism, is at the heart of my discussion in the article today. This article compares the Eighth Commandment (by Protestant enumeration), the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and demonstrates how the ancient practice of ostracism by mob rule has crept back into our political landscape, in spite of the Founding Fathers’ attempts to squelch such practices in the Constitution.

The Eighth Commandment in Context

The Eighth Commandment (Exodus 20:15), at least according to Protestant enumeration, simply states “You shall not steal.” It’s just two words in Hebrew; there’s no object of the verb, direct or indirect. However, the two commandments that follow, “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor” and “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, etc.”[1] may give us some clues about the extent of the command, namely, that it is intended broadly not to just include petty theft, but more serious misdemeanors and felonies.

The fact that the last two items focus on “your neighbor,” along with the extended part of the Sabbath commandment, suggests that the focus of the commandments is primarily about what happens within the covenant community of Israel. “Neighbor” is not just the person who lives next door or across the street. A neighbor is someone who is part of your covenant community. They could live near you, or they could be a resident of your town or city, big or small; they could be your coworker; they could be a fellow church member.

One need only to look at Exodus 21 to see that this is a reasonable conclusion. I have written more extensively about this in my post Does the Structure of Exodus 21:1–27 Tell the Patriarchs’ Story?, so I won’t go into too much detail here. I’ll focus on a couple things here. First, “You shall not murder” is not a general prohibition against any form of homicide. It excludes killing in war or self-defense. It focuses primarily on terminating the life of someone unjustly or out of anger, not on accident (see Exodus 21:12–14).

The two edicts about attacking and cursing your parents in 21:15 and 17 are worthy of capital punishment as well, even though they say nothing about whether the parents were killed. Exodus 21:16, however, gives us the important clue for understanding the severity with which the Eighth Commandment is treated. The word used for “steal” in Exodus 20:15 is the same word used for kidnapping in 21:16 (word-for-word translation): “Anyone who steals a man is to be put to death.” This idea suggests to some scholars that perhaps the original commandment had something to do with a more serious form of stealing that could result in the death penalty, but that is not a debate to be solved here.

I mentioned the Ninth and Tenth Commandments. The Tenth Commandment appears to be addressing more of a thought crime, a crime of desire. But many commentators believe “coveting” not only addresses your thoughts, but any illicit plans you might be considering to obtain the things you covet. In other words, coveting is “planning the heist,” fulfilling your desire to “steal” what is not yours. So you can see how the Ninth Commandment also might play into that; trumping up a charge against your neighbor so you can get something that is otherwise rightfully theirs. Proverbs 3:29–30 reflects the tone of these last three commandments:

29 Do not plot harm against your neighbor,

who lives trustfully near you.

30 Do not accuse anyone for no reason—

when they have done you no harm.[2]

What conclusions can we draw from this? First, kidnapping, or “stealing a man,” is about removing someone from their covenant community, especially if you sell them off into slavery as Joseph’s brothers did to him. Joseph’s fate was eventually his family’s fate as famine forced them relocate to Egypt after they learned Joseph had risen to power in Egypt. After the memory of Joseph’s heroic rescue of Egypt through their own famine faded, the Egyptian rulers enslaved the Israelites, thus preventing them from returning to their Promised Land for a time.

Second, murder, of course, removes a person from the covenant community permanently and has additional community issues for the deceased’s family. It may force the family to relocate to a safer place, especially if they are also targets of the murderer. It is the ultimate form of stealing: stealing someone’s very existence.

Third, false accusations, trumped up charges, overcharging someone, or even fabricating charges where there was no harm to anyone can cause reputational damage such as to bring shame or reproach on a person where none is deserved. Middle Eastern cultures, including Judaism, place a great deal of importance on the concepts of honor versus shame. Shame can force you out of your “in group” and cause you to relocate from your covenant community. When the penalties, especially monetary penalties, exceed the nature and seriousness of the alleged crime, this gives the appearance of targeting someone for reasons other than justice.

Those who conspire to violate any or all of these three (at least) commandments work together creating a platform for ostracism. The term “ostracism” reflects the practice in ancient Athens around the 5th century B.C.E. and is based on the use of the pottery shards (ostraka) used to cast votes for those whom they wanted ostracized. But the practice is more ancient than that.

For example, Pharaoh’s enslavement of the Hebrews (Exodus 1:8–14) was a form of ostracism because he feared the power of their growing population. Pharaoh couldn’t control their growing population by enslavement, so he took the ostracism to the next level and ordered the midwives to kill any Hebrew boys as soon as they were born (Exodus 1:15–19), but the midwives rightly had ethical problems with this practice of infanticide (read “post-birth abortions”) and refused to follow through. As a final plague, God punished the Egyptians with Pharaoh’s own edict and killed all the Egyptian first-born males and first-born cattle.

By now, if you’re political aware of what’s transpiring in the 2024 presidential campaign, you’ve probably already figured out where I’m going with this. Let me cut to the chase, then, and switch to discussing the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Eighth Amendment in Context

The Eighth Amendment is short and to the point about the God-given right it enshrines: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” It doesn’t take much of a leap of faith or the exercise of political analysis to see how this Amendment in our Bill of Rights can be understood in terms of the Eighth Commandment. Let me offer another caveat here before I dive in: If someone has committed criminal acts, and there is sufficiently demonstrated probable cause to demonstrate that is the case, then the use of the law to prosecute such persons or entities is fully justified; what I’m discussing here is when such probable cause has not been demonstrated or it’s clear that there is political “lawfare” at work.

When the power of the law is unjustly wielded for political purposes, this is a clear violation of the Eighth and Ninth Commandments. Many people who were peacefully ushered into the Capitol on January 6, 2021, by Capitol Hill police holding the doors open for them are still in jail to this day for their supposed “insurrection.” One man who entered peacefully and conducted himself peacefully committed suicide because the Justice Department trumped up the charges against him without any solid video evidence or other damning evidence.

The J6 protestors were removed from their respective covenant communities simply because they wanted a chance to be heard when they were clearly being ostracized, minimalized, and villainized by the Democrats and media who couldn’t see the obvious corruption right before their eyes. Their “Stop the Steal” signs were evidence of how widely and sincerely We the People did not trust the conduct of the election in several States. We the People believe the election was stolen through nefarious means. None of the challenges raised were ever judged on their merits. This article may eventually be ostracized just for me saying this.

Of course, the latest example of this is the excessive bail imposed on President Trump (with interest accruing daily) on his NY “fraud” trial for acts that had no victims, no financial loss for anyone involved, and positive reviews from those who had financial interactions with him. There was no jury, Trump was often not allowed to defend himself, and only two people were involved in the prosecution: a DA who campaigned on “getting Trump” and a judge who had made documented biased statements against Trump. Their bilateral action against Trump without a jury of peers guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. That is a clear violation of both constitutional law and the biblical commandments. The intent is clear and has been confirmed by the statements of those involved: they don’t want the American people to vote for a popular candidate. They’re trying to run him out of New York and Florida, trying to remove him from his childhood home and his current covenant community.

[I added the following paragraph on 03/04/24 based on a comment from BereanCrossroads. Check out that blog for your encouragement. Much thanks, BC!] The story of Naboth’s Vineyard is a pretty close parallel to what is happening to President Trump with respect to his alleged fraud trial in NYC. I’m kicking myself a bit for not making this connection, especially since one of my better sermons in my early years of preaching was telling that story from the perspective of Ahab. The story is found in 1 Kings 21. King Ahab wanted Naboth’s beautifully curated vineyard, but he was not willing to give up his family’s land and inheritance. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, arranged a feast for Naboth, but also hired two “scoundrels” who falsely accused Naboth of blasphemy, which led to Naboth’s stoning. Ahab and Jezebel seized his vineyard after that. Ahab humbled himself afterwards but that didn’t last long. Both he and Jezebel suffered the fates that Elijah had prophesied for them (1 Kings 22:29–40; 2 Kings 9:30–37). The story is a perfect example of the what the Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Commandments prohibited. You don’t need me to tell you who in the Trump fraud case represents the three main characters of the story of Naboth’s Vineyard.

Cancel Culture

Cancel Culture is a modern-day “revival” of the ancient practice of ostracism. I can remember as far back as the 1990s when I was a campus minister at Northern Illinois University when the buzz-phrase then was “Political Correctness.” You couldn’t say you didn’t agree with mainstreaming homosexual “marriage” without getting the accusation of “hate speech” hurled against you. The problem has gotten much worse since then, with individuals and organizations from all walks of life have been fired from their jobs, deplatformed from YouTube and Twitter, and demonetized by Internet payment services just for expressing political opinions contrary to a certain political point of view or for questioning some of the restrictions and analyses related to COVID. In a nation that has freedom of speech and religion and other God-given rights, we should not have to worry about any consequences for expressing our opinions and beliefs unless they represent a clear and present danger to others.

Cancel Culture is a grievous evil being perpetuated on our society and an obvious violation of both the Eighth Commandment and the Eighth Amendment. Getting fired, being deplatformed, or being demonetized for expressing your political opinion is “cruel and unusual punishment” in a free society. The interesting thing about the Eighth Amendment is that it doesn’t say anything about who is restricted from inflicting “cruel and unusual punishment.” So it just doesn’t apply to the courts. It applies to anyone who perpetuates Cancel Culture.

Lord, let the faithful arise and confront the evils in our society. Let your truth be proclaimed to all people. May your kingdom come and your will be done. In Jesus’s name, AMEN!

Scott Stocking

My opinions are my own.

If you like this article, you may also like the following:

Rachel Weeping: The Objectification of Gender and Children

Toxic Masculinity: Walking Like an Egyptian Pharaoh (2021 Update)

[1] Catholics and Lutherans combine the first two commands (no other gods, no idols) into one and split the “covet” commandments into two, making the one about coveting the house the ninth commandment and the one about coveting everything else the tenth commandment.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

October 29, 2023

Living the Greatest Commandments (Matthew 22:34–46; Leviticus 19:11–18; Psalm 110:1)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ephesians,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Leviticus,Matthew Gospel of,Passion,Proverbs,Psalms,Soteriology,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 9:00 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Our gospel passage this morning contains the two most-quoted Old Testament verses in the New Testament. “Love your neighbor as yourself,” from Leviticus 19:18 of all places, is quoted directly 10 times, with one other allusion to it, spread across several books in the NT, not just the Gospels.

Psalm 110:1, which Matthew quotes in the second part of our gospel passage this morning, is the second most-quoted OT verse in the NT, with a total of 8 direct quotes of and another 10 allusions to the passage. But it doesn’t end there. Dozens of early Christian writers in the first 300 or so years after the birth of the church referenced the passage as well.

Jesus uses this verse twice in each of the first three gospels. The first occurrence is what we read here this morning, when he’s speaking to the pharisees during his last week before his crucifixion and claiming that he is the Messiah, son of David, that the OT points to; the second occurrence in each Gospel is when he’s defending himself before the Sanhedrin after his arrest and affirms his place as the preexistent Messiah and descendant of David. That was the statement that caused the high priest to tear his robe and accuse Jesus of blasphemy. Outside of the gospels, the NT writers and early church fathers use it to demonstrate his resurrection and appointment to the right hand of God.

You probably also noticed that Psalm 110:1’s popularity among early Christian writers pretty much forced the ecumenical councils of the day to use a form of the verse in their respective creeds; we read it every week here in the last part of the Apostle’s Creed: “He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.”

Jesus knows his day of crucifixion is coming, so he’s essentially pulling out all the stops now as far as letting people know who he is. No more hints or subtle innuendos: by citing Psalm 110:1 about himself, Jesus is making the ultimate claim that he’s the Messiah come to earth. No stone will be left unturned before he breathes his last on the cross for our forgiveness, and one stone will be rolled away when he rises from the dead for our hope of eternity.

So we can have absolute assurance that Jesus is who he says he is: To the Jews, Messiah; to the Greeks, Christ. He’s the son of God, son of Man, son of David, three descriptions of the same person. He’s the one we can put our total and complete faith in, because we know how great his love is for us. And we owe him our very lives, dedicated to living out the hope he’s given us.

This is where we back up and look at the first part of our passage today for the two greatest commandments he’s left to us. Matthew and Mark place these commandments in Jesus’s mouth during the week before his crucifixion, while Luke has them much earlier, so it would seem, as a lead-in to the Good Samaritan parable.

Because these are the greatest commandments, we must of course be careful not to let the familiarity of these verses make them “trite” to us. Many of us recognize that these two greatest commandments come from the Old Testament. The “Love the Lord you God” passage comes from Deuteronomy 6:5, as Moses begins his final sermon on the Ten Commandments, in which we hear the oft-repeated refrain to “be very careful to obey all I have commanded you.”

This particular verse underwent a couple minor tweaks as it came into the New Testament. In the original passage, Moses says “with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength,” as the NIV translates it. That last phrase about “all your strength” could be translated “all your utmost.” The word translated “strength” there is most commonly translated as “very” or “great/greatly,” so it implies the best of the best of the best, the utmost of the utmost.

In our passage this morning, Matthew changes “strength” to “mind,” which is acceptable given the otherwise generic nature of the original Hebrew. Mark and Luke add “mind” to the original “heart,” “soul,” and “strength” from the Hebrew. Including the word “mind” here is most likely a hat tip to the prolific Greek and Roman philosophers, historians, and statesmen and the knowledge base they had accumulated. That doesn’t mean Jesus agreed with Greek and Roman philosophers, however; it just means he wanted his followers to have some intellectual understanding of how his teachings and way of living were different from theirs.

Now loving the Lord with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind is noble indeed, and should be first on the minds of all Christ followers. But then there’s that second greatest command, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Unlike the greatest command, which is found at the beginning of Moses’s greatest sermon, the “neighbor” command is tucked away in the middle of one of the most exciting books in the Old Testament: Leviticus, chapter 19, vs. 18.

Leviticus 19 reads very much like the Ten Commandments themselves, at least in the early going. But then beginning in vs. 13, after Moses gives the general command not to defraud or rob your neighbor, he begins to break down what that might look like in his “negative” commands. Listen to some of the context leading up to vs. 18, beginning in vs. 11:

11 Do not steal.

Do not lie.

Do not deceive one another.

12 Do not swear falsely by my name and so profane the name of your God. I am the Lord.

13 Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.

Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight.

14 Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am the Lord.

15 Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly.

16 Do not go about spreading slander among your people.

Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the Lord.

17 Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt.

18 Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.[1]

So NOT doing these things to your neighbor, I suppose, is a passive way of telegraphing your love for them.

The flip side of this, that is, the positive way to state this, is found in other scriptures, notably Micah 6:8:

8 He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.

And what does the Lord require of you?

To act justly and to love mercy

and to walk humbly with your God.[2]

Proverbs 3:27–30 has some more sage advice about loving your neighbor with a mix of things we should and shouldn’t do:

27 Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due,

when it is in your power to act.

28 Do not say to your neighbor,

“Come back tomorrow and I’ll give it to you”—

when you already have it with you.

29 Do not plot harm against your neighbor,

who lives trustfully near you.

30 Do not accuse anyone for no reason—

when they have done you no harm.[3]

There’s no shortage of advice and commands in the Bible about how to love our neighbor. In the New Testament, there are nearly 100 verses about how to treat “one another.” If you have a concordance or good computer Bible software or Internet site that allows you to search, spend some time looking up all of the “one another” passages in the New Testament. It’s eye opening. All kinds of positive ways to love your neighbor: love, serve, greet, submit to, encourage, offer hospitality to, and so on. One interesting fact about this: the Greek word for “one another” (ἀλλήλων) in the New Testament is pronounced “all-LAY-lone”; the easy way to remember this is that “you’re never all alone with “all-LAY-lone.”

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that your quilt ministry, which we’re honoring today, is an important way to love your neighbor as well. Your painstaking efforts in cutting the pieces of fabric, arranging them in the various patterns, and stitching them together put meat on the bones of another scripture, Ephesians 4:28b: “doing something useful with [your] own hands, that [you] may have something to share with those in need.”

With all the help we have in scripture about loving your neighbor, you might think that’s always an easy task. But I think we all know better. Sometimes it’s very easy to love our neighbors; other times, there may be hurts or fears that run so deep that it can be hard to break through. There may also be times where “tough love” means we might have to separate ourselves from a situation because the pain or risk of harm is too great to ignore or too much for us to bear.

In those times, it’s good to know we have a God who loves us unconditionally and whose presence is always with us as we saw in last week’s message. But how can we as mere mortals love an almighty, all-sufficient God who has no “need” for anything from us? Just as God’s presence goes with us, God also desires our presence before him. He wants us to love and honor him with all that we are and could be, all that he’s made us to be, and all that we have, to the extent we are in-line with his commands and precepts.

Our reading from Psalm 1 this morning helps us to understand this relationship. The passage in our bulletin is, I believe, from the New Revised Standard Version. When I saw the first word was “Happy,” I actually cringed inside for a moment, because I knew most translations had the word “Blessed” for the first word. I had always figured that was the traditional word for “blessed” used by the Hebrews in their standard blessing: “Blessed art thou, O Lord, King of the Universe.” But I suspended judgment and checked the Hebrew, and sure enough, it was NOT the typical word for blessing. The word does carry the idea of blessing, but it also refers to an emotional state as well as a spiritual state. One lexicon I looked at had it translated as an exclamation: “How happy!” Eugene Peterson, the Presbyterian minister who translated the Message version of the Bible, picked up on that emotional aspect in his translation of Psalm 1, and I want to read that for you this morning. But I’ll give you a head’s up: if you’ve never read the Message translation, it doesn’t really read like a traditional Bible translation. In fact, Psalm 1 is about as far away from a traditional translation as you can get. The first phrase of Psalm 1 sounds a bit sarcastic, but it’s not intended to be. Listen, and you’ll hear why:

1     How well God must like you—

      you don’t hang out at Sin Saloon,

      you don’t slink along Dead-End Road,

      you don’t go to Smart-Mouth College.

2–3  Instead you thrill to God’s Word,

      you chew on Scripture day and night.

      You’re a tree replanted in Eden,

      bearing fresh fruit every month,

      Never dropping a leaf,

      always in blossom.

4–5  You’re not at all like the wicked,

      who are mere wind-blown dust—

      Without defense in court,

      unfit company for innocent people.

6     God charts the road you take.

      The road they take is Skid Row.[4]

That is how we love God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind. We spend time with him by fellowshipping with one another on Sunday and throughout the week in our various ministries we have. We spend time in his word getting to know his precepts, statutes, and commands. We do things that bear fruit for God’s kingdom, for after all, Jesus said his followers would be known by their fruit. We “plant” ourselves in the God’s presence so he can nourish and sustain us, because that is how great his love is for us.

As the world around us continues to get scarier, with another mass shooting, a war in the Middle East that has Christians thinking about end-time prophecies and the book of Revelation again, and the general downhill spiral of morality around us, abiding in the presence of God and rekindling our love for him will become all the more important for our own spiritual security and emotional well-being. We can know without a doubt that God is with us; that’s an unfailing promise. We also know that his word will sustain us, for God’s word never returns void. Grace and peace to you all this morning. Amen.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] Peterson, Eugene H. 2005. The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress.

February 23, 2023

Confronting the Evil Within (Matthew 5:21–37)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Epifanía,Epiphany,Evil,Faith, Faithfulness,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Repentance,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 10:01 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Click the “Play” button above to hear the message.

Sermon preached at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, February 12, 2023, Sixth Sunday after Epiphany in the Revised Common Lectionary.

We’ve seen it before, right? Maybe in a soap opera or in an edgier Hallmark movie, if there is such a thing. It starts with a misstep, maybe innocent, maybe not so innocent. Someone forgets a birthday; the other makes that purchase that there’s no room in the budget for or that sets back the hope of a special trip. The husband is spending too much time in his “cave” watching sports or the news while the wife is struggling in the kitchen or with the kids. Then there’s the “not tonight, honey,” which may come from genuine exhaustion, or worse, maybe that’s the first expression of a spark of anger.

In a marriage, if such anger is left unchecked, or there’s not an immediate recognition that something may be going wrong, things start to happen in our head, and perhaps in our soul. Seeds of doubt may begin to creep in. You think a coworker may be noticing you more; that innocent conversation with someone of the opposite sex in the line at the Starbuck’s or grocery store touches you in such a way that it latches on to one of those seeds of anger or doubt, and the inappropriate desire starts taking root. Now you’re not just thinking that coworker is noticing you more; you’re actively seeking their attention. The woman in line slips you a business card or note with her personal “digits” (that’s phone number for those of us over 40) on the back.

And again, if left unchecked, eventually the ugly truth will come out. At some point, one or both get triggered by something the other does, and there’s an ugly fight. “You don’t pay attention to me anymore!” “You don’t love me anymore!” With each little stumble down the slippery slope, it becomes more and more critical that some kind of intervention is needed. One of two things may happen at this point: the couple realizes their need to turn things around. They make the attempt, oftentimes successful, to reconfirm their oaths or vows to each other, reconcile, and get back on the right track. But unfortunately, sometimes things progress so badly, or the reconciliation gets derailed because of a lack of commitment to it, the “D” word rears its ugly head, and the opportunity for any reconciliation fades into the sunset.

Jesus’s teaching in this part of the Sermon on the Mount really is about setting some boundaries for ourselves.

Now I set up this little scenario not because I want to talk about marriage in my message, but because I thought it might be a fairly concise way to show that the passage we just read from the Sermon on the Mount is not as disjointed as it may seem. I could have just as easily crafted the scenario to fit a friendship or a business relationship. What Jesus says in today’s gospel passage naturally flows from the claim he made in last week’s Lectionary gospel passage:

Matthew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”[1]

The apostle Paul puts it this way in Romans 10:4:

4 Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.[2]

The New Living Translation puts it this way:

4 For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given. As a result, all who believe in him are made right with God.[3]

Another way to put this is that the life Jesus lived while he dwelt with us on Earth was the embodiment of the law. He showed people what it meant to live a righteous life in God’s eyes. It wasn’t just about keeping the letter of the law; Jesus here is confronting the lax attitude about the law that seems to have taken hold in his day, perhaps enhanced by the strict legalism of the pharisees. Let’s take a closer look.

Now these passages have some difficult words for us to hear and may bring up some painful memories or even some feelings of guilt, especially for those of us who have been divorced when we get to that passage, but I want to emphasize this: If you are in Christ, who has accomplished everything the Law set out to do, then you share in that accomplishment. You have a share in that righteousness. Your sins have been forgiven and you have the absolute guarantee of eternal life. The old has gone, and the new has come. So take heart in that assurance of new and abundant life as we work our way through this difficult passage.

We’re looking at four of the last six sections of Matthew 5 this morning. You probably noticed that Jesus had a little formula he used to introduce each section: “You have heard people tell you X, but I’m going to tell you Y, and why X is shortsighted.” In the four sections we’re looking at today, Jesus is encountering an attitude that many people still have today about how good they think they are: “I’ve never killed anyone; I’ve never cheated on my wife; I’ve never stolen anything; so I don’t know why God wouldn’t let me into heaven.” What Jesus is saying in these passages is that these “big-time” sins are really just the ultimate expression of the attitude of our hearts.

Jesus first deals with the command, “Thou shalt not murder.” Murder is a technical, legal term that refers to an intentional, illegal or unethical act of taking someone’s life. It doesn’t refer to the defense of one’s self, family, or country; it doesn’t refer to the death penalty justly applied; and it doesn’t refer to accidents. Jesus makes that clear by how he interprets that command: it’s not so much about actually killing someone, although that’s definitely forbidden: it’s about the attitude or disposition of your heart toward a person. Jesus equates getting angry with someone to murder, especially if that anger degrades into some pretty nasty name calling. “Raca” was probably the equivalent in the Hebrew language of a certain word describing a body part people use today. “You fool” comes from the Greek word from which we get the English word “moron.”

Murder is a technical, legal term that refers to an intentional, illegal or unethical act of taking someone’s life. It doesn’t refer to the defense of one’s self, family, or country; it doesn’t refer to the death penalty justly applied; and it doesn’t refer to accidents.

Anger is a natural reaction we have to situations that upset us, but because it’s dangerous to dwell on that anger too much, Jesus exhorts his listeners to deal with that anger quickly by going straight to the person who angered you and work it out, peacefully. Paul recognizes this principle from Psalm 4:4 as well when he says in Ephesians: “Get angry, but don’t sin. Don’t let the sun go down while you’re still angry, and don’t give the devil a foothold.” That’s why anger is just as dangerous as murder, because it allows the devil to get in and wreak havoc on our own lives.

The first paper I did in my first year of seminary was on this next section on adultery. I entitled it “Lusting, Lopping, and Living.” My instructor was so impressed with the title when I proposed it that he said he’d give me an A based on the title! Like murder, the physical act of adultery, having sex with another person in a marriage covenant relationship in violation of your own marriage covenant, was the ultimate expression of despising your covenant. This was not unique to the Jews; many cultures of the day had moral or legal sanctions against adultery.

Jesus again stresses the seriousness of any disposition we might have to take a misstep in the direction of adultery. He uses hyperbole here. He’s not really talking about cutting off body parts or gouging out our eyes. He’s saying cut out of our lives those things that might foster such an attitude. Job said, “I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a young woman.”[4] Martin Luther advised that you can’t keep the birds from flying overhead, but you can keep them from nesting in your hair. Proverbs warns about being seduced by a “wayward” or “adulterous” woman. Many Christians have adopted the principle of never being alone in a room or other confined space with someone of the opposite sex to guard against even the accusation of adultery or impropriety. Maintaining an unimpeachable integrity in this regard requires establishing some pretty strict boundaries.

This brings us to the passage on divorce. Again, having been there myself, I know that those who are divorced go through some pretty serious soul searching. Feelings of failure, guilt, anger, grief, and a host of others are common, but as I said earlier, it’s important to realize that, in Christ, we have all that forgiven and covered by the blood of Jesus. That doesn’t mean all those feelings go away, necessarily, but they begin to pale in comparison in the light of our Savior’s love and healing.

What Jesus is addressing in verses 31 and 32 is not so much the consequences of divorce as he is the seriousness of it. We know from Matthew 19:8 that Moses had permitted writing a notice of divorce because of the hardness of Israel’s hearts. That’s never what God intended. Jesus is saying here that divorce carries several social and perhaps religious consequences with it that could stigmatize both parties permanently, negatively impacting their standing in the community, so be careful about such an “easy out” as writing out a bill of divorce.

Jesus is saying here that divorce carries several social and perhaps religious consequences with it that could stigmatize both parties permanently, negatively impacting their standing in the community.

We do have the writings of the rabbis in Jesus’s day about bills of divorce. One school of rabbis argued that if a wife “spoiled a dish,” that was a legitimate ground for divorce. Other schools were not quite so lenient. It would take some act of marital infidelity or perhaps even abuse or abandonment to justify divorce. In one passage from these writings, there’s a scenario about if a husband writes a bill of divorce and sends it to her by another person, but then changes his mind and gets back to her before the bill of divorce gets to her, he can tell her he’s nullifying the bill of divorce he sent her that she presumably knows nothing about. Yeah, that would go over well. Of course, if he gets there after the bill of divorce arrives, it’s too late to nullify it. These are just some of the examples about how flippantly at times the Jews acted about divorce.

If you know someone who is struggling with divorce, some congregations sponsor an excellent program called Divorce Care. I went through it myself, and it helped me immensely in dealing with all the feelings and emotions I was experiencing. If you need help finding such a group, just let me know. I’d be glad to put you in touch with them, or you can check out divorcecare.org.

Finally, we come to the passage on oaths. I think it’s significant that this passage comes after the divorce section that deals with violating a covenant promise. An oath is different from a covenant in that it typically invoked the name of God, heaven, or some other sacred place or object. Violating an oath thus given would bring shame on the oath maker and insult the reputation of God or other sacred places or article sworn on. Jesus warns it’s better not to make any oath at all and just do what you say you’re going to do, or not do what you say you won’t do. “All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.[5]” Here, we can call upon the profound wisdom of Pastor Yoda, I mean, Master Yoda: “Do or do not. There is no try.”

I’m not sure if my youngest daughter had this passage in mind when she and her husband got married a couple years ago. Everything was set up and beautifully decorated in the fairgrounds building where they got married. All the guests were seated, including the ceremonial seating of the parents and grandparents. I gave my permission when the officiant asked (or did he ask me?) and took my seat. He started the ceremony by asking Tim if he took Emma to be his wife, and he said yes. Then he asked Emma if she took Tim to be her husband. She responded yes as well. And without any further ado, the officiant announced that they were husband and wife, and that was the end of the ceremony! It took longer to walk everyone down the aisle than it did to go through the ceremony. No set of vows, no “until death do you part,” or anything like that. Short, simple, sweet. Everyone had the rest of the night to celebrate.

So to sum up here: Jesus’s teaching in this part of the Sermon on the Mount really is about setting some boundaries for ourselves so we can do our part to “deliver ourselves from the evil” around us, to guard against and defend ourselves from dangers within and without that would try to separate us from God. Jesus is fulfilling the promise that God gave in Jeremiah 31:33:

“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord.

“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.

I will be their God, and they will be my people.”[6]

Jesus calls us to not only give God first place in our hearts, but in our minds also, that we might know the heart and mind of God through him and see a lost world through eyes of the Savior who came to redeem his creation. Grace and peace to you all. Amen.

Scott Stocking

My opinions are my own conclusions based on my study of this passage.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Tyndale House Publishers. 2015. Holy Bible: New Living Translation. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Website Powered by WordPress.com.