BUT I SAY TO YOU...

I plan to deal with this week's material in blocks, rather than verse by verse.

First: JESUS AND THE LAW

Jesus said, “Don't expect me to let you off keeping the law of Moses. That law expressed God's will. Instead I will challenge you to dive into the heart of the law and do a far better job keeping the will of God. The scribes and Pharisees, the religious legalists, the thought police, are always on your case. But they are not as good as they think they are, and if you want real life, you must live better than they do!” Matthew is no exception to the whole thrust of NT ethics, which are built on love. Martin Luther famously said, “Love, and do what you will.” His idea was that if you cared for people, you would always act in their best interest. The opposite of love is selfishness, acting first in my own interest. But Jesus kicked off this sermon with “blessed are the poor in spirit,” remember?

Jesus then said he came to fulfill the law. That could mean by His teaching or by His life. In the deepest sense, the Law was fulfilled, completed, at the cross and through the resurrection. His life fulfilled the law by living by it, in spite of the legalists trying to trap him when he failed to keep that law their way. He demonstrated what a life under God's law would look like.

He taught that law in its deepest meaning: the law of love. Note that the six examples following are just that – examples. They are not new laws for us to keep. Apparently humans have a legalistic streak in us, for historically dozens of commenters on these verses have wrestled with them as laws and tried to find ways to make them easier to keep. Relax. They are not new and tighter laws. They are illustrations of the law of love in action.

There are six “antitheses” (opposites, sort of): you have heard...but I say...” Each illustrates how the law of love looks in action. Studying the examples should start you on applying love in situations YOU face.

You have heard not to murder, but I say “cool it.” If you love someone, your anger will not hurt them, nor last more than a few seconds. Love will not insult another. One commenter said we could look on this passage as a parody of the Pharisaic approach to breaking apart laws. I like that, and it fits, but I'm not sure that was Jesus's intention. In this political season, the Christian conscience has got to be hurt as we hear people insulting one another. Do I want leaders who build support by tearing down others?

Loving your neighbor is so important it comes before worship! You can't worship God fully while holding a grudge against your neighbor – or knowing you have somehow hurt him. Before you worship, mend your fences.

A reminder – these are illustrations. Jesus did not mean for a man sacrificing in the temple who remembered he owed something to someone in Nazareth must leave Jerusalem, go to Nazareth and come back. But make sure it's taken care of before his next trip to Jerusalem. Likewise if someone in court demands your shirt, giving him your coat literally would leave you naked. He's giving dramatic examples. We should neither interpret them legalistically, but neither dilute them. Jesus's teaching was radical, and living it out must be radical as well.

Skipping down to stay with the anger issue, let's look at the radical idea of loving your enemies. If you think he's not serious, look at his examples. If someone slaps you on the right cheek (probably a backhanded insult), you absorb it and offer your opponent the other cheek. You don't do this to shame him, nor to take the high road, you turn the cheek because you are to care for him genuinely. “Don't get over it, get even” is NOT in any sense Christian.

A major issue in Christian ethics is personal versus social ethics. Jesus is teaching personal ethics here. Christians have debated how far his teachings go in social ethics – in the laws of the land and the behavior of nations. Thus some will translate the love your enemies and resisting not evil into pacifism. More common is the “just war” theory, which says to protect yourself if attacked, but one country should not attack another. In today's America there is tension between equally sincere Christians who feel the state should do more for the poor, and those who say we should only provide opportunity for everyone.

Lust – Israel of Jesus's day was closer to the Sharia law of today than America's attitude toward sex. But it was a male dominated society, and only women could commit adultery. (Remember they only brought the woman to Jesus in John 8?)

But Jesus said if you look at another man's wife and let your mind wander lasciviously, you have already committee adultery in your heart. This was more radical than we know. He is saying MEN can commit adultery and can do it with their minds. Most men, and many women have done that, a practice that increases the chance of acting on those thoughts the more they are entertained. But Jesus's point here is not legalistic. His point is that we are not to look at others as possible sources of gratifying our desires. If we are lusting, we are not thinking of the others' welfare, but of our own pleasure. A valid way of expressing it today is that we should not treat women (nor men!) as objects!

Jesus goes further. Someone may say I can't help myself. I see a gorgeous woman and the thoughts just come. So Jesus says if your eye offends you, gouge it out so you don't fall into sin and its consequences. Some mentally ill people wracked by conscience have literally put their eyes out. But people, neither your eyes nor your hands (he also mentions) cause you to sin. It's what your mind and your will do with what your eyes see and your hand can reach. Control your mind – or better yet – let God control your mind, and you will avoid sin. The larger point is don't make excuses. Do what you have to do, but avoid sin. “Flee temptation.”

Divorce – probably more than any other part of Jesus teaching, divorce has been seized on and interpreted by the church in legalistic extremes. Marriage in Jesus's day was much like today. I remember one young married lady, daughter of a deacon, who said to me, “I thought if this marriage ran into trouble, I'd just get divorced. You've made me reconsider.” My thought was if this woman had been raised in a Christian home and church and thought so lightly of marriage, was there any hope for the country? Remember marriage in his day -as it still is in most of the world – was arranged by parents. The kids' wishes might or might not be taken into account. A man could divorce his wife simply by writing her a statement of divorce and have it witnessed. Jesus was radically blaming men for their role in divorce. His teaching was devastating to a man who might have lusted after another and divorced his wife to marry the other woman.

Again, do not interpret this as a legalistic forbidding of all divorce. Nor does it mean that a remarried man or woman is “living in sin.” It does mean to live life, not focused on selfish living for oneself, but seeking the best for the other. It does mean that marriage should be “held in honor by all and entered into with reverence.”

BUT I SAY TO YOU...

I plan to deal with this week's material in blocks, rather than verse by verse.

First: JESUS AND THE LAW

Jesus said, “Don't expect me to let you off keeping the law of Moses. That law expressed God's will. Instead I will challenge you to dive into the heart of the law and do a far better job keeping the will of God. The scribes and Pharisees, the religious legalists, the thought police, are always on your case. But they are not as good as they think they are, and if you want real life, you must live better than they do!” Matthew is no exception to the whole thrust of NT ethics, which are built on love. Martin Luther famously said, “Love, and do what you will.” His idea was that if you cared for people, you would always act in their best interest. The opposite of love is selfishness, acting first in my own interest. But Jesus kicked off this sermon with “blessed are the poor in spirit,” remember?

Jesus then said he came to fulfill the law. That could mean by His teaching or by His life. In the deepest sense, the Law was fulfilled, completed, at the cross and through the resurrection. His life fulfilled the law by living by it, in spite of the legalists trying to trap him when he failed to keep that law their way. He demonstrated what a life under God's law would look like.

He taught that law in its deepest meaning: the law of love. Note that the six examples following are just that – examples. They are not new laws for us to keep. Apparently humans have a legalistic streak in us, for historically dozens of commenters on these verses have wrestled with them as laws and tried to find ways to make them easier to keep. Relax. They are not new and tighter laws. They are illustrations of the law of love in action.

There are six “antitheses” (opposites, sort of): you have heard...but I say...” Each illustrates how the law of love looks in action. Studying the examples should start you on applying love in situations YOU face.

You have heard not to murder, but I say “cool it.” If you love someone, your anger will not hurt them, nor last more than a few seconds. Love will not insult another. One commenter said we could look on this passage as a parody of the Pharisaic approach to breaking apart laws. I like that, and it fits, but I'm not sure that was Jesus's intention. In this political season, the Christian conscience has got to be hurt as we hear people insulting one another. Do I want leaders who build support by tearing down others?

Loving your neighbor is so important it comes before worship! You can't worship God fully while holding a grudge against your neighbor – or knowing you have somehow hurt him. Before you worship, mend your fences.

A reminder – these are illustrations. Jesus did not mean for a man sacrificing in the temple who remembered he owed something to someone in Nazareth must leave Jerusalem, go to Nazareth and come back. But make sure it's taken care of before his next trip to Jerusalem. Likewise if someone in court demands your shirt, giving him your coat literally would leave you naked. He's giving dramatic examples. We should neither interpret them legalistically, but neither dilute them. Jesus's teaching was radical, and living it out must be radical as well.

Skipping down to stay with the anger issue, let's look at the radical idea of loving your enemies. If you think he's not serious, look at his examples. If someone slaps you on the right cheek (probably a backhanded insult), you absorb it and offer your opponent the other cheek. You don't do this to shame him, nor to take the high road, you turn the cheek because you are to care for him genuinely. “Don't get over it, get even” is NOT in any sense Christian.

A major issue in Christian ethics is personal versus social ethics. Jesus is teaching personal ethics here. Christians have debated how far his teachings go in social ethics – in the laws of the land and the behavior of nations. Thus some will translate the love your enemies and resisting not evil into pacifism. More common is the “just war” theory, which says to protect yourself if attacked, but one country should not attack another. In today's America there is tension between equally sincere Christians who feel the state should do more for the poor, and those who say we should only provide opportunity for everyone.

Lust – Israel of Jesus's day was closer to the Sharia law of today than America's attitude toward sex. But it was a male dominated society, and only women could commit adultery. (Remember they only brought the woman to Jesus in John 8?)

But Jesus said if you look at another man's wife and let your mind wander lasciviously, you have already committee adultery in your heart. This was more radical than we know. He is saying MEN can commit adultery and can do it with their minds. Most men, and many women have done that, a practice that increases the chance of acting on those thoughts the more they are entertained. But Jesus's point here is not legalistic. His point is that we are not to look at others as possible sources of gratifying our desires. If we are lusting, we are not thinking of the others' welfare, but of our own pleasure. A valid way of expressing it today is that we should not treat women (nor men!) as objects!

Jesus goes further. Someone may say I can't help myself. I see a gorgeous woman and the thoughts just come. So Jesus says if your eye offends you, gouge it out so you don't fall into sin and its consequences. Some mentally ill people wracked by conscience have literally put their eyes out. But people, neither your eyes nor your hands (he also mentions) cause you to sin. It's what your mind and your will do with what your eyes see and your hand can reach. Control your mind – or better yet – let God control your mind, and you will avoid sin. The larger point is don't make excuses. Do what you have to do, but avoid sin. “Flee temptation.”

Divorce – probably more than any other part of Jesus teaching, divorce has been seized on and interpreted by the church in legalistic extremes. Marriage in Jesus's day was much like today. I remember one young married lady, daughter of a deacon, who said to me, “I thought if this marriage ran into trouble, I'd just get divorced. You've made me reconsider.” My thought was if this woman had been raised in a Christian home and church and thought so lightly of marriage, was there any hope for the country? Remember marriage in his day -as it still is in most of the world – was arranged by parents. The kids' wishes might or might not be taken into account. A man could divorce his wife simply by writing her a statement of divorce and have it witnessed. Jesus was radically blaming men for their role in divorce. His teaching was devastating to a man who might have lusted after another and divorced his wife to marry the other woman.

Again, do not interpret this as a legalistic forbidding of all divorce. Nor does it mean that a remarried man or woman is “living in sin.” It does mean to live life, not focused on selfish living for oneself, but seeking the best for the other. It does mean that marriage should be “held in honor by all and entered into with reverence.”

BUT I SAY TO YOU...

I plan to deal with this week's material in blocks, rather than verse by verse.

First: JESUS AND THE LAW

Jesus said, “Don't expect me to let you off keeping the law of Moses. That law expressed God's will. Instead I will challenge you to dive into the heart of the law and do a far better job keeping the will of God. The scribes and Pharisees, the religious legalists, the thought police, are always on your case. But they are not as good as they think they are, and if you want real life, you must live better than they do!” Matthew is no exception to the whole thrust of NT ethics, which are built on love. Martin Luther famously said, “Love, and do what you will.” His idea was that if you cared for people, you would always act in their best interest. The opposite of love is selfishness, acting first in my own interest. But Jesus kicked off this sermon with “blessed are the poor in spirit,” remember?

Jesus then said he came to fulfill the law. That could mean by His teaching or by His life. In the deepest sense, the Law was fulfilled, completed, at the cross and through the resurrection. His life fulfilled the law by living by it, in spite of the legalists trying to trap him when he failed to keep that law their way. He demonstrated what a life under God's law would look like.

He taught that law in its deepest meaning: the law of love. Note that the six examples following are just that – examples. They are not new laws for us to keep. Apparently humans have a legalistic streak in us, for historically dozens of commenters on these verses have wrestled with them as laws and tried to find ways to make them easier to keep. Relax. They are not new and tighter laws. They are illustrations of the law of love in action.

There are six “antitheses” (opposites, sort of): you have heard...but I say...” Each illustrates how the law of love looks in action. Studying the examples should start you on applying love in situations YOU face.

You have heard not to murder, but I say “cool it.” If you love someone, your anger will not hurt them, nor last more than a few seconds. Love will not insult another. One commenter said we could look on this passage as a parody of the Pharisaic approach to breaking apart laws. I like that, and it fits, but I'm not sure that was Jesus's intention. In this political season, the Christian conscience has got to be hurt as we hear people insulting one another. Do I want leaders who build support by tearing down others?

Loving your neighbor is so important it comes before worship! You can't worship God fully while holding a grudge against your neighbor – or knowing you have somehow hurt him. Before you worship, mend your fences.

A reminder – these are illustrations. Jesus did not mean for a man sacrificing in the temple who remembered he owed something to someone in Nazareth must leave Jerusalem, go to Nazareth and come back. But make sure it's taken care of before his next trip to Jerusalem. Likewise if someone in court demands your shirt, giving him your coat literally would leave you naked. He's giving dramatic examples. We should neither interpret them legalistically, but neither dilute them. Jesus's teaching was radical, and living it out must be radical as well.

Skipping down to stay with the anger issue, let's look at the radical idea of loving your enemies. If you think he's not serious, look at his examples. If someone slaps you on the right cheek (probably a backhanded insult), you absorb it and offer your opponent the other cheek. You don't do this to shame him, nor to take the high road, you turn the cheek because you are to care for him genuinely. “Don't get over it, get even” is NOT in any sense Christian.

A major issue in Christian ethics is personal versus social ethics. Jesus is teaching personal ethics here. Christians have debated how far his teachings go in social ethics – in the laws of the land and the behavior of nations. Thus some will translate the love your enemies and resisting not evil into pacifism. More common is the “just war” theory, which says to protect yourself if attacked, but one country should not attack another. In today's America there is tension between equally sincere Christians who feel the state should do more for the poor, and those who say we should only provide opportunity for everyone.

Lust – Israel of Jesus's day was closer to the Sharia law of today than America's attitude toward sex. But it was a male dominated society, and only women could commit adultery. (Remember they only brought the woman to Jesus in John 8?)

But Jesus said if you look at another man's wife and let your mind wander lasciviously, you have already committee adultery in your heart. This was more radical than we know. He is saying MEN can commit adultery and can do it with their minds. Most men, and many women have done that, a practice that increases the chance of acting on those thoughts the more they are entertained. But Jesus's point here is not legalistic. His point is that we are not to look at others as possible sources of gratifying our desires. If we are lusting, we are not thinking of the others' welfare, but of our own pleasure. A valid way of expressing it today is that we should not treat women (nor men!) as objects!

Jesus goes further. Someone may say I can't help myself. I see a gorgeous woman and the thoughts just come. So Jesus says if your eye offends you, gouge it out so you don't fall into sin and its consequences. Some mentally ill people wracked by conscience have literally put their eyes out. But people, neither your eyes nor your hands (he also mentions) cause you to sin. It's what your mind and your will do with what your eyes see and your hand can reach. Control your mind – or better yet – let God control your mind, and you will avoid sin. The larger point is don't make excuses. Do what you have to do, but avoid sin. “Flee temptation.”

Divorce – probably more than any other part of Jesus teaching, divorce has been seized on and interpreted by the church in legalistic extremes. Marriage in Jesus's day was much like today. I remember one young married lady, daughter of a deacon, who said to me, “I thought if this marriage ran into trouble, I'd just get divorced. You've made me reconsider.” My thought was if this woman had been raised in a Christian home and church and thought so lightly of marriage, was there any hope for the country? Remember marriage in his day -as it still is in most of the world – was arranged by parents. The kids' wishes might or might not be taken into account. A man could divorce his wife simply by writing her a statement of divorce and have it witnessed. Jesus was radically blaming men for their role in divorce. His teaching was devastating to a man who might have lusted after another and divorced his wife to marry the other woman.

Again, do not interpret this as a legalistic forbidding of all divorce. Nor does it mean that a remarried man or woman is “living in sin.” It does mean to live life, not focused on selfish living for oneself, but seeking the best for the other. It does mean that marriage should be “held in honor by all and entered into with reverence.”

BUT I SAY TO YOU...

I plan to deal with this week's material in blocks, rather than verse by verse.

First: JESUS AND THE LAW

Jesus said, “Don't expect me to let you off keeping the law of Moses. That law expressed God's will. Instead I will challenge you to dive into the heart of the law and do a far better job keeping the will of God. The scribes and Pharisees, the religious legalists, the thought police, are always on your case. But they are not as good as they think they are, and if you want real life, you must live better than they do!” Matthew is no exception to the whole thrust of NT ethics, which are built on love. Martin Luther famously said, “Love, and do what you will.” His idea was that if you cared for people, you would always act in their best interest. The opposite of love is selfishness, acting first in my own interest. But Jesus kicked off this sermon with “blessed are the poor in spirit,” remember?

Jesus then said he came to fulfill the law. That could mean by His teaching or by His life. In the deepest sense, the Law was fulfilled, completed, at the cross and through the resurrection. His life fulfilled the law by living by it, in spite of the legalists trying to trap him when he failed to keep that law their way. He demonstrated what a life under God's law would look like.

He taught that law in its deepest meaning: the law of love. Note that the six examples following are just that – examples. They are not new laws for us to keep. Apparently humans have a legalistic streak in us, for historically dozens of commenters on these verses have wrestled with them as laws and tried to find ways to make them easier to keep. Relax. They are not new and tighter laws. They are illustrations of the law of love in action.

There are six “antitheses” (opposites, sort of): you have heard...but I say...” Each illustrates how the law of love looks in action. Studying the examples should start you on applying love in situations YOU face.

You have heard not to murder, but I say “cool it.” If you love someone, your anger will not hurt them, nor last more than a few seconds. Love will not insult another. One commenter said we could look on this passage as a parody of the Pharisaic approach to breaking apart laws. I like that, and it fits, but I'm not sure that was Jesus's intention. In this political season, the Christian conscience has got to be hurt as we hear people insulting one another. Do I want leaders who build support by tearing down others?

Loving your neighbor is so important it comes before worship! You can't worship God fully while holding a grudge against your neighbor – or knowing you have somehow hurt him. Before you worship, mend your fences.

A reminder – these are illustrations. Jesus did not mean for a man sacrificing in the temple who remembered he owed something to someone in Nazareth must leave Jerusalem, go to Nazareth and come back. But make sure it's taken care of before his next trip to Jerusalem. Likewise if someone in court demands your shirt, giving him your coat literally would leave you naked. He's giving dramatic examples. We should neither interpret them legalistically, but neither dilute them. Jesus's teaching was radical, and living it out must be radical as well.

Skipping down to stay with the anger issue, let's look at the radical idea of loving your enemies. If you think he's not serious, look at his examples. If someone slaps you on the right cheek (probably a backhanded insult), you absorb it and offer your opponent the other cheek. You don't do this to shame him, nor to take the high road, you turn the cheek because you are to care for him genuinely. “Don't get over it, get even” is NOT in any sense Christian.

A major issue in Christian ethics is personal versus social ethics. Jesus is teaching personal ethics here. Christians have debated how far his teachings go in social ethics – in the laws of the land and the behavior of nations. Thus some will translate the love your enemies and resisting not evil into pacifism. More common is the “just war” theory, which says to protect yourself if attacked, but one country should not attack another. In today's America there is tension between equally sincere Christians who feel the state should do more for the poor, and those who say we should only provide opportunity for everyone.

Lust – Israel of Jesus's day was closer to the Sharia law of today than America's attitude toward sex. But it was a male dominated society, and only women could commit adultery. (Remember they only brought the woman to Jesus in John 8?)

But Jesus said if you look at another man's wife and let your mind wander lasciviously, you have already committee adultery in your heart. This was more radical than we know. He is saying MEN can commit adultery and can do it with their minds. Most men, and many women have done that, a practice that increases the chance of acting on those thoughts the more they are entertained. But Jesus's point here is not legalistic. His point is that we are not to look at others as possible sources of gratifying our desires. If we are lusting, we are not thinking of the others' welfare, but of our own pleasure. A valid way of expressing it today is that we should not treat women (nor men!) as objects!

Jesus goes further. Someone may say I can't help myself. I see a gorgeous woman and the thoughts just come. So Jesus says if your eye offends you, gouge it out so you don't fall into sin and its consequences. Some mentally ill people wracked by conscience have literally put their eyes out. But people, neither your eyes nor your hands (he also mentions) cause you to sin. It's what your mind and your will do with what your eyes see and your hand can reach. Control your mind – or better yet – let God control your mind, and you will avoid sin. The larger point is don't make excuses. Do what you have to do, but avoid sin. “Flee temptation.”

Divorce – probably more than any other part of Jesus teaching, divorce has been seized on and interpreted by the church in legalistic extremes. Marriage in Jesus's day was much like today. I remember one young married lady, daughter of a deacon, who said to me, “I thought if this marriage ran into trouble, I'd just get divorced. You've made me reconsider.” My thought was if this woman had been raised in a Christian home and church and thought so lightly of marriage, was there any hope for the country? Remember marriage in his day -as it still is in most of the world – was arranged by parents. The kids' wishes might or might not be taken into account. A man could divorce his wife simply by writing her a statement of divorce and have it witnessed. Jesus was radically blaming men for their role in divorce. His teaching was devastating to a man who might have lusted after another and divorced his wife to marry the other woman.

Again, do not interpret this as a legalistic forbidding of all divorce. Nor does it mean that a remarried man or woman is “living in sin.” It does mean to live life, not focused on selfish living for oneself, but seeking the best for the other. It does mean that marriage should be “held in honor by all and entered into with reverence.”