Do Not Retaliate
Pastor Leslie Chua
““You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
This is probably one of the most misunderstood passages in the Bible. Christians quote these verses to argue the case for pacifism and against resisting evil. As a result of this misinterpretation, many Christians mistakenly believe that it is not God’s will for them to engage in culture and politics. Nothing is further from the truth.
In this passage, Jesus teaches against personal vengeance and angry retaliation. As children of the Heavenly Father and subjects of His Kingdom, we are not to retaliate when we are insulted and our rights are been trampled. Such a response is difficult. The human tendency is to retaliate. That is why we admire people with the courage to stand up against bullies and assert their rights.
____________________________________________
In this passage, Jesus teaches against personal vengeance and angry retaliation.
____________________________________________
But Jesus thinks otherwise. He wants us to hold to a higher standard, which reflects His Kingdom’s values. Retaliation is not a sign of strength. On the contrary, it betrays a lack of self-control.
An Eye For An Eye
‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ is an Old Testament law (Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:19-20; Deuteronomy 19:21). It reflects the principle of Lex Talionis, which was enshrined in many ancient law codes. The idea behind it is the punishment should correspond in degree and kind to the offence or harm inflicted by the wrongdoer.
Most Christians do not understand the intent of this law. Ask them and they will tell you that it means tit for tat. You do this to someone, and therefore, you deserve to be punished to the same degree for the harm caused. In a sense, that is true. It is retributive justice. But there is more to this law.
Two Purposes of the Law, an Eye for an Eye
There are two purposes for this law,
____________________________________________
The first purpose of this law, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, is to curtail further crime.
____________________________________________
The first purpose of this law, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, is to curtail further crime. When the perpetrator of a crime is punished publicly, the rest of the people will be warned not to repeat the same wrongdoing. The intent is expressly stated in Deuteronomy 19:19-20 -So you shall purge the evil from your midst. And the rest shall hear and fear, and shall never against commit any such evil among you. In other words, this law serves as a deterrence.
The Old Testament Law or Mosaic Law has three components – moral, ceremonial, and civil. ‘An eye for an eye’ falls under the civil code. It is part of the civil justice system of Israel. Please take note that all the three accounts in the Pentateuch where ‘an eye for an eye’ is stated (Exodus 21; Leviticus 24; Deuteronomy 19) have to do with the civil justice system.
____________________________________________
Personal vengeance is not permitted under the law. Only the civil authorities have the right to apply this law.
____________________________________________
As such, no individual could take things into his own hands and decide on the extent of his reprisal. The matter had to be brought before a panel of judges or a representative body that would decide on the offence and mete out the punishment.
____________________________________________
The second purpose of the law, an eye for an eye, is to prevent excessive punishment arising from personal vengeance and angry retaliation. It is to match the punishment to the offence.
____________________________________________
All this means that personal vengeance is not permitted under the law. Only the civil authorities have the right to apply this law.
The second purpose of the law, an eye for an eye, is to prevent excessive punishment arising from personal vengeance and angry retaliation. It is to match the punishment to the offence.
Here is the context. During ancient times, it is not uncommon for the victim and his family or clan to take things into their own hands and seek revenge. Usually, the retaliation is worse than the initial harm caused. The situation often spiralled out of control turning the retaliation into a wider conflict.
I give you two examples. Lamech killed a young man for wounding him and he boasted about his excessive vengeance (Genesis 4;23-24). Simeon and Levi killed all the males in the city of Shechem because its prince violated their sister (Genesis 34:25).
The Pharisees Perverts the Law
Once you understand the context and intent of ‘an eye for an eye,’ you will agree with me that it is a just and merciful law. While it is retributive, it protects the welfare of the larger community. So, it is a good law.
If that is the case, why did Jesus talk about ‘an eye for an eye’ as if it was a bad law?
That is not Jesus’ intention. It is a misconception. Again, understanding the historical and cultural context is important.
____________________________________________
Once you understand the context and intent of ‘an eye for an eye,’ you will agree with me that it is a just and merciful law. While it is retributive, it protects the welfare of the larger community. So, it is a good law.
____________________________________________
The problem lies in the rabbinic tradition. During Jesus’ time, the scribes and Pharisees perverted the meaning of ‘an eye for an eye’ completely. They erroneously taught that each individual had the right to take things into his own hands and be his own judge, jury, and executioner.
They essentially turned the law that was meant to rein in angry retaliation and excessive reprisal into a license for personal vengeance. Why they did that is anybody’s guess. It probably reflects their reprobate minds.
Jesus Rebuts the Pharisees
So, in this passage, we see Jesus rebutting the Pharisees’ gross misinterpretation of the law, ‘an eye for an eye.’ Essentially, He was saying, “You misinterpret and abuse this law, let me tell you what it means.”
Jesus rebutted the Pharisees and forbade retaliation in personal relationships – “But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39).
Again, context is important here. In the context of this passage and many other passages in the Bible, know that Jesus does not teach us not to resist evil. On the contrary, we see Him opposing evil strenuously on many occasions.
____________________________________________
Christians must resist evil. It is in our interest and the interest of our community and society that evil be restrained. However, at the personal level, we must not retaliate when an insult is thrown at us. We must be willing to give up our rights instead of seeking revenge.
____________________________________________
He often confronted the Pharisees for their hypocrisy and castigated them for putting heavy burdens on the ordinary people. He overturned the tables of the merchants in the temple. The apostle Paul told us to abhor evil (Romans 12:9). Both Jesus and Paul gave instructions for church discipline.
Therefore, Christians must resist evil. It is in our interest and the interest of our community and society that evil be restrained. However, at the personal level, we must not retaliate when an insult is thrown at us. We must be willing to give up our rights instead of seeking revenge.
____________________________________________
Instead of resisting, Jesus told his listeners to offer the other cheek. I don’t think Jesus meant that in a literal sense. It would be stupid. The idea behind the figure of speech is not to retaliate. Turning the other cheek symbolises a willingness to give up our rights and respond to insults in a non-retaliatory way.
____________________________________________
Jesus gives the example of a slap on the right cheek. People are normally right-handed. So, that is a backhand slap. In the Jewish culture, a slap is a grave insult. A servant would prefer to be beaten than slapped. A backhand slap is an even greater insult.
Instead of resisting, Jesus told his listeners to offer the other cheek. I don’t think Jesus meant that in a literal sense. It would be stupid. The idea behind the figure of speech is not to retaliate. Turning the other cheek symbolises a willingness to give up our rights and respond to insults in a non-retaliatory way.
This posture of non-retaliation is consistently taught in the Bible. Paul said the same thing in his letter to the Romans - Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them… Repay no one evil for evil… Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good (Romans 12:14, 17, 19-21).
Conclusion
Let me summarise.
‘An eye for an eye’ is a just and merciful law. It is a good law to limit the punishment by matching it to the crime. Jesus did not come to abolish this law, or any other Old Testament law (Matthew 5:5:17-18). Neither did Jesus change the meaning of this law. In this passage, Jesus clarified its meaning and original intent.
‘An eye for an eye’ is part of ancient Israel’s civil justice system. It gives the civil government the authority to punish offenders for their crimes. God has never meant for this law to be a license for personal vengeance and angry retaliation.
At the personal level, we must be willing to give up our rights and respond to personal insults without retaliation. In our personal relationships, we must be willing to overlook offences. However, that does not mean that we do not resist evil and allow it to run rampant. We resist evil strenuously.