Grace Within Boundaries
(Matthew 5:38-42)
1. A Catholic priest, a Baptist evangelist, and an Assembly of God minister were in a row boat in the middle of a pond fishing. None of them had caught anything all day.
The evangelist stands up, says he needs to go to the bathroom climbs out of the boat and walks on the water to shore. He comes back ten minutes later the same way.
Then the minister needs to go to the bathroom, too, so he climbs out of the boat and walks on the water to shore. He comes back the same way ten minutes later. ?
The priest looks at both of them and decides that his faith is just as strong as his fishing buddies and that he can walk on water, too. He stands up and excuses himself. As he steps out, he makes a big splash down into the water. ? ?
The evangelist looks at the minister and says," I suppose we should have told him where the rocks were."
2. It pays to be “in the know.”
3. When interpreting Scripture, however, the more context we have, the more in the know we are. That context can be the near context, the context of all Scripture, or sometimes the culture of the time.
MAIN THOUGHT: As a Rabbi, Jesus was interpreting and applying teachings from the Torah for His followers, addressing issues that were in rabbinic debate in this era. His teachings, understood correctly, do not contradict the rest of Scripture. Our eleven-minute summary of His hours-long teaching time needs to be unpacked so we can properly apply it today.
The theme or our text is walking the extra mile, grace within boundaries.
I. The Subject is dual: LITIGATION and COMPENSATION.
A. Jesus urges the ungracious to learn to give others SPACE and not be exacting.
B. Verse 38 sets the TONE.
Some people are more gracious by nature. Some are gracious more than they should be to the detriment of others (we call such people “enablers”) while others are sticklers, rigid, or out to guard their rights.
David Daube in his work, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (Hendrickson) devotes a chapter entitled, "Eye for Eye" to discuss the Jewish understanding of Talion (the law of retribution), the subject of the "Eye for Eye" commands. In the first century, those commands were understood to signify the idea of financial compensation and litigation, not physically injuring the guilty party. This sets the entire tone for verses 38-42, which is mostly about litigation
II. We Show Grace by Accept Insults and Giving People SPACE to Be Human (38-39).
A. One Rabbinic debate at the time was about how much to COMPENSATE for insult.
B. The issue here is not self-defense, passivity, or non-confrontation.
1. Christ encourages us to confront those who offend us.
2. The issue is taking an insult, perhaps in a heated moment.
3. In almost every culture, ultimate insult is a slap in face. At debate in the first century was the compensation for insult. From the oldest part of the Talmud, the Mishnah:
Tractate Bava Kama 8, “If he strike him with the palm of his hand on the cheek, he pays two hundred zuz; if, however, with the back of his hand, he pays four hundred. If he pull or cut his ear, or pull his hair, or spit in such a manner that the spittle fall on him, or strip him of his garment, or he bare the head of a woman in the market, four hundred zuz is to be paid.”
C. Jesus disagreed with the prevailing viewpoint, and encouraged taking an insult without rushing off to COURT.
Proverbs 15:1, "A soft answer turns away wrath.”
D .Note the MODERATION of this section: grace within boundaries.
1. You turn the other check for a second slap--but it ENDS there
2. You walk the extra mile, but not unlimited miles.
3. Pacifism is not the subject. Jesus is saying, "put up with insult and even a moderate amount of abuse before you take someone to court. Let people have space to be human, to err. Do not take the attitude of an opportunist, perched to exploit every infraction."
III. We Should ACCEPT Modest Financial Loss to Avoid Litigation.
A. Again, main theme of LITIGATION comes into play.
The example is clearly MODERATE. A person is wanting to sue another for a tunic. Perhaps some disagreement/dispute over a matter; rather than go to court, better to take loss and settle out of court. Related to 5:25, so please compare it.
B. Rather than fight over ones RIGHTS, better to suffer moderate loss and preserve or improve (perhaps lessening the hostility) the relationship.
C. Although clothing then was more of a commodity than now, the concession is still MINOR.
Better to take moderate loss and stay on good terms than prove your point or win your case.
IV. Graciously but Modestly Go BEYOND Minimal Requirements.
A. The principle: WALK THE EXTRA MILE but not five extra miles.
Under Roman Law, a Roman solider could constrain any non-citizen to walk one Roman mile (l,000 paces), carrying his supplies. Christ says go beyond-walk two miles.
B. The attitude is that of being gracious, but only to a POINT.
In a way, this entire section could be summarized as “walk the extra mile, but not an infinite number of miles.”
V. Practice RESPONSIBLE Generosity.
I believe the part of the Law Christ was addressing was Deuteronomy 15:9-11:
Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: "The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near," so that you do not show ill will toward your needy brother and give him nothing. He may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin. Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to. There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.
A. Christ was not talking about giving handouts to every STRANGER or pan-handler around.
B, Beggars whose true livelihood was begging because they could do nothing else are different from many today in the west.
Beggars were visibly unable to work, they had no government aid, and there were no missions or homeless shelters, free meals, etc.
We do not want to reward people for being undisciplined, lazy, or foolish in their use of money. Lots of scams, and we cannot tell liars. Guy at Aldi parking lot with C-pap (Scammer with fake Parkinsons, using C-Pap in car to look extra sick and asking for grocery money in parking lot).
We have no obligation to support alcoholics, drug addicts, or people who simply do not want the obligation of a job. The Bible also says, “For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.” 2 Thess. 3:10
A lot of charitable giving makes the giver feel good about himself, but nurtures long-term dependency. Causes that teach people to fish rather than giving them fish are the best.
Refer to the book “Toxic Charity.”
We do have a responsibility to offer help to responsible people (destitute because of circumstances beyond their control) we know whether we will be paid back or not.
Galatians 6:10 reads, “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.”
C. People who believe we are required to give to all, in contradiction to "if a man will not work, neither let him eat," often live in nice suburbs, rural areas -- but not in big cities.
A lot of Christians who believe in giving without reservation solve the issue by moving to nice suburbs or classier neighborhoods. They might make a field trip into the city to work at a soup kitchen, but they deal with the poor on their terms. They don't want to shop at Walmart where they might rub shoulders with the grungy crowd.
A Christian in a big city would soon find everything he has gone and be left naked in the city. If we understand Jesus' words correctly, they should work everywhere.
