in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing. 27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. 29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it about to take thee before a magistrate. Adjust the matter speedily. Let it not be carried to the judge, for the cause will go against thee; the judge will deliver thee over to the officer of punishment; thou wilt be thrown into prison. 26. The uttermost farthing; the last mite. Strict justice will then be executed; no mercy will be shown. The same sentiment is expressed in Luke 12:58, 59. 27. By them of old time. See on v. 21. The Saviour proceeded to unfold the true spirit and meaning of another command (Ex. 20: 14), which was commonly explained as referring only to the outward act. Jesus declared that the guilt of adultery, so far from being confined to the outward crime, does also belong to him who cherishes impure desires in his heart. 29, 30. Offend. The modern signification of this word, to displease, to affront, is not applicable here. It means, lead to sin, prove an occasion of sinning. || Hell. The connection clearly shows that the world of future punishment is here meant. The Jews had no tribunal that could take cogni from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and east it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever zance of inward sins; nor were they disposed, in the time of Christ, to treat the crime of adultery with signal harshness. The thought expressed by the Saviour, is, it is better to suffer a partial loss in this life, however great a one, than a total loss in the coming world. The right eye and the right hand are members which we cannot well part with; but valuable as they are, it would be better to pluck out the one and to cut off the other, than by their means to be led into sin, and thus to incur the loss of the soul. These same expressions occur again in Matt. 18: 8, 9, as a general caution against occasions of sin. 31. It hath been said; that is, by the ancients. The statute of Moses in Deut. 24: 1, had been so explained by some of the Jewish teachers as to allow husbands to put away their wives in an arbitrary manner for very light causes, provided they gave a bill of divorce. 32. Jesus corrected this erroneous view, and declared what is the just, and the only just, ground of divorce. Causeth her to commit adultery; ex shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery. 33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old poses her to this sin, proves an occasion to her of committing it. || Marry her that is divorced; that is, her that is divorced for light causes, for other causes than the one specified. The rule is similarly stated in Matt. 19:9. In Mark 10: 11, 12, and Luke 16:18, the rule is stated without any exception. Thus Mark and Luke must be compared with Matthew in order to obtain the Saviour's rule; and the exception in the former part of the verse in Matthew is to be regarded as implied in the latter part. Thus a wife divorced for any other cause than the one specified, is not, properly speaking, divorced. She is still, in the view of the Saviour, a married woman. The connection between her and her husbandis not dissolved. Any other man, then, marrying her, commits adultery. An examination of Matt. 19:3-9, and Mark 10:2-12, shows that this was, in our Saviour's time, a subject that excited deep interest; and that there was great occasion for him, as the legislator for the conscience, to pronounce a decision. 33. In further correcting the erroneous views which the Jewish teachers had imparted, Jesus spoke of the ordinary practice among the Jews of swearing, or voluntarily taking an oath. It appears throughout the Old Testament, that, from the earliest periods, the Jews were in the habit of confirm ing their declarations by an appeal to God; that is, by taking an oath. This was customary in ordinary conversation, and on topics not of an uncommonly serious character. See Gen. 14:22. Ruth 1:17. 3:13. 1 Sam. 14:44, 45. 20:3, 21. 2 Sam. 3:9, 35. 1 Kings 2:23. 2 Kings 6:31. Jer. 42: 5. They sometimes swore by the life of the person to whom they were speaking. 1 Sam.1:26.2 Kings 2:2. They also swore by cities and consecrated places. This practice continued in the nation, and prevailed exceedingly in the time of Christ. They time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear used to swear, in conversation, by the altar, by Jerusalem, by heaven, by the earth, by their heads, by the temple, by the gold of the temple, &c. See Matt. 23: 16-22. Moses had enacted, on the subject of oaths (Ex. 20 : 7), Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; and (Lev. 19:12) Ye shall not swear by my name falsely. In teaching on the subject of oaths, the Jewish doctors made a distinction between oaths which contained the name of God, and those which appealed to some other object. The former were, according to them, not to be violated; but the latter they represented as of a light character, imposing scarcely any obligation; and of course they could be safely violated. Compare Matt. 23. The tendency of such teaching may well be imagined. Oaths greatly multiplied among the people, and they acquired among all nations the reputation of perjurers. Forswear thyself; perjure thyself, take a false oath, swear falsely. || Perform unto the Lord; the thing respecting which thou hast sworn, perform religiously, as to the Lord, regarding it as a duty to be fulfilled to him. Probably this was the general precept which the Jewish teachers laid down; and then they proceeded to make such explanations as have been above alluded to. It was not necessary for the Saviour to enter into a detailed account of their manner, as it was well known to his hearers, and as he was intending not so much to correct erroneous additions or diminutions allowed by their teachers, as to cut up, root and branch, the whole practice of which he was speaking. Though they laid down a precept, good in some respects, as enforcing sincerity, yet they frittered it away by their explanations; and though the apparent enforcing of sincerity was a good thing, yet they did nothing that tended to correct the existing evil, and to abolish the needless, and, as then conducted, the wicked practice. 34. But I say. Hence, instead of not at all: neither by heaven; ❘ by thy head, because thou canst for it is God's throne: one hair white or 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King: 36 Neither shalt thou swear giving any precept to regulate swearing, Jesus enjoined that the practice be entirely abolished - swear not at all. || By heaven; one of the oaths by which the Jews were in the habit of swearing, and which they regarded as a trifling one, which they could violate without guilt, as not expressly mentioning the name of God. || It is God's throne. In swearing by heaven, the Jews did in reality appeal to him who sitteth on the heavens as his throne. Is. 66: 1. Hence the distinction made by the Jewish teachers between swearing by heaven and swearing by the name of God, was utterly futile, and such a method of quieting conscience utterly vain. Swearing by heaven is the same, in reality, as swearing by the name of God; and criminality in regard to such an oath is none the smaller. Since, then, such an oath, though reputed as light, is equally grave with the other, have nothing to do with it. 35. Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool. See Is. 66: 1. He who swears by the earth, does in reality appeal to God, and swear by him, as such an oath is a recognition of God himself, to whose dignity the earth is represented, in the Scripture, as an appendage. || The city of the great King. Ps.48:2. Swearing by Jerusalem was in effect swearing by the name of God, as Jerusalem owed its dignity and sanctity to the circumstance that it was the city which God had selected for his worship. not make 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than these, cometh of evil. Again, swearing by one's head is the same as swearing by one's life. Now, thy life is not dependent on thyself; for thou canst not order even so unimportant a thing as the natural color of one hair. On God thy life depends. Swearing by thy head, then, is the same as swearing by him who made thee and keeps thee in life. The distinction, then, between oaths, as great and as small, according to the particular form of words employed, was an idle one. Oaths in reality contain an appeal to the Divine Being; and the Jewish practice in respect to them was throughout a dishonoring of God and a system of perjury. 37. Communication; conversation, discourse with one another. The Greek word here employed, so often used in the original in the same sense as our word conversation; shows that our Lord had in view the ordinary conversation of men; and that he was not intending to regulate the practice of civil courts. || Yeu, yea; Nay, nay. When you say yes, let it be understood that you do fully and absolutely mean yes; and when you say no, that you actually mean to be understood as saying no. Let there be no mental reservation; let your simple affirmation or negation be worthy of implicit reliance on the part of those with whom you converse. || Cometh of evil; proceeds from an evil source, and is sinful. It is not of much importance to determine whether the Saviour meant to represent as criminal the solemn administering and taking of an oath when prescribed by the civil government. The whole connection of these verses respecting oaths, shows that he had in view the prevalent practice among the in their conversa 36. Make one hair white or black. It is not thou that didst create thy hair and determine its color. This was ordered by the Creator. Swearing by one's head, then, is an acknowledgment of God, and is of equal force with swearing by the name of God. | Jews of using freely, in 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy tion, such oaths as he specifies. It appears also, that on a very solemn occasion, with reference to a question of most momentous import, he made a declaration on oath. Matt. 26:63, 64. At the same time, it cannot be doubted, that if the principles which the Saviour has laid down, were universally acted on, oaths would be entirely needless; that is, if all men would cherish that simplicity and godly sincerity which would make their affirmation and their negation a perfect representation of what exists in their hearts, their simple declaration would be as much valued, in regard to truth, as an oath. And therefore the professed necessity for oaths would not exist. Since, however, men in general can be swerved from the truth by various considerations, governments have endeavored to make them peculiarly impressed, on certain occasions, with a sense of their responsibility to God, and of the danger of incurring his displeasure. But if, on every occasion, every man's yea was yea, and his nay, nay, oaths would of course have no place. The followers of Christ, especially, ought to be as conscientious, in every declaration, as they would be if put on oath. 38. To another topic most erroneously treated at that time, the divine Teacher directed his hearers; and unfolded the spirit that ought to be cherished, in opposition to the teachings and explanations that had come down from former times. An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; that is, inflict on another an injury similar to the one he has inflicted on you. This is retaliation. In the law of Moses, retaliation was not absolutely forbidden; but it was subjected to certain regulations, which brought the crime before the judges. Thus Moses endeavored to prevent injustice. A spirit of revenge would also thus be right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. checked. For the regulations of Moses, see Ex. 21:23-25. Lev. 24: 19, 20. Deut. 19:16-21. But in after times the statute of Moses was explained as giving license to a person to inflict, in his private capacity, an injury corresponding to the one he had received. Thus the spirit of private revenge was cherished. 39. Resist not evil; resist not, in the spirit of retaliation, an evil, that is, an injurious man, one who has done thee evil. Resist him not by doing him evil in return. Do not to him as he has done to you. || Turn to him the other also. So far from resisting an injurious man by doing him a similar injury, submit to still further injury. y. If he has smitten one cheek, revenge not the insult, or the injury, by returning the blow; but rather, in meekness, not in a provoking spirit, turn to him your other cheek. Guard against a spirit of revenge; rather suffer repeated wrong, than do wrong. Compare Rom. 12:19-21. 1 Cor. 6:7. 1 Pet. 2:23. 3:9. That it is not the mere external act of turning the other cheek when one has been struck, that the Saviour enjoins, but that it is the spirit of forbearance, of meek submission, of quelling a revengeful temper, is manifest from the whole passage, and from the manner in which he himself bore the insult, and the injury, of being struck on the face. John 18:22, 23. 40. Coat. Cloak. These words designate the two principal garments worn among the Jews. The one first named was the under, or inside garment; the other corresponded to our cloak, in being an outside garment. But it was more properly a mantle, nearly square, five or six cubits long, and as many feet broad, intended to be wrapped around the body, or worn over the shoulders. This garment 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. 41 And whosoever shall com- | been said, Thou shalt love thy pel thee to go a mile, go with neighbor, and hate thine enemy: him twain. 43 Ye have heard that it hath was sometimes employed by the poor as a covering in sleep during the night. Hence Moses enacted that this garment, if given as a pledge, should not be retained over night. Ex. 22: 26, 27. Deut. 24: 13. In conformity, probably, to such a practice, Jesus spoke of the under garment being taken away from a person. The idea of the Saviour in this verse is, If a person seeks to draw thee into controversy, and to take one of thy garments, indulge not a spirit of revenge; instead of retaliating, give up to him thy mantle also, and submit to any inconvenience. 41. Compel. In Persia, the king's orders were conveyed by public couriers, who had changes of horses at suitable distances, and who were also empowered to press into service any person, or any thing, that might be needed for performing the king's business. The word which expressed this compulsion to the public service was adopted in other countries to express a similar idea. An instance of this compulsory service is mentioned in Matt. 27: 32, and Mark 15:21. It may easily be conceived that a man thus ordered by public authority, and diverted from his own business, would cherish bitter feelings towards the government, or the officer who compelled him, and would gladly make his escape. This is a case somewhat akin, at least as to the temper which it might excite, and as to the temper in which it should be met, to those just produced. Jesus enjoined that it be met in a spirit of accommodating submission, and with a willingness even to do and to bear double of what was demanded. Let there be no malice, out, on the contrary, a readiness to ex 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you; ceed the required limit in rendering service. 42. Him that asketh thee. It is taken for granted, that the person really needs the favor which he asks. In such a case, give. Exercise no malignant, unkind feelings, but let love prevail. And, as a consequence, if you refuse a request, be sure that you do not refuse it under the influence of an unkind, unaccommodating spirit. || Borrow of thee; when he really needs what he asks for, and will be subjected to privation if he does not obtain what he seeks, do not repulse him; but meet his request in kindness and accommodation. 43. It hath been said; that is, by the ancient teachers. To another perversion, introduced in former times, Jesus next directed his hearers; and exhibited the proper view of the subject. || Thy neighbor. Lev. 19:18: This word, like the word brother, properly signified any other person. Besides this broad signification, it was used, in a limited sense, to mean a relative, a friend, one belonging to the same country, or professing the same religion. This more limited signification was applied to the word by the Jewish teachers; and hence they made the addition which here follows-and hate thine enemy. The word enemy was applicable not only to persons who belonged to a nation engaged in hostilities with the Jews, but to people of other nations and other religions than their own. The Jews were taught to love Jews; but were permitted, by their teachers here spoken of, to hate people of other nations. 44. Love your enemies; others besides those of your own country and of your own religion; those, even, who |