04.06.08
Rejection of traditional interpretation of the law (Matt. 5:21-48) - Part 1
- Rejection of traditional interpretation of the law (Matt. 5:21-48) - Part 1
- Rejection of traditional interpretation of the law (Matt. 5:21-48) - Part 2
Rejection of traditional interpretation of the law (Matt. 5:21-48) - Part 1
This is where we get an illustration from Jesus that shows that the Pharisees did not understand the intent of the law. So the choice was keeping the traditions (which were not fulfilling the righteousness demanded by the law) or listen to God in the flesh and be obedient. Six times He said ‘You have heard that it was said…But I tell you…’ (vs. 21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43).
Note what Jesus said, He doesn’t say things for no reason. He said ‘you have heard that it was said’; He did not say ‘you have seen that it was written’. Keep in mind the crowd Jesus was addressing – these were not the literate folks. They didn’t have books/scrolls sitting on coffee tables near their TiVo’s. Most could not read or write. Because of this, their knowledge of the law came from public instruction directly from the synagogues. The law was faithfully read, but the spirit or intent of the law was frequently missed or obscured by those expounding on it.
In each of these 6 ‘cases’ to follow, Jesus refers to the law that governs the conduct of people toward others. Why? If the righteousness espoused by the Pharisees did not fulfill what the conduct of the law demanded (as people interact with one another) then it certainly failed to fulfill what God demanded – a righteousness that concerned our conduct towards a Holy and righteous God.
1 – Murder (vs. 21-26)
The law is pretty specific - Do not murder. Hard to explain that one away, most everyone could quote it! This was a demand of God’s holiness, however, the Pharisees interpreted the law to mean that as long as one did not take another man’s life, the person was innocent of breaking the law (and consequently they were acceptable to God). The Pharisees were only concerned with the physical act of murder.
Jesus brings in the intent of the law, because it was more than just checking the box to make sure you had not personally taken another man’s life. He said the law required one to refrain from anger. Jesus knew that the act of murder was a symptom of things like hatred, anger and malice. So if someone is full of those things, the law had been violated even though the fruit of murder had not taken place.
And that is the rub for us isn’t it? We may not have killed anyone, but we have relished the thought of it a time or two…and that reveals some nasty stuff in us that perhaps no one else is aware of. And the Word of God is full of what we should do – repent, go to our brother and ask for forgiveness, make peace with them. The Pharisaic interpretation of the law of murder does not fulfill the righteousness of God. And our attempts to live to the letter of the law fall short when we hide the nastiness of anger, malice, and hatred in our hearts. Sometimes it comes out in starting (or continuing) rumors, making assumptions based on minimal facts, and a host of other things. How can we stop this? A point to ponder for all of us.
2 – Adultery (vs. 27-30)
The second law Jesus chooses to explain is the one that was designed to protect marriage institution. Marriage was divinely given to provide for the satisfaction of the physical and emotional appetites that God gave to people. Hebrews 13:4 Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral. Marriage was instituted to benefit society as well. You see – we sometimes have it a bit confused and turned around. God didn’t institute society on individuals – it was founded on family. And looking around today, you can see that the attack is not on individuals, instead it is on the family itself. Furthermore, God designed marriage to be an object lesson of the relationship between Himself and the believer.
Gen 2:24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Just as we, as believers, are united with Christ in a bond that cannot be broken, the unity of marriage was to be a similar picture in practice. How can that be accomplished? Forbidding adultery in the law was a fine start. The Pharisees saw adultery as an illegal sexual union. But to refrain from the physical act did not fulfill the spiritual demands of the law. The law demanded not only abstinence from a physical act – it also demanded abstinence from the lustful desire that would produce the act. That means purity of thought! So, if you have gone too far in your thoughts…you’re guilty.
As stated by Pentecost, “Christ warned His hearers to remove the cause of the offense. He was not teaching physical mutilation, for a blind man can lust, and a man with no hands can have unlawful desires. Christ taught that one must deal with the sin of lust because this was the root of the problem of adultery. It is not enough to merely abstain from lust’s outward manifestation, that is, adultery.”
And we’re all guilty if we’re honest. It’s not just the act – we may have met the letter of the law there. But Christ cuts to the heart of the matter. It’s our minds, it’s our hearts. How are you doing in this area?
3 – Divorce (vs. 31-32).
The Mosaic law permitted one whose wife had some uncleanness to divorce her, or to break the marriage contract (Deuteronomy 24:1-4 If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, 2 and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man, 3 and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, 4 then her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after she has been defiled. That would be detestable in the eyes of the LORD. Do not bring sin upon the land the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.).
Using this text as their base, Pharisaic tradition had codified rules involving all sorts of excesses. If the man didn’t like the lady for whatever reason (you burned the breakfast bacon!) he had a good enough reason to divorce her. I don’t hesitate to say some things have swung towards this in our society as well. Many in this class remember that it was not always like this. I’ve heard it said that if it was a bit harder to get married, perhaps folks wouldn’t be so quick to look towards divorce as a first option. And – from what I understand – it’s not that hard to get divorced anymore.
In contrast to the Pharisaic tradition, Christ taught that one who divorced his wife caused her to commit adultery by her remarriage; anyone who married a woman so divorced committed adultery. Christ will address divorce later in his ministry, so we won’t have a complete treatment of this issue here. What is clear is that Jesus was repudiating the Pharisaic freedom to divorce a wife and to remarry.
For more information on our culture and divorce among people of faith, I recommend starting with ‘Born Again Christians Just As Likely to Divorce As Are Non-Christians’ at http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=170 – please understand that in the world of statistics it is possible to derive more than one conclusion from data, so please review other sources as well to see other potential issues surrounding these statistics.
I want to be quick to add here – some reading or hearing these words may have strong feelings on this subject or may have been involved with divorce in their lives. Jesus never said this was an area that He didn’t die for. This is an area where forgiveness can be found. I also want to say – it is not an area where we use the forgiveness as an excuse to sin. How do you respond to those statements?
Note from Bryan - I’ll post the rest of this topic as part 2, once we have covered the material in class!
