Luke 6:27

These verses agree with Mat 5:38, to the end of that chapter: I say unto you that hear (Luk 6:27), to all you that hear, and not to disciples only, for these are lessons of universal concern. He that has an ear, let him hear. Those that diligently hearken to Christ shall find he has something to say to them well worth their hearing. Now the lessons Christ here teacheth us are,

I. That we must render to all their due, and be honest and just in all our dealings (Luk 6:31): As ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise; for this is loving your neighbour as yourselves. What we should expect, in reason, to be done to us, either in justice or charity, by others, if they were in our condition and we in theirs, that, as the matter stands, we must do to them. We must put our souls into their souls' stead, and then pity and succour them, as we should desire and justly expect to be ourselves pitied and succoured.

II. That we must be free in giving to them that need (Luk 6:30): "Give to every man that asketh of thee, to every one that is a proper object of charity, that wants necessaries, which thou hast wherewithal to supply out of thy superfluities. Give to those that are not able to help themselves, to those that have not relations in a capacity to help them." Christ would have his disciples ready to distribute, and willing to communicate, to their power in ordinary cases, and beyond their power in extraordinary.

III. That we must be generous in forgiving those that have been any way injurious to us.

1. We must not be extreme in demanding our right, when it is denied us: "Him that taketh away thy cloak, either forcibly or fraudulently, forbid him not by any violent means to take thy coat also, Luk 6:29. Let him have that too, rather than fight for it. And (Luk 6:30) of him that taketh thy goods" (so Dr. Hammond thinks it should be read), "that borrows them, or that takes them up from thee upon trust, of such do not exact them; if Providence have made such insolvent, do not take the advantage of the law against them, but rather lose it than take them by the throat, Mat 18:28. If a man run away in thy debt, and take away thy goods with him, do not perplex thyself, nor be incensed against him."

2. We must not be rigorous in revenging a wrong when it is done us: "Unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek, instead of bringing an action against him, or sending for a writ for him, or bringing him before a justice, offer also the other;" that is, "pass it by, though thereby thou shouldest be in danger of bringing upon thyself another like in dignity, which is commonly pretended in excuse of taking the advantage of the law in such a case. If any one smite thee on the cheek, rather than give another blow to him, be ready to receive another from him;" that is, "leave it to God to plead thy cause, and do thou sit down silent under the affront." When we do thus, God will smite our enemies, as far as they are his, upon the cheek bone, so as to break the teeth of the ungodly (Psa 3:7); for he hath said, Vengeance is mine, and he will make it appear that it is so when we leave it to him to take vengeance.

3. Nay, we must do good to them that do evil to us. This is that which our Saviour, in these verses, chiefly designs to teach us, as a law peculiar to his religion, and a branch of the perfection of it.

(1.) We must be kind to those from whom we have received injuries. We must not only love our enemies, and bear a good will to them, but we must do good to them, be as ready to do any good office to them as to any other person, if their case call for it, and it be in the power of our hands to do it. We must study to make it appear, by positive acts, if there be an opportunity for them, that we bear them no malice, nor see revenge. Do they curse us, speak ill of us, and wish ill to us? Do they despitefully use us, in word or deed? Do they endeavour to make us contemptible or odious? Let us bless them, and pray for them, speak well of them, the best we can, wish well to them, especially to their souls, and be intercessors with God for them. This is repeated, Luk 6:35 : love your enemies, and do them good. To recommend this difficult duty to us, it is represented as a generous thing, and an attainment few arrive at. To love those that love us has nothing uncommon in it, nothing peculiar to Christ's disciples, for sinners will love those that love them. There is nothing self-denying in that; it is but following nature, even in its corrupt state, and puts no force at all upon it (Luk 6:32): it is no thanks to us to love those that say and do just as we would have them. "And (Luk 6:33) if you do good to them that do good to you, and return their kindnesses, it is from a common principle of custom, honour, and gratitude; and therefore what thanks have you? What credit are you to the name of Christ, or what reputation do you bring to it? for sinners also, that know nothing of Christ and his doctrine, do even the same. But it becomes you to do something more excellent and eminent, herein to out-do your neighbours, to do that which sinners will not do, and which no principle of theirs can pretend to reach to: you must render good for evil;" not that any thanks are due to us, but then we are to our God for a name and a praise and he will have the thanks.

(2.) We must be kind to those from whom we expect no manner of advantage (Luk 6:35): Lend, hoping for nothing again. It is meant of the rich lending to the poor a little money for their necessity, to buy daily bread for themselves and their families, or to keep them out of prison. In such a case, we must lend, with a resolution not to demand interest for what we lend, as we may most justly from those that borrow money to make purchases withal, or to trade with. But that is not all; we must lend though we have reason to suspect that what we lend we lose, lend to those who are so poor that it is not probable they will be able to pay us again. This precept will be best illustrated by that law of Moses (Deu 15:7-10), which obliges them to lend to a poor brother as much as he needed, though the year of release was at hand. Here are two motives to this generous charity.

[1.] It will redound to our profit; for our reward shall be great, Luk 6:35. What is given, or laid out, or lent and lost on earth, from a true principle of charity, will be made up to us in the other world, unspeakably to our advantage. "You shall not only be repaid, but rewarded, greatly rewarded; it will be said to you, Come, ye blessed, inherit the kingdom."

[2.] It will redound to our honour; for herein we shall resemble God in his goodness, which is the greatest glory: "Ye shall be the children of the Highest, shall be owned by him as his children, being like him." It is the glory of God that he is kind to the unthankful and to the evil, bestows the gifts of common providence even upon the worst of men, who are every day provoking him, and rebelling against him, and using those very gifts to his dishonour. Hence he infers (Luk 6:36), Be merciful, as your Father is merciful; this explains Mat 5:48, "Be perfect, as our Father is perfect. Imitate your Father in those things that are his brightest perfections." Those that are merciful as God is merciful, even to the evil and the unthankful, are perfect as God is perfect; so he is pleased graciously to accept it, though infinitely falling short. Charity is called the bond of perfectness, Col 3:14. This should strongly engage us to be merciful to our brethren, even such as have been injurious to us, not only that God is so to others, but that he is so to us, though we have been, and are, evil and unthankful; it is of his mercies that we are not consumed.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Luk_6:27-30

But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies

The ideal of Christianity

This passage is in earnest.

You are to do this. Why? In order that you may come into the family of God. Here is not simply an additional moral maxim, but it is a critical turning thing. Whereas nature says, Use all your powers of body and mind to repel injuries, and to punish those that are against you; the spiritual kingdom says, Use none of them; forgive, love, pray for, bless, help, carry a little heaven in your souls, and make it fair weather around about all those that are your enemies. Is it possible that any such thing as that can take place? I have known some men that came very near to it. One thing is certain--Jesus, whose life was a commentary on His own doctrine, did attain it; and we find Him acting easily, familiarly on that very ground, returning good for evil. Is it a thing, then, that comes with conversion? Men are turned from darkness to light, from selfishness to benevolence; they are said to be converted, but does that state of mind come with conversion? I wish it did, and I know it does not. It is a thing that must be the result of spiritual education in men. Men never come to their graces all at once. It is a law that prevails in the spiritual kingdom as well as in the exterior kingdom, that we come to lower and higher gradations by processes of unfolding, step by step, little by little, continuously through periods of time. (H. W.Beecher.)

On the love of enemies

1. By the love which is here enjoined we are not to understand the love of esteem or complacency, which in some respects is unreasonable and impossible; but that of benevolence or good-will.

2. The precept of the text evidently disallows and utterly excludes all kinds of revenge and retaliation.

I. THE REASONABLENESS OF THIS DUTY. What can be more agreeable to reason and wisdom than to keep evil, so much as possible, out of the world; and when it is in to use all proper means to drive it out. Instead of this, as enmity lets it in, so revenge keeps it there and propagates it.

II. THE EXCELLENCE OF THIS DUTY. General benevolence is general virtue; the true principle of a rational mind, and the great support and ornament of society. But in benevolence towards enemies there is additional worth, peculiar grace, for it raises mens minds, and exalts their affections to the sublimest pitch.

III. THE ADVANTAGES AND BENEFITS WHICH REDOUND FROM THE PRACTICE OF THIS DUTY. Most evident they are, both in respect of society and every individual.

1. It would be of infinite service to the public if the precept in the text were generally observed and practised. Innumerable broils, feuds, and contentions, would be hereby prevented or soon stopped. Such a disposition, when rooted in the minds of men, would grow up in a firm bank against the overflowings of ill-will and the inundations of strife. The wrongs that were done would slide away gently, without spreading or giving much disturbance to the community; and in a little time be swallowed up and lost in the wide ocean of charity.

2. And as to the private advantages, they are manifestly great and unquestionable. The peace and tranquility of a mans own mind; the delight of exercising benevolence towards enemies, and of conquering a wild affection. (J. Balguy, M. A.)

Love to enemies the outcome of Christianity

The Roman Triumph, with its naked ostentation of revenge, fairly represents the common feeling of the ancients. Nevertheless, forgiveness even of an enemy was not unknown to them. They could conceive it, and they could feel that there was a Divine beauty in it, but it seemed to them not merely, like the other Christians virtues, more than could be expected of ordinary men, but almost more than could be expected of human nature itself, almost superhuman. A passage near the close of the Ajax of Sophocles will illustrate this. As there was nothing of the antiquarian spirit about Greek tragedy, as it probably never occurred to Sophocles that the ancient heroes he depicts belonged to a less civilized age than his own, but on the contrary, as he conceived them to be better and nobler than his contemporaries, we may fairly suppose the feelings described in this passage to be of the highest standard of the poets own age, the age of Pericles. Ulysses, after the death of his enemy Ajax, is described as relenting towards him so far as to intercede with Agamemnon that his body may be decently buried, and not be exposed to the beasts and the birds. This may seem to be no great stretch of generosity. But the request is received by Agamemnon with the utmost bewilderment and annoyance. What can you mean? he says, do you feel pity for a dead enemy? On the other hand, the friends of Ajax are not less astonished, and break out into rapturous applause, but, says Tencer, I hesitate to allow you to touch the grave, lest it should be disagreeable to the dead man. The impression of strangeness which these words, Do you feel pity for a dead enemy? produce upon us is a proof of the change which Christianity has wrought in manners. A modern dramatist might have written the words, if he had been delineating an extremely savage character, but Sophocles is doing no such thing. He is expressing the natural sentiment of an average man. (Ecce Homo.)

An illustration of the influence of Christian teaching upon barbarous customs

Had the Son of Man been in body upon the earth during the Middle Ages, hardly one wrong and injustice would have wounded His pure soul like the system of torture. The main forces in medieval society, even those which tended to its improvement, did not touch this abuse. Roman law supported it; Stoicism was indifferent to it; Greek literature did not affect it; feudalism and arbitrary power encouraged a practice which they could use for their own ends; and even the hierarchy and a State Church so far forgot the truths they professed as to employ torture to support the religion of love. But against all these powers were the words of Jesus, bidding men Love your enemies! Do good to them that spitefully use you! and the like commands, working everywhere on individual souls, heard from pulpits and in monasteries, read over by humble believers, and slowly making their way against barbaric passion and hierarchic cruelty.

Gradually, in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the books containing the message of Jesus circulated among all classes, and produced that state of mind and heart in which torture could not be used on a fellow-being, and in which such an abuse and enormity as the Inquisition was hurled to the earth. (C. L. Bruce.)

The master-word of Christianity is love. (R. S. Storrs, D. D. , LL. D.)

Loving our enemies a Christian duty

From the words we may observe--

I. That innocence is not always a protection from injuries.

II. That Christians must not recompense evil for evil. I shall--

I. Lay before you your PATTERN, and show you how Christ loved His enemies. And then--

II. I shall press the IMITATION of Him in this respect.

I. Our Saviour, the Son of God, when He was here on earth, had His enemies. Infinite purity, and the most extensive engaging goodness could not gain the love of all.

II. Now I am next to show you how our blessed Saviour carried it toward His enemies; what spirit He was of under such indignities. Christ is spoken of in the Word of God as subduing His enemies in a twofold sense.

1. By His vengeance, when they have filled up the measure of their iniquities.

2. There is another sense in which Christ may be said to conquer and subdue His enemies; by His grace, by His Word and Spirit.

Let us now inquire how Christ our great pattern manifested His love or good-will towards His enemies, and still shows Himself reconcilable to such as are so.

1. In His bearing their reproaches with meekness, and a tender concern for them, not using them with severity, any farther than He saw needful to convince them of their sin, and to awaken them to repentance. He did not render evil for evil, and railing for railing (1Pe_2:21; 1Pe_2:23).

2. In His forbearing to take vengeance on His enemies, as one that came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

3. Christ showed His love to His enemies in forgiving them, on condition of their sincere repentance.

4. Our blessed Saviour manifested His good-will towards His enemies, His desire of their conversion and salvation, in His labours for their good, His preaching the Gospel to any that would attend upon Him, in His warning, instructing, and entreating them.

5. In His praying for them.

6. In that charge mentioned before, which He gave His apostles after His resurrection from the dead, to preach repentance and remission of sins first at Jerusalem.

I shall now close with two or three reflections on what has been delivered.

1. Let not those who have hitherto shown themselves enemies to Christ, despising His love, dishonouring His name, rejecting His gracious offers and abusing His gospel, despair of mercy, and think themselves utterly excluded from His favour.

2. Let the friends of Christ rejoice in their interest in His peculiar love.

I am now to proceed to the consideration of the second thing proposed, to press the IMITATION of our Lord in this respect.

1. The first thing to be considered is, who are our enemies. Not ministers who are ordained of God to show men their sins. Nor are rulers, such as bear the sword of justice. Nor are we to be offended with any that tell us of our faults, as if they were our enemies. This is not always a sign of mens disaffection to us, but sometimes of their good-will. Nor, further, are we to reckon all our enemies that differ from us in their opinions about religion. But let us see who may justly be called our enemies. Now, they are such as have ill-will, bitterness and rancour in their hearts against us. Now, how are Christians to behave themselves towards those that hate them, and wrong them? Why, corrupt nature presently dictates an answer; hate them in like manner, recompense evil for evil, take revenge.

2. What is meant by loving our enemies? Not taking complacency and delight in them; not entering into familiarity with them, and making them our intimates, as we would our particular friends. In short, we should be well affected towards them.

Thirdly then, how are we to express our love to our enemies?

1. We must suppress all immoderate anger and passion.

2. We must express our good-will to our enemies by just faithful reproof.

3. We must not envy our enemies their ease and prosperity, nor wish that their circumstances were altered into worse, that God would lift up His hand against them, afflict and blast them. In the fourth place, we should be so far from desiring the adversity of our enemies, that we should pity them in their distress.

4. We must pray for our enemies.

I am now to offer to your consideration some motives to this duty.

1. Consider the excellency of this duty. It is difficult indeed, but then there is a peculiar beauty in it, which tends greatly to adorn Christianity.

2. This is a duty expressly commanded in the gospel of Christ.

3. By such a disposition of mind as is recommended in the text we should be conformed to God.

4. We have the example of Christ our Lord.

5. We have also the example of the apostles of Christ, who themselves practised this duty.

6. Hatred and malice, when they lie fretting in the heart, and break out in their unchristian inhuman effects, can do no good, but must needs be unprofitable and unpleasant. Lastly, you shall not lose your reward. My prayer, says David, returned into my own bosom (Psa_35:13). Love your enemies and do good; and your reward shall be great Luk_6:35). (Thomas Whitty.)

The duty of loving our enemies stated and explained

I. Then, I am to STATE THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF THIS PRECEPT. There are two kinds of love which we must distinguish here; the love of approbation or esteem, and the love of benevolence or good-will. The love of approbation and the love of benevolence are, then, very distinct in their own nature. Our Saviour, at the same time that He expressed His disapprobation and dislike of Jerusalem for stoning the prophets, yet exemplified a very benevolent and compassionate regard for it, for He wept over it. Even resentment does not exclude benevolence, and we are very often angry at a person for committing a fault, even because we love him.

And as our Saviour loved and compassionated the Jews, though He abhorred their ungenerous treatment of Himself and the prophets; so we ought, with the same god-like generosity of soul, to love the man at the same time that we detest his vices; just as we may have an affectionate regard for a person that lies ill, but have an aversion to the disease he labours under. As to the extent and degrees of this duty, the Scripture nowhere enjoins an undistinguishing beneficence to men whether friendly or injurious. We ought to do the most good we can. Now, by singling out men of fortune, whatever relations may endear them to us, as the objects of our favour, we contribute little or nothing to their real enjoyments; but by being, what God is in a higher degree, the helper of the friendless and forlorn, we make the heart of one that was ready to perish sing for joy. In the former ease our bounty is like a shower to the ocean; in the latter it is like a shower to dry and thirsty ground. This is a very important rule, viz., that the extreme necessity of even our enemies, much more of other persons, is to take place of the mere conveniency of friends and relations, and that we ought rather to relieve the distressed than to promote the happiness of the easy; however the practice of it be disregarded by the world. But to proceed; the Scripture does not require any acts of kindness to our enemy which are confessedly prejudicial to our own interests: for we are not to love our neighbour better than ourselves. Our mercy to our enemies must not be so far extended as to expose us to the mercy of our enemies.

II. Having thus stated the nature and extent of this duty, I proceed, secondly, TO SHOW THE REASONABLENESS OF IT.

1. The great law of nature is an universal, active benevolence to the whole body of rational beings, as far as the sphere of our power extends. We were all sent into the world to promote one anothers happiness, as being all children of the same Father, our Father which is in heaven. What Moses said to the contending Israelites is applicable to all mankind: Why do ye wrong one another, since ye are brethren? And no injuries can take away or cancel that unchangeable relation. For, do we do good to our nearest and dearest relations only because they are deserving? Do we not think ourselves obliged to serve them merely because they are relations? This relation is always a strong reason for doing good, when there is no stronger reason to supersede or set it aside. And this may serve to show, that however for ward persons of the first distinction in civil and military offices may be to engross to themselves the character of heroism or any uncommon degree of virtue; a man in a private capacity may be as truly a hero in virtue, as they can be in a larger and more public sphere of action. He is like one of the fixed stars, which though, through the disadvantage of its situation, it may be thought to be very little, inconsiderable, and obscure by unskilful beholders; yet is as truly great and glorious in itself as those heavenly lights, which, by being placed more commodiously for our view, shine with more distinguished lustre. For he shows, by his complacency, that he would have done the same if his abilities had been equal to his inclinations.

2. An argument may be drawn from the consideration of our own happiness. Now to cultivate the sweet and kindly passions, to cherish an affectionate and social temper, to beget in ourselves, by repeated acts of goodness, a settled complacency, good will and benevolence to all mankind in general, is a constant spring of satisfaction. To contract an unrelenting malice, sullenness, and discontent, to let a sudden discomposure of mind ripen into a fixed aversion and ill-will, to have a savageness of nature and an insensibility to pity; what is this but to make our breast, which should be the temple of God, as it were a den of savage passions? In acts of severity, even when necessary, there is always something that is irksome to a gentle and compassionate spirit, something of a harsh and ungrateful feeling within accompanies them; like armour, which, though we may be obliged to put it on for our necessary self-defence, yet always fits uneasy, cumbrous, and unwieldy. Some cool-thinking villains there may be, who can lay plots to injure others with a steadfast and sedate malice, and with an untoward complacency; their minds being like those nights, which are very calm, silent, and close, and yet very black and dark; nights in which there reigns a sullen stillness. But men of this stamp are very rare: the generality of mankind, when they strive to make others uneasy, certainly disquiet themselves, and work out the ruin of other men, as they should do their own salvation, with fear and trembling.

3. A third argument for the love of our enemies may be drawn from the forgiveness of them. Now, the forgiveness of our enemies is a duty incumbent on us: because, in the first place, malice is, as I showed before, destructive of our happiness: because, secondly, we cannot with any reason ask that of God which we are not willing to bestow: because, thirdly, all private revenge, and consequently the desire of it too, is in the nature of the thing unlawful; since if it were allowed, it would draw a fatal train of consequences after it, and make the world an Aceldama, or field of blood. We know that the malignity of the offence rises in proportion to the dignity of the person whom we offend: now, most people are inclined to think themselves much greater than they are; and consequently to think the offence committed against them to be so too; the consequence of which is obvious, if we were commissioned to revenge ourselves. The mists of passion would represent injuries bigger than they are, and it would be impossible to proportion the punishment to the indignity. In short, it can never be reasonable, that one mans reputation, fortune, or life should be sacrificed to another mans passion and malice. How are we to behave ourselves to those whom we forgive? Are we to behave ourselves to them as to enemies? Not as to enemies: for then we do not sincerely forgive them. Besides, it is unnatural to have a cold indifference to the happiness or misery of our fellow-creatures, when our minds are divested of all rancour towards them. Benevolence will naturally shed abroad in our heart its kindly and gentle beams, when the clouds, which the unfriendly passions cast over the soul, are removed and dispersed.

4. A fourth argument may be drawn from the nature of God. No creature ought to counteract his Creator.

III. I proceed to show THE PRACTICABLENESS OF THIS DUTY. And here two sorts of men fall under our consideration:

1. Men of cool and deliberate malice, who, like lions lurking in secret places, can wait a considerable time, till, a convenient season offering itself, they spring to vengeance, and crush their unwary foe. Their resentment is like a massive stone, slowly raised; but, when once it is raised, on whomsoever it falls, it will grind them to powder.

2. The men of fire and fury, who immediately discharge the malignity of their passion in words or actions. As to the first set of men: it is certain that the same power of mind, which enables them to suspend the prosecution of their revengeful designs till a commodious opportunity, enables them likewise to get the better of their revengeful desires; for a passion so importunate and clamorous in its demands as revenge, if it cannot be curbed and controlled, cannot be suspended, and put off; and if it can be controlled, it can likewise be quelled and overcome. As to the second set of men, viz., the men of passion and fury, they indeed will tell you, God forgive them, it is their infirmity which they cannot help: they are apt to be transported into unseemly words and actions; but the storm is soon over. These are the excuses of those, who, when their anger has spent itself, are very good-natured; and continue so, till fresh recruits of spirits enable their passions to take the field again. But the misfortune is, these notable excuses are quite spoiled, if we consider that these men can be, and are very often, upon their guard. They will not fall into an unseemly rage before a great person, whom they dread and revere. After all, it must be owned, that a provocation may be so shocking and flagrant, that nature may rebel against principle, and a desire of revenge may as naturally hurry away the soul as a whirlwind does the body. This is an extraordinary case, and no doubt a gracious God will make allowances for it. It is a common saying, that few people know their own weakness; but it is as true a one, that few people know their own strength till they are put to it, and resolved in the prosecution of any design. It has been often observed that our hatred is most implacable when it is most unjust.

IV. And lastly, TO CONCLUDE WITH SOME PRACTICAL ADVICE. Let US reflect, that we cannot expect to be benefited by our Saviour, as a full sacrifice for sin, unless we imitate Him, as a complete model of virtue; and this we cannot do without forgiving and loving our enemies. Can a mind think anything here worth an implacable animosity, whose comprehensive views are raised as high as heaven, and extended as far as eternity? Let us think what would become of us at the last decisive day, a day decisive of our eternal happiness or misery, if God should deal with us with the same unforgiving disposition as we would deal with others. (J. Seed.)

Of loving our enemies

I. WHAT IS NOT THAT LOVE WHICH WE MUST SHOW OUR ENEMIES: this we shall find to exclude several things which would fain wear this name.

1. As first, to treat an enemy with a fair deportment and amicable language, is not the love here enjoined by Christ. Love is a thing that scorns to dwell anywhere but in the heart. The kindness of the heart never kills, but that of the tongue often does. Was ever the hungry fed, or the naked clothed, with good looks or fair speeches? These are but thin garments to keep out the cold, and but a slender repast to conjure down the rage of a craving appetite. But we are not to rest here; fair speeches and looks are not only very insignificant as to the real effects of love, but are for the most part the instruments of hatred in the execution of the greatest mischiefs. For it is oil that whets the razor, and the smoothest edge is still the sharpest: they are the complacencies of an enemy that kill, the closest hugs that stifle, and love must be pretended before malice can be effectually practised. In a word, he must get into his heart with fair speeches and promises, before he can come at it with his dagger.

2. Fair promises are not the love that our Saviour here commands us to show our enemies. For what trouble is it to promise, what charge is it to spend a little breath, for a man to give one his word, who never intends to give him anything else? And yet, according to the measures of the world, this must sometimes pass for a high piece of love. In a word, I may say of human promises, what expositors say of Divine prophecies, that they are never understood till they come to be fulfilled.

3. But thirdly and lastly, to advance a degree yet higher, to do one or two kind offices for an enemy is not to fulfil the precept of loving him. It is like pardoning a man the debt of a penny, and in the meantime suing him fiercely for a talent. Love is then only of reality and value when it deals forth benefits in a full proportion to ones need: and when it shows itself both in universality and constancy. Other wise it is only a trick to serve a turn, and carry on a design. The skilful rider strokes and pleases the unruly horse, only that he may come so near him, as to get the bit into his mouth, and then he rides, and rules, and domineers over him at his pleasure. So he who hates his enemy with a cunning equal to his malice, will not strain to do this or that good turn for him, so long as it does not thwart, but rather promote the main design of his utter subversion, For all this is but like the helping a man over the stile, who is going to be hanged, which surely is no very great or difficult piece of civility.

II. And thus having done with the negative, I come now to the second general thing proposed, namely, to show POSITIVELY WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DUTY OF LOVING OUR ENEMIES. It includes these three things.

1. A discharging the mind of all rancour and virulence towards an adversary.

2. To love an enemy is to do him all the real offices of kindness that opportunity shall lay in our way. Love is of too substantial a nature to be made up of mere negatives, and withal too operative to terminate in bare desires.

3. The last and crowning instance of our love to our enemies, is to pray for them. For by this a man, as it were, acknowledges himself unable to do enough for his enemy; and therefore he calls in the assistance of heaven, and engages omnipotence to complete the kindness. He would fain outdo himself, and therefore finding his own stores short and dry, he repairs to infinity. Prayer for a mans self is indeed a choice duty, yet it is but a kind of lawful and pious selfishness. But when I pray as heartily for my enemy as I do for my daily bread; when I strive with prayers and tears to make God his friend, who himself will not be mine; when I reckon his felicity among my own necessities; surely this is such a love as, in a literal sense, may be said to reach up to heaven. For nobody judges that a small and trivial thing for which he dares to pray: no man comes into the presence of a king to beg pins.

III. I come now to the third and last thing, viz., TO ASSIGN MOTIVES AND ARGUMENTS TO ENFORCE THIS LOVE TO OUR ENEMY; and they shall be taken--

1. From the condition of our enemys person, For the first of these, if we consider our enemy, we shall find that he sustains several capacities, which may give him a just claim to our charitable affection.

(1) As first, he is joined with us in the society and community of the same nature.

(2) An enemy, notwithstanding his enmity, may be yet the proper object of our love, because it sometimes so falls out, that he is of the same religion with us; and the very business and design of religion is to unite, and to put, as it were, a spiritual cognation and kindred between souls.

(3) An enemy may be the proper object of our love, because, though perhaps he is not capable of being changed and made a friend by it (which, for any thing I know, is next to impossible), yet he is capable of being shamed and rendered inexcusable.

2. A second motive or argument to the same shall be taken from the excellency of the duty itself. It is the highest perfection that human nature can reach unto. The excellency of the duty is sufficiently proclaimed by the difficulty of its practice. Nothing certainly but an excellent disposition improved by a mighty grace, can bear a man up to this perfection.

3. The third motive or argument shall be drawn from the great examples which recommend this duty to us. (R. South, D. D.)

Example of the early Christians

Justin Martyr, one of the earliest writers, in his Apology to the heathen in behalf of the Christians, says, We who once hated and murdered one another, we who would not enjoy the hearth in common with strangers, on account of the difference of our customs, now live in common with them, since the appearance of Christ; we pray for our enemies; we seek to persuade those who hate us unjustly, that they may direct their lives according to the glorious doctrines of Christ, and may share with us the joyful hope of enjoying the same privileges from God the Lord of all things.

Example of Origen

Origen, one of the greatest scholars and theologians of the Christian Church in the third century, when he was cruelly persecuted by Demetrius, and through his efforts excommunicated by the synod, beautifully exhibited the same mild and forgiving spirit. Speaking in his defence against the synod, he mentions wicked priests and rulers thus: We must pity them rather than hate them, pray for them rather than curse them, for we are created for blessing rather than cursing.

The Carthaginian Christians

In the time of a great pestilence, Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, in the third century, exhorts his flock to take care of the sick and dying, not only among their friends, but their foes. If, says he, we only do good to our own people, we do no more than publicans and heathens. But if we are the children of God, who makes His sun to shine and His rain to descend upon the just and upon the unjust, who sheds abroad His blessings, not upon His friends alone, but upon those whose thoughts are far from Him, we must show this by our actions, blessing those who curse us, and doing good to those who persecute us. Stimulated by their bishops admonition, the members of the Church addressed themselves to the work, the rich contributing their money and the poor their labour. Thus the sick were attended to, the streets soon cleared of the corpses that filled them, and the city saved from the dangers of a universal pestilence.

Mr. Burkitt and his injurers

Mr. Burkitt observes in his journal, that some persons would never have had a particular share in his prayers but for the injuries they had done him!

Mr. Lawrences charge to his sons

Mr. Lawrence once going, with some of his sons, by the house of a gentleman who had been injurious to him, charged them that they should never think or speak amiss of that gentleman on account of anything he had done against him, but, whenever they passed his house, they should lift up their hearts in prayer to God for him and his family. This good man had read our text to some purpose.

A persuasive to love our enemies

Negative holiness is short of Christianity more than the one half. It is not enough that we do others no ill, but we must do them good as we have access. Nor is it enough that we fly not out in passion and revenge on those who have wronged us, but we must love them.

I. We shall consider THE DUTY OF LOVING OUR ENEMIES. And here I shall show who are to be understood by our enemies. In general, it aims at those about whom there is least to engage our love to them.

1. Does not the psalmist say, Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against Thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies? (Psa_139:21-22.) And does not Jehu the son of Hanani the seer say to King Jehoshaphat, Shouldst thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord? (2Ch_19:2.)

(1) There is a hating of ones way and course, and a hating of ones person. It is not the latter that is meant in these passages, but the former.

(2) There is a hatred opposite to a love of complacency, and a hatred opposite to a love of good will: the former is what we should bear to the enemies of God, and is there meant; the latter is not. Are not the prayers of the Church bent against the enemies of Christ?

1. Yea they are, and for them too, in different respects; the former in respect of their wicked works, the latter in respect of their persons.

2. It is to be understood of those who are adversaries to us, or are against us any manner of way, whether they in that matter be against God or not. And so it takes in--

(1) Those who are not truly and properly our enemies, but in our account and reckoning only are enemies to us.

(a) Those whom we take for our enemies, but are really only smiting friends.

(b) Those whom we take for our enemies, but are only competitors with us in a lawful way. There is so much selfishness in the world, and so little regard to the interest of our neighbour, that a great many imaginary enemies are made this way.

(2) Those who are indeed our enemies, whom we reckon so, and who are truly what we reckon them.

1. Stated public enemies, who, in their principles and by open profession, are opposite to us, and practise accordingly. Such were the unbelieving Jews, particularly the Scribes and Pharisees, to the followers of Christ, inwardly hating them, openly cursing them. This party-enmity is frequent in the world, and it is the bane of the Church.

2. Stated private enemies, who set themselves in a course of enmity against such and such persons. Such enemies were Herod and Pilate to one another Luk_23:12). Such had Josephs brethren against him, Ahab against Micaiah, and Absalom against his brother Amnon. This is frequent everywhere, spreading itself like venom among neighbours, yea, among relations, and among neighbours of all sorts.

(1) Occasional enemies, who, upon particular emergent occasions, do wrong to us; but not from a stated enmity against us. If we are to love our stated enemies, much more these (Col_2:13). Both these kinds of enemies are of three sorts.

1. Heart-enemies, who in their hearts are set against us, burning with grudge, malice, and rancour at us. The text is plain as to our duty in that case, Do good to them that hate you.

2. Tongue-enemies, who employ their tongues against us like swords, arrows, fire, and scourges. Bless them that curse you. These are very dangerous enemies, and sometimes give very deep and galling wounds Psa_57:4). And tongue-love will not pay that debt, it must be heart- Pro_10:18). Wit may furnish the former, but true wisdom must furnish the latter in that case.

3. Hand-enemies, who in their actions and deeds are enemies to us; not only in their hearts wishing us ill, and with their tongues speaking ill of us, but to their power, and as they have occasion, doing ill to usPray for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you. Our Lord binds us even to love these, and that while they are doing against us. The corrupt hearts motion is to do ill for ill, but by grace we must do good for ill: that is heavens exchange.

II. I come to show WHAT THAT LOVE IS WHICH WE OWE TO OUR ENEMIES; We must love them. It is necessary to explain this, both negatively and positively. First, Negatively. We are not bound to love them--

I. So as for their sakes to be reconciled to and at peace with their sin. We must love and strive to please one another, but to edification, not to destruction.

2. Neither does this love bar seeking redress of wrongs in an orderly way. If God had meant that men should be in the earth, like the fishes in the sea, where the greater swallow up the lesser, without possibility of redress, nothing being left to the weaker but to yield themselves, He had never appointed the magistrate, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil (Rom_13:4).

3. Neither doth it bind us to a love of complacency in them. That is, we are not obliged to take delight in them, make them our intimate and familiar companions, associate with them as our friends, being in a course of enmity against God. Jehoshaphat was reproved for that (2Ch_19:2). David makes it a mark of his sincerity, that he abstained from it (Psa_139:21). Solomon tells us, He that walketh with wise men shall be wise: but a companion of fools shall be destroyed (Pro_13:20). Secondly, Positively. There is a threefold love that uses to be distinguished.

First, We owe to our enemies, our real enemies, a love of good-will Rom_13:9).

1. We must not wish them ill as ill to them (Psa_40:14). We must pluck up the roots from which ill wishes to them do spring up. Envy, which looks with an ill eye on their welfare, and would eat it up (Jam_3:16); hatred, which blocks up all good from us to them (Lev_19:17); grudge, which is a train lying within the heart, ready to be blown up on occasion for mischief to them (Lev_19:18); and malice, which like a burning fire pursues them with ill-will (Eph_4:31). Our ill wishes Can do them no ill, but they do ourselves much. Every ill wish is an item in our accounts before God, and the reigning root of ill-will to our neighbour proves one to be naught (1Jn_2:11). But this extends not to these two cases.

(1) The wishing one an ill for good to him, e.g., the losing of such an ones favour, the having of which is a snare to his soul.

(2) The wishing evil to a person for the good o! many, as that one who is a corrupter of others, and incorrigible in it, may be taken out of the way.

2. We must not take pleasure in any ill that befalls them, as ill to them Pro_24:17).

3. We must heartily wish them well (1Ti_1:5). Pray for them, says the text. We must wish them the best things, that they may be for ever happy; may have favour and peace with God (Luk_33:34); and that for that cause God may grant them faith, repentance, and all other saving graces. For it is a vain wish, and worse than vain, to wish people happy, living and going on in their sins.

4. We must wish them well, as well to them (Psa_122:8). Men may wish well to their enemies, from a mere carnal principle, not as being well for them, but for themselves. That is, they may wish them repentance, dec., for their own ease, not from any love to their souls.

Secondly, We owe to our enemies, our real enemies, a love of beneficence, whereby we will be ready to do them good as we have access; and therefore says the apostle (1Jn_3:18).

1. We must not practise revenge upon them, by doing one ill turn for another they have done us (Rom_12:19).

2. We must not withhold from them the good that is due to them from us by any particular tie; but must be sure to be in our duty to them, though they be out of their duty to us, Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hand to do it (Pro_3:27).

3. We must be ready to do them good as Providence puts an opportunity in our hand. As we have opportunity, let us do good unto all men Gal_6:10). Now we must be ready to do them good--

(1) In their temporal interest. If thine enemy hunger, feed him: if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head Rom_12:20).

(2) In their spiritual interest, contributing our utmost endeavours as we have access for their eternal happiness (Pro_11:30).

(a) To speak for their good: for a good word is often of such usefulness to men, that it may be reckoned among good deeds.

(b) To act for their good (Rom_12:20).

III. The next general head is to show, THAT THIS LOVING OF OUR ENEMIES IS A NECESSARY MARK AND EVIDENCE OF A CHILD OF GOD.

1. The living in malice and envy against any, is an evidence of one in the black state of nature, a child of hell. Hence says the apostle (Tit_3:3).

2. To love our friends and hate our enemies, is nothing above the reach of nature, corrupt as it is.

3. The want of it will evince the person to want the true love of God; and he who wants that, surely is not a child of God, but a child of the devil.

4. It is a necessary consequent of regeneration, and without that no man shall see heaven (1Jn_3:9-10).

5. If we love not our enemies, we are not like God; and if we be not like Him, we are not His children: for all His children have His Spirit in them Gal_4:6). And they all bear His image (Col_3:10).

6. If we love not our enemies, we have not the Spirit of Christ, and so are none of His (Rom_8:9).

7. Without this we are murderers in the sight of God, and so have no share in eternal life. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer (1Jn_3:15).

This shows us that--

1. It is not easy to be a Christian indeed, however easy it is to take on the name and profession of it.

2. Christianity lies in a Christian or Christ-like disposition of heart, and a conduct of life agreeable thereto (Jam_1:22).

3. Those who pick and chose in religion, taking the easier, and not meddling with the difficult duties thereof laid before them, do but deceive themselves.

4. Christianity is the best friend of human society. O how happy might the world be if it should obtain! What peace, safety, and ease would there be among nations, in neighbourhoods, and in families? It would be an effectual quench-coal to all the fightings, quarrellings, jarrings, strifes, and wrongs, that take away the comfort of society.

5. There are few Christians in the world: the children of Gods family are very rare; even as rare as they are who love their enemies. Hereby ye may discern, whether ye are the children of God or not. This is an evidence proposed by Christ Himself, the elder brother of the family. But ye may safely take the comfort of love to your enemies--

(1) If it be a loving of them in deed and in truth, and not in word and tongue only (1Jn_3:18). Men for their own sake may give their enemies their best words and wishes, while these are but a white cover of black hatred.

(2) If it be evangelical in its spring and rise. A good humour, some particular interest of mens own, may go far in the counterfeit of this. But the true love to our enemies rises from gospel principles.

(3) If it be universal, not extending to some only for whom we retain a particular regard, but to all whom we take for our enemies. For if the spring of it be evangelical, it will be universal: since in that case the reason for bearing that love to one, is a reason for bearing it to all; for being in charity with all the world.

To press this, let me suggest the following motives.

1. It is the command of God and His Son Jesus Christ.

2. Ye were baptized in the name of God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, all of you, and many of you have communicated in the Lords Supper. Since ye have taken on the external badge of the family, walk as becomes members of that holy society.

3. The more ye have of this, ye are the more like God; the less ye have of it, ye are the more unlike Him. Here is your true glory.

4. This is the way to be useful in the world.

5. It will be much to your own advantage.

6. Your claim to the family of God depends on it.

I shall conclude with a few directions.

1. Come to Christ, and unite with Him by faith (Heb_11:6).

2. Bear up in your hearts a deep sense of your sinfulness, with the faith of pardon thereof.

3. Ply your hearts with the believing thoughts of the beneficence of God to His enemies, and the love of Christ dying for His enemies to redeem them from wrath.

4. Consider that even your enemies were made originally after Gods image Gen_9:6), and they may be for all you know the objects of everlasting love; for whom special favour is secured by the eternal transaction.

5. As there are readily none, but they have something desirable about them; so fix ye upon that, and love them for it, as ye will love gold, though ye should find it in a mire. Beware lest the faults of others and their blemishes blind your eyes to their beauties and excellencies.

6. Consider them rather as objects of pity and compassion, than of hatred.

7. Consider the shortness of time, their and your own (Ecc_9:6). We have no time to spend in these petty quarrels of this world. (T. Boston, D. D.)

Returning good for evil, the wisest course

Thus, with intimate knowledge of our common life, does Jesus trace the workings of revengeful irritation down from the buffet which burns upon the cheek, to the neighbour who only pesters us with his borrowing. Everywhere he bids us substitute for the passion which calls for retaliation that nobler charity which repays evil with good. Shallow or selfish hearts are apt to say this is to put a premium on aggression, and meekly invite a repetition of it. No doubt there are foolish ways of yielding a literal obedience to this law, which would have no better effect than to provoke a second blow on the other cheek. Yet love is wise, not foolish; and often wiser in its generous confidence than selfishness in its calculating suspiciousness, which it terms prudence. God has made human souls more susceptible, on the whole, to kindness than to any other moral force; and such kindness as this, which can net only forgive, but suffer, offence, is fit to melt the rock and to tame the brute. Good, by the simple and lovely strength of its own goodness, does in the end overcome evil; or if it does not, it is because evil cannot be overcome. At all events, when a patient lover of men is trying, by unaffected meekness and unrequited generosity, to wear out the evil-doing of the bad and shame them into penitence, he is only taking the course which both Gods wisdom has prescribed and Gods own love has followed. It is not by His words only, but much more by His acts, that Jesus has fulfilled this law which substitutes generosity for revenge. In His person we see the supreme example of His own rule. (J. O. Dykes, D. D.)

The good use of an enemy

It was the opinion of Diogenes, that our life had need either of faithful friends, or sharp and severe enemies. And indeed our enemies oftentimes do us more good than those we esteem our friends; for a friend will often pass over ordinary failings, and out of respect, connivance, or self-interest, speak only what shall be grateful, or, at least, not displeasing; while aa enemy will catch at every error, and sets himself as a spy upon all our actions, whereby, as by a tyrant governor, we are kept impaled within the bounds of virtue and prudence, beyond whose limits if we dare to wander, we are presently whipped by him into the circle of discretion. Like the sergeant of a regiment, if we be out of rank, he checks us again into the place and file appointed us. To a fool, he is the bellows of passion; but to a wise man, he may be made a schoolmaster of virtue. An enemy also, not only hinders the growth and progress of our vices, but enkindles, exercises, and exalts our virtues. Our patience is improved, by bearing calmly the indignities he strives to load us with; our charity is enflamed by returning good for ill, and by pardoning and forgiving the injuries he does us; our prudence is increased by wisely managing ourselves in our demeanour, so as not to give him opportunity to wound us; our fortitude is strengthened by a manful repelling of scorns, and by giving occasions for the display of an undaunted courage in all our actions; our industry is strengthened and confirmed by watching all his attacks and stratagems; and by our contriving how we may best acquit ourselves in all our contests. And doubtless we ought, in another respect, to be thankful for an enemy. He causes us to show the world our parts and piety, which else perhaps might go with us to our dark graves, and moulder and die with us, quite unknown; or, could not otherwise well be seen, without the vanity of a light and ostentatious mind. Miltiades had missed his trophy, if he had missed an enemy in the Marathonian fields. Our enemies, then, are to be reckoned in the number of those by whom we may be rendered better if we will. As the hardest stone is the most proper for a basis, so there is not a better pedestal to raise a trophy of our virtues upon, than an outward enemy, if we can but keep ourselves from inward enemies, our vices and our weaknesses. (Owen Felltham.)

Returning good for evil

Difference between mans way of doing it and Gods way. When we do it we fail in various ways.

1. Sometimes it is done through sycophancy or cowardice.

2. Through weakness or easy indulgence; we return good to a spoilt child (or dependant) for evil which requires checking, by selfishly or idly ignoring it.

3. Through indifference or apathy, want of sensitiveness and real abhorrence of evil; we take no notice, we condone and are tolerant of it, thinking thus to return good.

4. We calculate that our good-returning will pay us; in praise and influence or reputation for instance.

5. We do it at the wrong time (i.e., what is good for the evil-doer at one time is bad for him at another)

; or we return a wrong (i.e., unsuitable)

kind or form of good and in the wrong way; so that it is perverted and misunderstood, and becomes evil.

6. We do it so as to encourage the evil-doer to repeat his injury on another, perhaps more helpless; we harden him by impunity, we refuse to help him against himself. There is thus nothing more vitally important in returning good for evil than to be sure that it is good in the highest sense of the word; Gods own good, not our selfish or shallow or one-sided notions of it.

The difficult commandment

I. ILLUSTRATE THIS DUTY.

1. The objects--Enemies.

2. The feelings we must exercise towards them-- Love.

(1) So as deeply to compassionate them--feel for them--and sincerely pity them.

(2) That we forgive them.

(3) That we pray for them.

(4) That we are ready to relieve them, and do them good.

(5) That we are willing to receive them to favour and friendship on signs of repentance.

II. ENFORCE THIS DUTY.

1. On the ground of Christs indisputable authority.

2. On the ground of Christs blessed example.

3. Our acceptance with God is suspended upon 2:4. It is essential to true religion here, and to happiness hereafter.

III. ANSWER OBJECTIONS. It is objected--

1. That it is incompatible with self-love. We reply, that we are not to love the injury, but the injurer; and the souls sweetest felicity will thus be produced.

2. Revenge is sweet. It is so to demons, and wicked men who possess the spirit of the wicked one. But mercy and pity only are really sweet to those who are renewed in their hearts by the saving grace of God.

3. Revenge is honourable. It is false honour--the honour of a bad world, and of depraved hearts. It is the glory of the blessed God to forgive us, who have been enemies to Him; and it is our highest dignity to be conformed to His holy image.

4. It is impossible. So it is to the carnal mind, without Divine aid, without crucifying our own carnal self. Stephen prayed for his murderers. And the blessed Jesus, who knows what is in man, and what he is capable of doing, and whose yoke is easy, has enjoined it; and therefore, however difficult, it is evidently possible. (J. Burns, D. D.)

Love to an enemy

During the American Revolutionary War there was living, in Pennsylvania, Peter Milier, pastor of a little Baptist Church. Near the church lived a man who secured an unenviable notoriety by his abuse of Miller and the Baptists. He was also guilty of treason, and was for this sentenced to death. No sooner was the sentence pronounced than Peter Miller set out on foot to visit General Washington, at Philadelphia, to intercede for the mans life. He was told that his prayer could not be granted. My friend! exclaimed Miller, I have not a worse enemy living than that man. What, rejoined Washington, you have walked sixty miles to save the life of your enemy? That in my judgment puts the matter in a different light. I will grant you his pardon. The pardon was made out, and Miller at once proceeded on foot to a place fifteen miles distant, where the execution was to take place on the afternoon of the Same day. He arrived just as the man was being carried to the scaffold, who, seeing Miller in the crowd, remarked: There is old Peter Miller. He has walked all the way from Ephrata to have his revenge gratified to-day by seeing me hung. These words were scarcely spoken before Miller gave him his pardon, and his life was spared.

A proof of the gospel being from God

Henry Clay once replied to some sneering allusion to the character of American Evangelical Christianity: I do not know practically what the Churches call religion. I wish I did. But I do know what it effects. And then reciting the case of a bitter feud between two neighbouring families in Kentucky which had kept the community in a ferment for years, but at last had been settled by the conversion of both parties, he said: I tell you that whatever will change a Kentucky feud into a fellowship so soon and effectively is of God. No power short of His could do it.

Doing good to an enemy

In the old persecuting times there lived in Cheapside one who feared God and attended the secret meetings of the saints; and near him there dwelt a poor cobbler, whose wants were often relieved by the merchant; but the poor man was a cross-grained being, and most ungratefully, from hope of reward, laid as information against his kind friend on the score of religion. This accusation would have brought the merchant to death by burning if he had not found a means of escape. Returning to his house, the injured man did not change his generous behaviour to the malignant cobbler, but, on the contrary, was more liberal than ever. The cobbler was, however, in an ill mood, and avoided the good man with all his might, running away at his approach. One day he was obliged to meet him face to face, and the Christian man asked him gently, Why do you shun me? I am not your enemy. I know all that you did to injure me, but I never had an angry thought against you. I have helped you, and I am willing to do so as long as I live, only let us be friends. Do you marvel that they clasped hands? (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Returning good for evil

Arcadius, an Argive, was incessantly railing at Philip of Macedon. Venturing once into the dominions of Philip, the courtiers reminded their prince that he had now an opportunity to punish Arcadius for his past insolences, and to put it out of his power to repeat them. The king, however, instead of seizing the hostile stranger and putting him to death, dismissed him loaded with courtesies and kindnesses. Some time after Arcadiuss departure from Macedon, word was brought that the kings old enemy was become one of his warmest friends, and did nothing but diffuse his praises wherever he went. On hearing this, Philip turned to his courtiers, and asked, with a smile, Am not I a better physician than you?

Good for evil

A man was seen one day going in a boat on a river with a large dog, which he wished to get rid of by drowning. He succeeded in throwing the animal into the water; but the creature sought to re-enter the boat. As the man was attempting to beat off the dog from the boat, he fell overboard, and would have been drowned, had not the dog seized him by his coat, and brought him to the shore.

Love to enemies

A few poor Cherokee women, who had been converted to Christianity, formed themselves into a society for the propagation of the gospel, which was now become so dear to them. The produce of the first year was about ten dollars, and the question was, To what immediate object this should be applied? At length a poor woman proposed that it should be given to promote the circulation of the gospel in the Osage nation; For, said she, the Master has told us to love and do good to our enemies, and I believe the Osages are the greatest enemies the Cherokees have.

Dr. Mathers ambition

It was the laudable ambition of Cotton Mather to be able to say, that he did not know of any person in the world who had done him an ill office, but he had done him a good one for it.

The Chinese monarch and the rebels

A Chinese emperor being told that his enemies had raised an insurrection in one of the distant provinces, Come, then, my friends, said he, follow me, and I promise you that we shall quickly destroy them. He marched forward, and the rebels submitted upon his approach. All now thought that he would take the most signal revenge; but were surprised to see the captives treated with mildness and humanity. How, cried the first minister; is this the manner in which you fulfil your promise? Your royal word was given that your enemies should be destroyed; and behold you have pardoned them all, and even caressed some of them! I promised, replied the emperor, with a gracious air, to destroy my enemies. I have fulfilled my word; for, see, they are enemies no longer; I have made friends of them! Let every Christian imitate so noble an example, and learn to overcome evil with good.

Literal obedience; or, rules versus principles

It is said that many years ago an eminent minister of the gospel, who had been a great athlete in his youth, on returning to his native town soon after he had been ordained, encountered in the High Street an old companion whom he had often fought and thrashed in his godless days. So, youve turned Christian, they tell me, Charley? said the man. Yes, replied the minister. Well, then, you know the Book says, If youre struck on one cheek, youre to turn the other. Take that; and with that he hit him a stinging blow. There then, replied the minister, quietly, turning the other side of his face toward him. The man was brute enough to strike him heavily again. Whereupon the minister said, And there my commission ends, pulled off his coat, and gave his antagonist a severe thrashing, which no doubt he richly deserved. But did the minister keep the command of Christ? He obeyed the letter of the rule: but did he not violate the principle, the spirit, of it? Hear the other story, and judge. It is told of a celebrated officer in the army that, as he stood leaning over a wall in the barrack-yard, one of his military servants, mistaking him for a comrade, came softly up behind him, and suddenly struck him a hard blow. When the officer looked round, his servant, covered with confusion, stammered out, I beg your pardon, sir; I thought it was George. His master gently replied: And if it were George, why strike so hard? Now which of these two, think you, really obeyed the command of Christ? the minister who made a rule of it and kept to the letter of the rule, or the officer who made a principle of it, and acting on the spirit of it, neglected the letter? Obviously, the minister disobeyed the command in obeying it, while the officer obeyed the command in disobeying it. And here we may see the immense superiority of a principle over a rule. Take a rule, any rule, and there is only one way of keeping it, the way of literal obedience, and this may often prove a foolish and even a disobedient way. But get a principle, and there are a thousand ways in which you may apply it, all of which may be wise, beneficial to you, and no less beneficial to your neighbour. (S. Cox, D. D.)

Turning the other cheek

A Swiss colporteur entered a three-story house, in which, according to the custom of the country, three different families lived. He began with the highest story, and sold copies of the Scriptures in this and in the next. On inquiring about the family on the ground-floor, he was warned not to enter, but he did enter. He found both the man and his wife at home. He offered his Bibles; his offer was replied to with abuse, and a positive order to leave the house instantaneously; he, however, stayed, urging them to buy and read Gods holy Word. The man then rose in a violent rage, and struck him a severe blow on the cheek. Up to this moment the colporteur stood quietly with his knapsack on his back. He now deliberately unstrapped it, laid it on the table, and turned up the sleeve of his right arm, all the while steadily looking his opponent in the face. The colporteur was a very strong man. Addressing his opponent he said, Look at my hand--its furrows show that I have worked; feel my muscles--they show that I am fit for work. Look me straight in the face; do I quail before you? Judge, then, for yourself if it is fear that moves me to do what I am about to do. In this Book my Master says, When they smite you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. You have smitten me on one cheek; here is the other! Smite I I will not return the blow. The man was thunderstruck. He did not smite, but bought the Book which, under the influence of Gods Spirit, works marvels in the human heart. (W. Baxendale.)

Bible precepts to be spiritually interpreted

You cannot make language more explicit, yet I say that to carry it out literally would be to pervert human society so that there could be no such thing as Christianity in this world. I affirm this, not theoretically, but as the result of the revelation of Gods providence among men, and as a fulfilment of Gods teaching in revelation--that great unending perpetual revelation that is going on in the human raze. It would destroy the whole framework and order of society. That in a far-off state, that in the ripeness of human development, the law of non-resistance will have a universal application, I think to be more than likely; but that it should have a universal application now is not possible. Take another point, that of almsgiving. Do our friends, the Quakers, who insist upon the literal translation of the passage on the subject of non-resistance, take a literal view of this passage also? Do they put their hands in their pockets for all that ask of them, and draw them out full? No. This, they say, you are to take in its spirit. Yes, I say that you are to take it in its spirit, and not in its letter. A literal interpretation of it would slay mankind, almost. It would well-nigh destroy the business-life of organized society. It would break up fellowship between man and man. It would promote the very opposite of that which it is the object of the New Testament to inculcate. Take the spirit of the command. Interpret it as enjoining the practice of generosity, of helpfulness, of kindness one toward another. Accept it as inculcating a disposition in every man to look, not on his own things, but on the things of others. That is to say, make it a principle adaptable according to your feeling and judgment. (H. W.Beecher.)

Cloak and coat

The Jews of the first century always wore the tunic and mantle or robe. These were the two indispensable garments. The tunic was of linen. It fitted the figure, had sleeves and came down to the feet. It was worn next to the skin, or over an under-garment of linen very full and long. That of the rabbi, scribe, or doctor, was specially large, and yet was not to be visible more than a handbreadth under the mantle. The mantle or robe was worn over all. A man must be very poor to have only one cloak, and yet this is what Christ enjoined on His disciples. According to Lukes Gospel He said one day, If any man will take away thy cloak, forbid him not take thy coat also. This precept can be understood; a robber would naturally lay hold first of the outer garment. But Matthew puts it the other way. Under this form it is harder to understand, and we may well suppose that in transcribing [Matthews version] the copyist may have misplaced the two words coat and cloak. (E. Stapfer, D. D.)

Almsgiving

Many of you know the name of William Law, the author of the Serious Call to a Devout and Holy Life. He was one of the best of clergymen, and was bent on leading a life of Christian obedience in the most thorough and unshrinking manner. He and two rich friends agreed to live together, and to spend as little as possible on themselves, and to give away almost their joint income. They did so by relieving all who applied to them and who represented themselves as in want. The result was that they attracted crowds of idle and lying mendicants. For a long time Law shut his eyes to the evil of which he and his friends were thus the occasion; until at last his fellow-parishioners were driven to present a memorial to the magistrates, entreating them in some way to prevent Mr. Law from thus demoralizing their parish. A sad and pathetic incident illustrating the perplexities and contradictions of human life! The best men are not above the need of learning wisdom from experience. The real Christian duty of these good people was not to be less self-denying and liberal, but to consider anxiously how they might lay out their means so as to do the most good and the least evil. If you give sixpence to a poor creature, when you know, or may know, if you think or inquire, that the sixpence will be turned at once into intoxicating drink, you are putting a stumbling-block or occasion of falling in the way of a brother or sister for whom Christ died. What is it that forbids you to do this? Is it political economy? Perhaps, but it is certainly also Christian duty, Christian love. I once heard an excellent clergyman say, Warn as you will, if I were to refuse help to the apparently hungry woman who begs me to give her food, I could not eat my own dinner in comfort. My answer to such a remark would be, What does it matter whether you eat your own dinner in comfort or not? This is a very secondary consideration, compared with the question of doing good or harm to the brother or sister for whom Christ died. People are imposed upon, as we say, not unfrequently: when they find it out they are vexed; but too often their regret is limited to their own humiliation, to their own insignificant loss; and they fail to reproach themselves for having in their carelessness put an occasion of falling in the way of the weak brother for whom Christ died. (J. H. Davies, M. A.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 6:27-28. But I say unto you which hear — You who hear me now, and you who in future ages shall hear my gospel. Hitherto our Lord had spoken only to particular sorts of persons; now he begins speaking to all in general. Love your enemies, &c. — The disposition which my gospel cherishes in its votaries, is that of love and kindness, even to the evil and unthankful; and therefore all who hear the gospel ought to be of this disposition. See on Mat 5:44.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Second Section: The Requirement of Love

(Luk_6:27-38.)

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Luk_6:27. But I say unto you which hear.—Antithesis to the foregoing, Luk_6:26. Meyer very happily: “Yet although I utter against those these Woes, yet I enjoin on you not hatred but love towards your enemies. It is therefore no accidental antithesis” (Köstlin). As the Saviour in Luk_6:26 had shown what treatment Christians have to expect of their enemies, He unfolds, Luk_6:27-38, what return they must give to this treatment. Comp. Mat_5:38-48; Mat_7:12. Here is connected in thetic form what was given by Matthew antithetically, over against the ἐῤῥέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις.

Ἀγαπᾶτ ε, κ.τ.λ.—The doctrine of love to enemies is here communicated in the most complete the fourfold form, while in Mat_5:44 the second and the third member appear to be spurious. (See Tischendorf.)—Respecting the subject itself comp. Lange, Matthew, p. 117. Although it cannot be denied that love to enemies is in a certain sense required even by Jewish and heathen moralists, it must yet be remembered that the thought of requiting acts of enmity with devout intercession could only arise in the heart of Him who has Himself prayed for the evil doers. Such sayings of the Saviour, particularly, may well have elicited from even a godly man, on reading the Sermon on the Mount, the exclamation: “Either this is not true, or we are no Christians.”

Luk_6:29. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek.—The sense and application of this and similar precepts will occasion no difficulties, if we only bear in mind the simple rule: “The ethical commandments of Christ, or His explanations of the Old Testament, must themselves in turn be explained in the spirit of Christ.” (Tholuck, Bergpredigt, p. 163.) Let us in this matter consider well, first, that in proportion as civil life is more and more guided and sanctified by the spirit of Christ, it must continually be and become less and less possible that any one should unrighteously smite us, or take away our mantle, or force us to accompany him a mile. Secondly, that the Saviour did not here intend to project a definite rule of behavior, but to inculcate certain essential principles, as Augustine very justly remarks on the passage: “Ista prœcepta magis ad prœparationem cordis, quœ intus est, pertinere, quam ad opus, quod in aperto fit, ut teneatur in secreto animi patientia et benevolentia, in manifesto autem id fiat, quod iis videtur prodesse, quibus bene velle debemus.” Respecting the views of the ancient Christians as to the allowableness or inadmissibleness of military service, we find important statements in Neander’s Denkwürdigkeiten. If we remember, finally, the time of closely impending persecutions in which this precept was given, and the conflict in which a literal following of Luk_6:29-30, would bring us with the unchangeable and chief principle of Luk_6:31, the way is then as it were of itself prepared for a right explanation of this precept. We do not even need to form the supposition that “the sentence: ‘From him that taketh thy goods ask them not again,’ is hardly original with Luke, since it unnecessarily exaggerates the endurance” (Ewald), for it requires nothing more than what had immediately preceded. Better is Bengel’s remark: “Nimis hic cumulatœ sunt ingenii humani exceptiones.”

Luk_6:31. And as ye would.—Here connected still more closely with the duty of love to enemies, in Mat_7:12 more generally stated. Justly Theophylact: νόμον ἔμφυτον ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν γεγραμμένον. The Saviour gives a touch-stone into the hands of His disciples, by which they might prove themselves as to whether their demeanor towards neighbors and enemies was in agreement with their duties. His utterance contains no principle, but a touch-stone of morality, since it only refers to an outer form of action. Neither is it new (comp. Jesus Sirach xxx. and the passages cited by Tholuck, p. 488 seq.), and might even be misused by egoism and perversely interpreted by scoffers, except as it is understood and applied with the whole spirit of Christianity. Where it is so used we shall discover in it a plain, simple, universally applicable precept of the practical wisdom of life, fully fitted for the purpose for which the Saviour has given it. Only let a special emphasis be laid upon the καθώς. Very happily Lange: “Not what people desire of us, but according to all that we desire of them, agreeably to that should we do to them.” We subjoin that here the standard is not intrusted to the hands of every natural man, but to those of the disciples of Christ.

Luk_6:32. What, thanks.—“Qualis vobis gratia, ut qui uberius quidam, mercede dignum, prœstiteris.” Bengel. It is, of course, to be understood that we are not here to think of human, but of Divine recompense. Comp. Mat_5:46-47.

For sinners also.—Here and Luk_6:33-34, each time ἁμαρτωλοί, in Matthew τελῶναι καὶ ἐθνικοί (see Tischendorf on Mat_5:47). In Luke, from his position of liberality towards the Gentiles, it is not the ethnic but the ethic antithesis which comes most into prominence; but the meaning remains the same. The Saviour will raise His disciples above the position of the ordinary morality of the natural man. Comp. the beautiful essay of A. Vinet in his Nouveaux discours sur quelques sujets religieux, entitled, L’extraordinaire, pp. 146–184.

Luk_6:34. And if ye lend.—Lending in the hope of receiving again is human; but without this hope it becomes Christian. And yet, how many found their right to the Christian’s name almost on nothing else than on services of love so carefully measured and egoistic that every heathen or Jew equals them therein, perhaps even excels them.

Luk_6:35. Hoping for nothing again.—It is plain that the Saviour here only forbids the expectation of human recompense, inasmuch as He has already confirmed the hope of heavenly reward, Luk_6:23, and immediately animates this again with the words: And your reward shall be great. The different explanation of Meyer: “nihil desperantes,” is, without doubt, philologically admissible; yet it appears to us to be less favored by the connection.

Ye shall be the children of the Highest.—We find no reason to restrict the enjoyment of this dignity (with Meyer) to the future life. The Pauline doctrine of the υἱοθεσία even in the earthly life of believers, appears to us, on the other hand, to have its ground in such sayings of Jesus. If the ethical relationship with God manifests itself even here, why should its reward be incapable of being enjoyed until the next life?

Luk_6:36. Be ye therefore merciful.—In Matthew, τέλειοι, here, οἰκτίρμονες; explicative: (for only in His moral attributes can God be an ideal to be imitated, and of this His love is the centre). Even without the spurious οὖν the nexus idearum is of itself evident.

Luk_6:37. And judge not.—Comp. Mat_7:1. Κρίνειν is not the same as κατακρίνειν (Olshausen), or here there would be a tautology with the immediate sequel: μὴ καταδικάζετε, κ.τ.λ.; but what is here understood by judging, is the considering of the faults of our neighbor with a look only sharpened by mistrust, and not tempered by love and self-knowledge. It is the not “judging of a righteous judgment,” Joh_7:24. Undoubtedly, to the spiritual man, who judges all things (ἀνακρίνει, 1Co_2:15), the right to judge, in and of itself, cannot be forbidden; yet it is only granted by the Lord when one has previously cast a look of searching examination upon himself. “Luke conceives as a consequence what Matthew designates as that to be avoided.” (De Wette.) Forgive, &c.—A practical commentary on this saying see in Mat_18:23-35.

Luk_6:38. Good measure, pressed down and shaken together, and heaped up.—The distinction of Bengel: in aribus, mollibus, liquidis, appears to be more ingenious than true. At least it cannot be denied that all the epithets here used can be used of a measure for dry substances. The climax brings into relief in a vivid manner the riches of the Divine retribution. Since now the Saviour does not at all say whom He uses for the impartation of such a recompense to His disciples, it is not at all necessary to restrict the matter exclusively to the future life, and to understand it of the angels (Meyer). Even in this life His disciples might at least now and then expect a superabundant recompense of their labor of love.—With the same measure.

Very well Theophylact: τῷ αὐτῷ, οὐ μὲν τοσούτῳ.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The high value of the ethical precepts here given will not become fully evident unless we consider how the Saviour Himself fulfilled them His life long in the most perfect manner; so that they contain not only the expression of His will, but also the living image of His own heart and life. By the comparison with the Saviour’s own conduct, moreover, will the arbitrary application of the rules here given be best avoided. Comp. for instance Joh_18:21-22.

2. In the fulfilling, moreover, of the precepts here given, Luk_6:29-30, the main requirement of the gospel, love to God before all, and to our neighbor as ourselves, still remains at once principle and corrective. It is self-evident that an unthinking obedience to the letter would often bring with it dishonor to God, and would strengthen our neighbor in his injustice. Or should we have to give a supplicant everything, for instance even a dagger or poison to the madman who incessantly begs for them? Just as well might then the old Carpocratians derive from this passage the doctrine that a woman is obliged to follow the voice of temptation to forbidden lusts! But then the Saviour himself sinned against His own precept, when He permitted the Canaanitish woman first to entreat fruitlessly for help, and forbade one healed by Him to accompany Him, although entreated by him to permit it. The understanding, enlightened by the spirit of Christ, and the moral sense, guided by a tender conscience, must and can, in particular cases, decide whether love itself does not command to act directly contrary to the letter of the precept, in order to act agreeably to its spirit.

3. The peculiar Christian command of love to enemies must, on the one hand, not be exaggerated, nor, on the other hand, thrown aside. The former is done when the fact is overlooked that even heathen philosophers have given the most striking hints in this respect; see Tholuck on the passage. The other takes place when it is forgotten that the ground, impulse, form, measure, and ideal of this love, in the Christian sphere, are something entirely different from what they are in the extra-Christian sphere.

4. This whole pericope of the Sermon on the Mount is important for the answer of the question, how far the Saviour required an entirely pure love (Amour pur in the sense of Fénélon), or whether He has encouraged a respect to the reward promised to obedience. That He would never command a desire of reward, as the essential principle, hardly needs to be suggested; and quite as little, that genuine Christian effort does not seek its reward without, but within, itself. On the other hand, however, we see that He adds the incitement of the love of reward as a counterpoise to so many things that might be able to depress zeal and obedience. The question, Mat_19:27, although placed upon a legal position, is not of itself anti-Christian.

5. The exalted excellence of the Christian ethics comes convincingly into view when we compare its highest requirement, Likeness to God in love, with what heathen philosophers have given as the highest precept.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Love to enemies: 1. A human virtue, 2. a Christian virtue, 3. a Divine virtue.—Love to enemies: 1. A severe conflict, 2. its noble trial, 3. its glorious crown.—The vengeance of love: 1. Its fervor, 2. its loveliness.—The invincible might of voluntary defencelessness.—Better suffer wrong than do wrong.—The relation of Christian love of our neighbor to befitting self-love.—The ordinary in the life of man, the extraordinary in the life of a Christian.—Whoever, in a Christian sphere, only does what is common, has no extraordinary reward to expect.—The love of sinners to each other, and of nominal Christians, compared with one another: 1. Often the former is even greater; 2. often both are like; 3. the latter must always rise above the former.—The Christian a follower of God as a dear child, Eph_5:1.—What God is, Christ’s disciples must become.—Regard to reward in the Christian sphere: 1. How far is it permitted, 2. how far not permitted.—Compared with the goodness of God, all are unthankful and evil.—Compassion that which is divinest in God and in man.—The judicial function, as exercised by pride and by love.—Even the righteous receive reward here below.—The disciple of the Saviour before a threefold judgment, before that: 1. Of his conscience, 2. of his neighbor, 3. of the Lord. Comp. 1Co_4:4.—God’s righteousness keeps measure, but God’s love is immeasurably rich. “It gives for a penny more than ten thousand pounds, for a peck more than a hundred thousand bushels, for a little drop of comfort to my neighbor whole streams of refreshments; for a little tear, shed from love to Jesus, a whole sea of blessedness; for brief temporal suffering an everlasting and far more exceeding weight of glory.” Brast-berger.

Starke:—Be ashamed, ye scoffers, that pretend that the gospel teaches nothing concerning friendship: He who commands to love our enemies, presupposes that true friends are much more to be loved.—Hedinger:—In all wrong suffered we must leave room for the wrath of God, Rom_12:19.—A Christian heart is easily entreated, and willingly assumes the necessities of the saints.—Nova Bibl. Tub.:—Better is it to lose land and goods, and to let all go, than to suffer harm to the soul. Mat_16:26.—To love enemies and do them good, is the Christian’s art and test.—Osiander:—An honest man seeks his own, but a Christian Jesus Christ’s.—A bought or bartered love is no love of God that has reward.—Cramer:—Children of God have their Father’s temper, and do not let themselves be rebuffed by the unthankfulness of man from doing them good.—Nulla re sic colitur Deus, ut misericordia, Gregor. Nazianz.—Majus:—It is a desperate blindness, rather to rush upon Divine vengeance, than to show kindness and meekness towards our own brother.—Hedinger:—Be not angry if thou gettest back again just the coin which thou hast given out.—Why do others trouble thee? Look to thyself! Gal_6:1.—It ought not to go hard with love to give that which Divine truth promises to give back. Pro_19:17.—The Christian loses by liberality nothing, but gains very much. 2Co_8:10 Act_20:35.—To be parsimonious and niggardly it not the right way to become rich, but to be beneficent and free-handed is the way.—The jus talionis is with the righteousness of God fully in accord, and never fails. Therefore be warned, whosoever thou art. Jdg_1:7; 1Ki_21:19-24. Comp. 1Ki_22:38-39.

Ubber:—The Christian eye for human faults: 1. Strict against itself, 2. gentle towards its neighbor.—Ahlfeld on Luk_6:36 :—1. The source from which compassion springs; 2. the fields on which it brings forth its fruit; 3. the hindrances with which it wrestles.—Uhle:—How we are wont to demean ourselves: 1. Towards our neighbor’s faults; 2. in the case of suffering wrong from him; 3. in the case of his necessity being made known to us—Rautenberg:—The Divine compassion: 1. The type, 2. the ground, 3. the reward of our compassion.—Burke:—The love of compassion: 1. Who gives it? 2. How is it exercised? 3. Who rewards it?—Schmaltz:—Without self-conquest no true love.—Alt:—Who can constrain his enemies to esteem?—Stier:—Concerning the evil habit of judging others.—Van Oosterzee:—What do ye more than others? The Christian called to distinguish himself. This a requirement: 1. Whose scope is extensive; 2. the urging of which is legitimate: 3. the remembering is needful. On 1. The Saviour demands that His disciples should be more upright, more disinterested, more steadfast in good than others. On 2. The Christian must distinguish himself above others; he can do it, and, as history shows, he does it in fact. On 3. By this remembrance, Humility, Faith, Heavenly longing, is awakened.

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6:27 love your enemies! People were commonly taught in the ancient world to love their family and friends and hate their enemies. Jesus announced a radical new ethic of loving even one’s enemies and overcoming evil through self-sacrificial love for others, not through violence and hatred (cp. Rom 12:14-21).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Luk_6:27-28. Nevertheless, as far as concerns your conduct, those denunciations of woe are not to deter you, etc. Hence there is here no contrast destitute of point (Köstlin), although the sayings in Luk_6:27-36 are in Matthew more originally conceived and arranged (comp. Weiss in the Jahrb. f. d. Theol. 1864, p. 55 f.).

τοῖς ἀκούουσιν] to you who hear, i.e. who give heed, τοῖς πειθομένοις μου, Euthymius Zigabenus. This is required by the contrast. Moreover, comp. Mat_5:44.

καταρώμ.] with a dative, Hom. Od. xix. 330; Herod. iv. 184; Dem. 270. 20, 381. 15; Xen. Anab. vii. 7. 48. Elsewhere in the New Testament, in accordance with later usage (Wis_12:11; Sir_4:5 f.), with an accusative.

ἐπηρεάζειν] to afflict, is connected by the classical writers with τινί, also with τινός.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 6:27-35 . The law of love (Mat 5:38-48 ).

Luk 6:27 . ὑμῖν λέγω : Lk. here uses the phrase with which Mt. introduces each dictum of Jesus in opposition to the dicta of the scribes. But of the many dicta of the Lord reported in Mt. he has preserved only one, that relating to the duty of loving (Mat 5:44 ). The injunction to love enemies is much weakened in force by omission of the antithesis: love neighbours and hate enemies. As if to compensate Lk. gives the precept twice , (1) as a general head under which to collect sayings culled from the section of the discourse omitted (Mat 5:17-42 ), (2) as a protest against limiting love to those who love us (Luk 6:35 , cf. Luk 6:32 ). τοῖς ἀκούουσιν , to you who hear; a phrase by which the discourse is brought back to the actual audience from the rich and the false disciples apostrophised in the preceding verses. It is an editorial phrase. καλῶς ποιεῖτε , etc.: Lk., in contrast with Mt. (true text), enlarges here, as if to say: you must love in every conceivable case, even in connection with the most aggravated evil treatment. In the clause enjoining prayer for such as have done wrong Lk. substitutes ἐπηρεαζόντων (Luk 6:28 ) for Mt.’s διωκόντων = those who insult you, the people it is hardest to pray for. Persecution may be very fierce, at the prompting of conscience, yet respectful.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Christian charity, which differeth much from the worldly, doth not only not revenge injuries, but comprehended even our most grievous enemies, and that for our Father’s sake, which is in heaven: so far is it, from seeking its own profit in doing well.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

(See on Mat 5:44-48; Mat 7:12; and Mat 14:12-14.)

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

(27, 28) Love your enemies.—See Notes on Mat_5:44. It should be noted that the great command of the gospel is set forth in the Sermon on the Plain in its width and universality, without being formally contrasted with the Pharisaic gloss, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy,” as in the Sermon on the Mount.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

27. Love your enemies] This had been distinctly the spirit of the highest part of the Law and the Old Testament. Exo_23:4, “If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.” Pro_25:21, “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat.” Yet in many passages it had practically been said “to men of old time,” at any rate in some cases, “thou shalt hate thine enemy,” Deu_7:2; Deu_23:6; 1Ch_20:3; 2Sa_12:31; Psa_137:8-9, &c. On these passages the fierce fanaticism of the Pharisaic Jews, after the Exile, had so exclusively fed, that we find the Talmud ringing with precepts of hatred the most bitter against all Gentiles, and the ancients had, not unnaturally, been led to the conclusion that detestation of all but Jews was a part of the Jewish religion (“adversus omnes alios hostile odium,” Tac. Hist. v. 5; Juv. Sat. xiv. 103).

do good to them which hate you] See the precept beautifully enforced in Rom_12:17; Rom_12:19-21.

27-38. The Laws of Love and Mercy.

27-30. The manifestations of Love. 31. Its formula. 32-35. Its distinctiveness. 35-36. Its model. 37-45. Love as the principle of all judgment. Godet.]

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Bless them that curse you;.... In common discourse, or anathematize you in their synagogues:

and pray for them which despitefully use you: so Christ himself did; See Gill on Mat 5:44.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

Ver. 27. See Mat 5:44; Rom 12:20.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We met also with a passage much like this in this verse, Mat 5:39,40, the general sense of which was, as I then said, a prohibition of private revenge. It is therefore there prefaced in with a more general precept, Resist not evil. But besides this, there seems to be in it also a prohibition of vexatious suits and molestations of others, though under a colour of law; therefore Matthew saith, If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy cloak; and it may be thought a more special precept relating to those times, when they had none but heathen magistrates, and in some measure to be expounded by 1Co 6:7, and to be a precept given with respect to the reputation of the gospel, that it might not be scandalized by Christians going to law before infidels. It is most certain it doth not forbid the use of the law, whether for the defending or recovering our just rights, only the irregular or scandalous use of it. See Poole on "Mat 5:39".

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

27-38. Christian laws of conciliation and benevolence. Mat_5:38-48.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But I say to you that hear - Hitherto our Lord had spoken only to particular sorts of persons: now he begins speaking to all in general. Matt. v, 44.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The law of love:

v. 27. But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

v. 28. bless them that curse you,. and pray for them which despitefully use you.

v. 29. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.

v. 30. Give to every man that asketh of thee, and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

v. 31. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

There is a double contrast here: Jesus had Tittered His woes against various classes of people, but that would not give others a right to act in an arbitrary way, according to their own interpretation of the saying; He had addressed His disciples mainly, but now He purposely includes all those that heard His discourse. All that were within reach of His voice at that time, and all that are in a position to hear His words today, should observe the law of love toward their enemies. The contrast throughout emphasizes the point which Jesus wishes to make: To love, not friends, for there no urging is needed, but enemies; to do good, not to those that show us every form of kindness, for there the act of reciprocating is self-evident, but to those that hate us; to bless, not those that wish us well, for there we return the greetings as a matter of course, but those that heap imprecations and curses upon us; to pray, not for those whose kind solicitude surrounds us every day, for there the remembrance is almost matter-of-fact, but those that spread calumnies about us. Needless to say, these ethical precepts of Christ must themselves in turn be explained in the spirit of Christ, for He is the highest and best example. Some practical examples to illustrate the scope of the precepts: To the smiter of one cheek the other should be turned; from him that forcibly takes the tipper garment the lower should not be withheld; to him that asks we should give; what is taken by force we should cheerfully resign. To that extent will Christian meekness in individual cases go, and where no harm is done to others incidentally. For all of these rules must themselves be understood in the light of the Golden Rule: Just as ye wish that the people should act toward you, just so do ye act toward them. "The Savior gives a touchstone into the hands of His disciples, by which they might prove themselves as to whether their demeanor towards neighbors and enemies was in agreement with their duties. His utterance contains no principle, hut the touchstone of morality, since it refers only to an outer form of action. Where it is so used, we shall discover in it a plain, simple, universally applicable precept of the practical wisdom of life, fully fitted for the purpose for which the Savior has given it.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, 1. The noble spirit of Christianity, and the large extent of Christian charity; the Jewish kindess was limited and confined to those of their own religion, kindred, and nation, their charity began and ended at home; but our Saviour obliges his followers to the exercise of a more extensive charity, even to all mankind, even the worst of men, our enemies that seek our destruction. Christianity is so far from allowing us to persecute them that hate us, that it commands us to love them that persecute us.

Observe, 2. The nature and quality of the duty enjoined: Love your enemies: there the inward affection is required. Bless them that curse you: there outward civility and affability is required. Do good to them that hate you; here real acts of kindness and beneficence are required to be done to the worst of enemies, though they be guilty of the worst of crimes, calumny and cruelty; striking both at our reputation and our life.

Learn, that Christianity obliges us to bear a sincere love to our most malicious enemies, to be ready at all times to pray for them, and upon all occasions to do good unto them. Thus to do, is an imitation of God our maker of Christ our master: it is for the good of this lower world, and the way to a better; it is the ornament of our religion, and the perfection of our nature, and an high degree and pitch of virtue. To which may be added the next duty, Not to revenge injuries; where private revenge is the thing forbidden, and we are directed, rather to suffer a double wrong than to seek a private revenge.

Christianity obliges us to bear many injuries patiently, rather than to revenge one privately; we must leave the matter to God and the magistrate. The truth is, revenge is a very troublesome and vexatious passion, the man’s soul swells and boils, and is in pain and anguish, and has no ease. Besides, by our avenging of one injury, we necessarily draw on another, and so bring on a perpetual circulation of injuries and revenges; whereas forgiveness prevents vexation to others, disquietment to ourselves.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [XLII. D. Messianic and Traditional Teaching].

XLII. THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. (A Mountain Plateau not far from Capernaum.) Subdivision D. RELATION OF MESSIANIC TEACHING TO \line OLD TESTAMENT AND TRADITIONAL TEACHING. aMATT. V. 17-48; cLUKE VI. 27-30, 32-36.

a17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. [This verse constitutes a preface to the section of the sermon which follows it. It is intended to prevent a misconstruction of what he was about to say. Destroy is here used in antithesis, not with perpetuate, but with fulfill. To destroy the law would be more than to abrogate it, for it was both a system of statutes designed for the ends of government, and a system of types foreshadowing the kingdom of Christ. To destroy it, therefore, would be both to abrogate its statutes [235] and prevent the fulfillment of its types. The former, Jesus eventually did; the latter, he did not. As regards the prophets, the only way to destroy them would be to prevent the fulfillment of the predictions contained in them. Instead of coming to destroy either the law or the prophets, Jesus came to fulfill all the types of the former, and (eventually) all the unfulfilled predictions of the latter. He fulfills them partly in his own person, and partly by his administration of the affairs of his kingdom. The latter part of the process is still going on, and will be until the end of the world.] 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all things be accomplished. [The jot or yod answering to our letter i was the smallest of the Hebrew letters. The tittle was a little stroke of the pen, by which alone some of the Hebrew letters were distinguished from others like them. To put it in English, we distinguish the letter c from the letter e by the tittle inside of the latter. This passage not only teaches that the law was to remain in full force until fulfilled, but it shows the precise accuracy with which the law was given by God.] 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [Disobedience is a habit, and it is not easily laid aside. Hence he that is unfaithful in that which is little will also be unfaithful in that which is great. So also those who were disobedient and reckless under the Jewish dispensation would be inclined to act in like manner in the new, or Christian, dispensation: hence the warning. Not only shall God call such least, but men also shall eventually do likewise. Those who by a false system of interpretation, or an undue regard for the traditions of men, enervate or annul the obligations of Christ's laws or ordinances, and teach others to do the same, shall be held in low esteem or contempt by the church or kingdom of God as fast as it comes to a knowledge [236] of the truth. Greatness in the kingdom of heaven is measured by conscientiousness in reference to its least commandments. Small Christians obey the great commandments, but only the large are careful about the least.] 20 For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed i the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven. [Since the scribes and Pharisees were models of righteousness in their own sight and in that of the people, Jesus here laid down a very high ideal. Though one may now enter the kingdom of heaven having of himself far less righteousness than that of the Pharisees, yet he must attain righteousness superior to theirs, or he can not abide in the kingdom. A large portion of the sermon from this point on is a development of the righteousness of the kingdom of heaven in contrast with old dispensation righteousness and Pharisaic interpretation of it. The laws of Moses regulated civil conduct, and being state laws, they could only have regard to overt acts. But the laws of the kingdom of Christ are given to the individual, and regulate his inner spiritual condition, and the very initial motives of conduct; in it the spirit-feelings are all acts-- 1Jo_3:15.] 21 Ye have heard [ Exo_20:13, Deu_5:17. The common people, for the most part, knew the law only by its public reading, and hence the exposition of the scribes which accompanied the readings shared in their estimation the very authority of Scripture itself.] that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger [shall be liable to] of the judgment; 22 but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca [an expression of contempt frequently used in rabbinical writings, but of uncertain derivation, so that it may mean "empty head" or "spit out;" i. e., heretic], shall be in danger of the council: and whosoever shall say, Thou fool ["'Thou impious wretch;' folly and impiety being equivalent with the Hebrews"--Bloomfield], shall be in [237] danger of hell fire. [We have here three degrees of criminality or offence as to the sin of anger: 1. Silent rage; 2. Railing speech; 3. Bitter reproach ( Psa_14:1). With these are associated respectively three different degrees of punishment. The law of Moses provided for the appointment of judges ( Deu_16:18), and Josephus informs us that in each city there were seven judges appointed (Ant. iv. 8, 14). This tribunal was known as the judgment, and by it the case of the manslayer was determined. Compare Num_35:15, Num_35:24, Num_35:25, Jos_20:4. And in determining his case this court might certify it for decision to the Sanhedrin, or they might themselves confine the man in of the cities of refuge, or order him to be stoned to death. The second punishment would be the result of a trial before the Sanhedrin or council. This chief court of the Jews sat at Jerusalem ( Deu_17:8-13), and common men stood in great awe of it. The third punishment passes beyond the pale of human jurisdiction. It is the final punishment--being cast into hell. The Scripture word for hell is derived from the name of a place in the neighborhood of Jerusalem, called the valley of Hinnom. It was a deep, narrow valley, lying southeast of Jerusalem. The Greek word Gehenna (which we translate hell) is first found applied to it in the Septuagint translation of Jos_18:16. (For the history of the valley, see the following passages of Scripture: Jos_15:8, 2Ch_28:3, 2Ch_33:6, Jer_7:31, Jer_19:1-5, 2Ki_23:1-14, 2Ch_34:4, 2Ch_34:5.) The only fire certainly known to have been kindled there was the fire in which children were sacrificed to the god Moloch. This worship was entirely destroyed by King Josiah, who polluted the entire valley so as to make it an unfit place even for heathen worship. Some commentators endeavor to make this third punishment a temporal one, and assert that fires were kept burning in the valley of Hinnom, and that as an extreme punishment the bodies of criminals were cast into those fires. But there is not the slightest authentic evidence that any fire was kept burning there; nor is there any evidence at all that casting a criminal into the [238] fire was ever employed by the Jews as a punishment. It was the fire of idolatrous worship in the offering of human sacrifice which had given the valley its bad name. This caused it to be associated in the mind of the Jews with sin and suffering, and led to the application of its name, in the Greek form of it, to the place of final and eternal punishment. When the conception of such a place as hell was formed, it was necessary to give it a name, and there was no word in the Jewish language more appropriate for the purpose than the name of this hideous valley. It is often used in the New Testament, and always denotes the place of final punishment ( Mat_10:28, Mat_18:9, Mat_23:33, Mar_9:43). We should note that while sin has stages, God takes note of it from its very first germination in the heart, and that a man's soul is imperiled long before his feelings bear their fruitage of violence and murder.] 23 If therefore [having forbidden anger, Jesus now proceeds to lay down the course for reconciliation] thou art offering thy gift at the altar [that which was popularly esteemed the very highest act of worship], and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, 24; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. [Reconciliation takes precedence of all other duties, even of offerings made to God. A very important teaching in these days, when men, by corrupt practices, by extortionate combinations, and by grinding the face of the poor, accumulate millions of dollars and then attempt to placate God by bestowing a little of their pocket change upon colleges and missionary societies. God hears and heeds the voice of the unreconciled brethren, and the gift is bestowed upon the altar in vain. The offering of unclean hands is an abomination. The lesson teaches us to be reconciled with all who bear grudges against us, and says nothing as to whether their reasons are sufficient or insufficient, just or unjust. "It is enough to say, I have naught against him, and so justify myself"--Stier.] 25 Agree with thine adversary [opponent in a lawsuit] [239] quickly, while thou art with him in the way [on the road to the judge]; lest haply thy adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer [one answering somewhat to our sheriff], and thou be cast into prison. ["In this brief allegory one is supposed to have an adversary at law who has just cause against him, and who will certainly gain a verdict when the case comes into court. The plaintiff himself used to apprehend the defendant" (Bengel). The defendant is, therefore, advised to agree with this adversary while the two are alone on the way to the judge, and thus prevent a trial. Jesus still has in mind the preceding case of one who has given offence to his brother. Every such one is going to the final judgment, and will there be condemned unless he now becomes reconciled to his brother.] 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou have paid the last farthing. [This is the text on which the Roman Catholic Church has built its doctrine of purgatory, and one of those on which the Universalists build theirs of final restoration. But neither "prison" nor "till" necessarily point to ultimate deliverance. Compare 2Pe_2:4, Jud_1:6. The allusion here is of course to imprisonment for debt. In such a case the debtor was held until the debt was paid, either by himself or some friend. If it were not paid at all, he remained in prison until he died. In the case which this is made to represent, the offender would have let pass all opportunity to make reparation and no friend can make it for him; therefore, the last farthing will never be paid, and he must remain a prisoner forever. So far, therefore, from being a picture of hope, it is one which sets forth the inexorable rigor of divine justice against the hardened and impenitent sinner. It is intended to teach that men can not pay their debts to God, and therefore they had better obtain his forgiveness through faith during these days of grace. It exposes the vain hope of those who think that God will only lightly exact his debts. God knows only complete forgiveness or complete exaction. This is an action founded upon the perfection of his nature. The Greek word [240] translated "farthing," is derived from the Latin "quadrans," which equals the fourth part of a Roman As, a small copper or bronze coin which had become common in Palestine. The farthing was worth about one-fifth part of a cent.] 27 Ye have heard that it was said [ Exo_20:14, Deu_5:18], Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 but I say unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. [Here, as in reference to murder, Jesus legislates against the thought which lies back of the act. He cuts off sin at its lowest root. The essence of all vice is intention. Those who indulge in unchaste imaginations, desires and intentions are guilty before God-- 2Pe_2:14.] 29 And if thy right eye [the organ of reception] causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee [these words indicate decision and determination, and suggest the conduct of a surgeon, who, to protect the rest of the body, unflinchingly severs the gangrened members]: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell. 30 And if thy right hand [the instrument of outward action] causeth thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body go into hell. [Jesus here emphasizes the earnestness with which men should seek a sinless life. To this the whole Scripture constrains us by the terrors of hell, and encourages us by the joys of heaven. The right eye and hand and foot were regarded as the most precious ( Zec_11:17, Exo_29:20), but it is better to lose the dearest thing in life than to lose one's self. To be deprived of all earthly advantage than to be cast into hell. Of course the Saviour does not mean that we should apply this precept literally, since bodily mutilation will not cure sin which resides in the will and not in the organ of sense or action. A literal exaction of the demands of this precept would turn the church into a hospital. We should blind ourselves by taking care not to look with evil eyes; we should [241] maim ourselves by absolutely refusing to go to forbidden resorts, etc. "'Mortify' ( Col_3:5) is a similar expression"--Bengel.] 31 It is said also [ Deu_24:1, Deu_24:3], Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress [the mere fact of divorce did not make her an adulteress, but it brought her into a state of disgrace from which she invariably sought to free herself by contracting another marriage, and this other marriage to which her humiliating situation drove her made her an adulteress]: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery. [The law of divorce will be found at Deu_24:1-4. Jesus explains that this law was given by Moses on account of the hardness of the people's heart; i. e., to prevent greater evils ( Mat_19:8). The law permitted the husband to put away the wife when he found "some unseemly thing in her." But Jesus here limits the right of divorce to cases of unchastity, and if there be a divorce on any other ground, neither the man nor the woman can marry again without committing adultery ( Mat_19:9). Such is Jesus' modification of the Old Testament law, and in no part of the New Testament is there any relaxation as to the law here set forth. It is implied that divorce for unchastity breaks the marriage bond, and it is therefore held almost universally, both by commentators and moralists, that the innocent party to such a divorce can marry again. Of course the guilty part could not, for no one is allowed by law to reap the benefits of his own wrong. For further light on the subject, see Rom_7:1-3, 1Co_7:10-16, 1Co_7:39. It is much to be regretted that in many Protestant countries the civil authorities have practically set aside this law of Christ by allowing divorce and remarriage for a variety of causes. No man who respects the authority of Christ can take advantage of such legislation.] 33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform [242] unto the Lord thine oaths [ Lev_19:12, Num_30:2, Deu_23:21]: 34 but I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is the throne of God; 35 nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. [ Psa_48:2.] 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your speech be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil i one. [It will be seen from the quotation given by Jesus that the law permitted oaths made unto the Lord. It was not the intention of Jesus to repeal this law. But the Jews, looking upon this law, construed it as giving them exemption from the binding effect of all other oaths. According to the their construction no oath was binding in which the sacred name of God did not directly occur. They therefore coined many other oaths to suit their purposes, which would add weight to their statements or promises, which, however, would not leave them guilty of being forsworn if they spoke untruthfully. But Jesus showed that all oaths were ultimately referable to God, and that those who made them would be forsworn if they did not keep them. To prevent this evil practice of loose swearing Jesus lays down the prohibition, "Swear not at all;" but the universality of this prohibition is distributed by the specifications of these four forms of oaths, and is, therefore, most strictly interpreted as including only such oaths. Jesus surely did not intend to abolish now, in advance of the general abrogation of the law, those statutes of Moses which allowed, and in some instances required, the administration of an oath. See Exo_22:11, Num_5:19. What we style the judicial oaths of the law of Moses then were not included in the prohibition. This conclusion is also reached when we interpret the prohibition in the light of authoritative examples; for we find that God swore by himself ( Gen_22:16, Gen_22:17, Heb_6:13, Heb_7:21). Jesus answered under oath before the Sanhedrin ( Mat_26:63), and Paul also made oath to the Corinthian church ( 2Co_1:23). See also Rom_1:9, Gal_1:20, Phi_1:8, 1Co_15:31, Rev_10:5, Rev_10:6. We conclude, then, that judicial oaths, and oaths taken in the name of God on occasions of solemn religious importance, are not included in the prohibition. But as these are the only exceptions found in Scriptures, we conclude that all other oaths are forbidden. Looking at the details of the paragraph, we find that oaths by heaven and by the earth, by Jerusalem and by the head, are utterly meaningless save as they have reference to God. "Swearing is a sin whereunto neither profit incites, nor pleasure allures, nor necessity compels, nor inclination of nature persuades"--Quarles.] 38 Ye have heard that it was said [ Exo_21:24, Lev_24:20, Deu_19:21], An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 but I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil [The lex talionis, or law of like for like, was the best possible rule in a rude state of society, its object being not to sacrifice the second eye, but to save both, by causing a man when in a passion to realize that every injury which he inflicted upon his adversary he would in the end inflict upon himself. From this rule the scribes drew the false inference that revenge was proper, and that a man was entitled to exercise it. Thus a law intended to prevent revenge was so perverted that it was used as a warrant for it. This command which enjoins non-resistance, like most of the other precepts of this sermon, does not demand of us absolute, unqualified pacivity at all times and under all circumstances. In fact, we may say generally of the whole sermon on the mount that it is not a code for slaves, but an assertion of principles which are to be interpreted and applied by the children of freedom. We are to submit to evil for principle's sake and to accomplish spiritual victories, and not in an abject, servile spirit as blind followers of a harsh and exacting law. On the contrary, taking the principle, we judge when and how to apply it as best we can. Absolute non-resistance may so far encourage crime as to become a sin. As in the case of the precept about swearing just above, Jesus distributes the universal prohibition by the specification of certain examples, which in this case are three in number]: but [244] whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. [This first example is taken from the realm of physical violence. The example given, a slap in the face, has been regarded as a gross insult in all ages, but it is not an assault which imperils life. We find this precept illustrated by the conduct of the Master himself. He did not literally turn the other cheek to be smitten, but he breathed forth a mild and gentle reproof where he might have avenged himself by the sudden death of his adversary ( Joh_18:22, Joh_18:23). The example of Paul also is given, but it is not so perfect as that of the Master ( Act_23:2-5). Self-preservation is a law of God giving rights which, under most circumstances, a Christian can claim. He may resist the robber, the assassin and all men of that ilk, and may protect his person and his possessions against the assaults of the violent and lawless ( Act_16:35-39). But when the honor of Christ and the salvation of man demands it, he should observe this commandment even unto the very letter.] 40 And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. [This second case is one of judicial injustice, and teaches that the most annoying exactions are to be endured without revenge. The coat was the inner garment, and the cloak was the outer or more costly one. The creditor was not allowed to retain it over night, even when it was given to him as a pledge from the poor, because it was used for a bed-covering ( Exo_22:26, Exo_22:27). The idea therefore is, "Be ready to give up even that which by law can not be taken" (Mansel). This case, as the one just above, is also an instance of petty persecution, and shows that the command does not forbid a righteous appeal to the law in cases where large and important interests are involved.] 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile [the Roman mile; it was 142 yards short of the English mile], go with him two. [This third instance is a case of governmental oppression. It supposes a man to be impressed by government officials to go a mile. The custom alluded to is said to have originated with Cyrus, king of Persia, and it [245] empowered a government courier to impress both men and horses to help him forward. For an example of governmental impress, see Luk_23:26. The exercise of this power by the Romans was exceedingly distasteful to Jews, and this circumstance gave a special pertinency to the Saviour's mention of it. (See Herodotus viii. 98; Xen. Cyrop. viii. 6, 7; Jos. Ant. xiii. 2, 3.) The command, "Go with him two," requires a cheerful compliance with the demands of a tyrannical government--a doubling of the hardship or duty required rather than a resistance to the demand. But here again the oppression is not an insupportable one. A man might go two miles and yet not lose his whole day's labor. The Saviour chooses these lesser evils because they bring out more distinctly the motives of conduct. If we resist the smaller evils of life, we thereby manifest a spirit of pride seeking revenge; but when the larger evils come upon us, they waken other motives. A man may strive for self-protection when life is threatened without any spirit of revenge. He may appeal to the law to protect his property without any bitterness toward the one who seeks to wrest it from him, and he may set himself against the oppression of his government from the loftiest motives of patriotism. If revenge slumbers in our breast, little injuries will waken it as quickly as big ones.] 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. [Jesus here turns from the negative to the positive side of life. Our conduct, instead of being selfish and revengeful, should be generous and liberal. A benevolent disposition casts out revenge as light does darkness. No lending was provided for by the law of Moses except for benevolent purposes, for no interest was allowed, and all debts were canceled every seventh year. The giving and lending referred to, then, are limited to cases of real want, and the amount given or loaned is to be regulated accordingly. Giving or lending to the encouragement of vice or indolence can not, of course, be here included. Good actions are marred if they bear evil fruit.] 43 Ye have heard that it was said [ Lev_19:18], [246] Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy: 44 but I say unto you, cthat hear, Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you 28 bless them that curse you [ 1Co_4:12], aand pray for them that persecute you; cthat despitefully use you. [The law commanding love will be found at Lev_19:18, while the sentiment "hate thy enemy" is not found in the law as a precept. But the Jews were forbidden by law to make peace with the Canaanites ( Exo_34:11-16, Deu_7:2, Deu_23:6), and the bloody wars which were waged by God's own command inevitably taught them to hate them. This was the feeling of their most pious men ( 1Ch_20:3, 2Ki_13:19), and it found utterance even in their devotional hymns; e. g., Psa_137:8, Psa_137:9, Psa_139:21, Psa_139:22. It is a true representation of the law, therefore, in its practical working, that it taught hatred of one's enemies. This is one of the defects of the Jewish dispensation, which, like the privilege of divorce at will, was to endure but for a time. To love an enemy has appeared to many persons impossible, because they understand the word "love" as here expressing the same feeling in all respects which are entertained toward a friend or a near kinsman. But love has many shades and degrees. The exact phase of it which is here enjoined is best understood in the light of examples. The parable of the good Samaritan is given by Jesus for the express purpose of exemplifying it ( Luk_10:35-37); his own example in praying on the cross for those who crucified him serves the same purpose, as does also the prayer of Stephen made in imitation of it ( Luk_23:34, Act_7:60). The feeling which enables us to deal with an enemy after the manner of the Samaritan, or Jesus, or Stephen, is the love for our enemies which is here enjoined. It is by no means an impossible feeling. Prayer, too, can always express it, for as Hooker says, "Prayer is that which we always have in our power to bestow, and they never in theirs to refuse."] a45 that ye may be sons of your Father who is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on [247] the just and the unjust. [Jesus here gives two reasons why we should obey this precept: 1. That we may be like God; 2. That we may be unlike publicans and sinners. Of course right action towards our enemies does not make us sons of God, but it proves us such by showing our resemblance to him. We are made children of God by regeneration. God, in his daily conduct toward the children of this earth, does not carry his discrimination to any great length. Needful blessings are bestowed lavishly upon all.] c29 To him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and from him that taketh away thy cloak withhold not thy coat also. 30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. [The teaching of this passage has been explained above. It is repeated because of its difference in verbiage, and because its position here illustrates the spirit of the verses which precede it.] a46 For c32 And if ye love them that love you, what thank areward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? cfor even sinners love those that love them. 33 And if ye do good to them that do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do the same? [The Roman publican proper was a wealthy man of the knightly order, who purchased from the state the privilege of collecting the taxes, but the publicans mentioned in the Scripture were their servants--the men who actually collected the taxes, and the official name for them was portitores. These latter were sometimes freedmen or slaves, and sometimes natives of the province in which the tax was collected. The fact that the Jews were a conquered people, paying tax to a foreign power, made the tax itself odious, and hence the men through whom it was extorted from them were equally odious. These men were regarded in the double aspect of oppressors and traitors. The odium thus attached to the office prevented men who had any regard for the good opinion of their countrymen from accepting it, and left it in the hands of those who had no self-respect and no reputation. Jesus teaches that our religion is [248] worth little if it begets in us no higher love than that which is shown by natural, worldly men. "Christianity is more than humanity"--M. Henry.] 34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. 35 But love your enemies, and do i them good [ Exo_23:4, Pro_24:17, Rom_12:17, Rom_12:19-21], and lend, never despairing; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be sons of the Most High: for he is kind toward the unthankful and evil. ["To make our neighbor purchase, in any way, the assistance which we give him is to profit by his misery; and, by laying him under obligations which we expect him in some way or other to discharge, we increase his wretchedness under the pretense of relieving him"--Clarke.] a47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the Gentiles the same? [The Jews despised the Gentiles, so that they did not usually salute them. This was especially true of the Pharisees. The morality, therefore, of this sect proved to be, in this respect, no better than that of the heathen. Salutation has always been an important feature in Eastern social life. The salutation, with all its accompaniments, recognized the one saluted as a friend.] c36 Be ye merciful, even as your Father is merciful. a48 Ye therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. [Luke emphasizes the particular characteristic of God's perfection which Jesus has been discussing; namely, mercy; but Matthew records the broader assertion which bids us resemble God's perfections in all their fullness and universality. God is our model. Everything short of that is short of what we ought to be. God can not be satisfied with that which is imperfect. This requirement keeps us in mind of our infirmities, and keeps us at work. Like Paul, we must be ever striving ( Phi_3:12). Our standard is not the perfection of great and heroic men, but of the infinite Creator himself.] [249]

[FFG 235-249]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

27–36. Love your enemies. These precepts are found in 1 in their connection. See notes there.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Jesus continues to speak to his disciples and the crowd who is listening to him as well.

to you who are listening

Jesus now begins to speak to the entire crowd, rather than just to his disciples. (See: Introduction of New and Old Participants)

love ... do good ... Bless ... pray

Each of these commands is to be followed continually, not just a single time.

love your enemies

This does not mean they were to only love their enemies and not their friends. This can be stated. AT: "Love your enemies, not only your friends" (See: Ellipsis)

love ... do good to

These two phrases mean the same thing, and together emphasize the point. (See: Doublet)

Bless those

God is the one who blesses. This can made explicit. AT: "Ask God to bless those" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

those who curse you

"those who habitually curse you"

those who mistreat you

"those who habitually mistreat you"

translationWords

love

adversary

bless

curse

pray

wrong

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

27–38. THE LAWS OF LOVE AND MERCY

[27–30. The manifestations of Love. 31. Its formula. 32–35. Its distinctiveness. 35–36. Its model. 37–45. Love as the principle of all judgment. Godet.]

27. τοῖς ἀκούουσιν. ‘To you who (really) hear.’ Euthymius Zigabenus paraphrases it τοῖς πειθομένοις μου.

ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν. This had been distinctly the spirit of the highest part of the Law and the Old Testament. Exo 23:4, “If thou meet thine enemy’s ox or ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.” Pro 25:21, “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat.” Yet in many passages it had practically been said “to men of old time,” at any rate in some cases, “thou shalt hate thine enemy,” Deu 7:2; Deu 23:6; 1Ch 20:3; 2Sa 12:31; Psa 137:8-9, &c. On these passages the fierce fanaticism of the Pharisaic Jews, after the Exile, had so exclusively fed, that we find the Talmud ringing with precepts of the most bitter hatred against all Gentiles, and the ancients had, not unnaturally, been led to the conclusion that detestation of all but Jews was a part of the Jewish religion (“adversus omnes alios hostile odium,” Tac. Hist. Luk 6:5; Juv. Sat. XIV. 103).

καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς. See the precept beautifully enforced in Rom 12:17; Rom 12:19-21.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

27-30. 39-42. 43-46. 16-21.

27-45. Requirement: the Duties to be performed by those who are admitted to the Kingdom of God. This forms the main body of the discourse. Lk. omits the greater portion of what is reported in Mt. respecting Christ’s relation to the Mosaic Law (5:17-19), and His condemnation of existing methods of interpreting it (5:20-48) and of fulfilling it (6:1-18). This discussion of Judaic principles and practices would not have much meaning for Lk.’s Gentile readers. The portion of it which he gives is stated without reference to Judaism. The main point in Mt. is the contrast between legal righteousness and true righteousness. In Lk. the main point is that true righteousness is love; but the opposition between formalism and the spirit of love is not urged. The opposition which is here marked is the more universal opposition between the spirit of selfishness and the spirit of love. There is a break in this main portion, which Lk. marks by making a fresh start, Εἶπεν δὲ καὶ παραβολὴν αὐτοῖς, but the second half (39-45) continues the subject of the working of the principle of love.

27. Ἀλλά. What is the contrast which this ἀλλά marks? The emphatic position of the ὑμῖν seems to show that the contrast is between those on whom the Woes have been pronounced and the faithful hearers now addressed. Others interpret, “But, although I have denounced them, I do not allow you to to them: you must love them.” There is, however, no indication that the enemies who are to be loved are the wealthy who have just been denounced, and such a limitation of the meaning of enemies cannot be justified: comp. Mat 5:44.

τοῖς ἀκούουσιν. “Who give ear and obey,” τοῖς πειθομένοις (Euthym.). It is unnatural to take it literally as meaning “My audience,” in contrast to the rich who have just been addressed in their absence. Representatives of the rich may have been present among the audience. Schanz interprets “who listen with attention.”

There is on the whole a double climax in what follows,—the worse the treatment received, the better the return made; but it is not quite exact. One would expect that ἀγαπᾶτε would be coupled with τοῦς μυσοῦντας. This is the first time that Lk. uses the word ἀγαπᾷν, which sums up the whole spirit of the Gospel: it is most frequent in the writings of Jn. “It should never be forgotten that ἀγάπη is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion: it occurs in the Septuagint; but there is no example of its use in any heathen writer whatever” (Trench, Syn. xii.). This is not true of ἀγαπᾷν and ἀγαπάζειν, which are common in class. Grk. But Christianity has ennobled the meaning of both ἀγαπᾷν and φιλεῖν, with their cognates: ἐρᾷν, which is scarcely Capable of such advancement, does not occur in N.T. See on 11:42, the only place where ἀγάπη occurs in Lk. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 198.

τοὺς ἐχθρούς. For the combination with τοῖς μισοῦσιν comp. 1:71; Psa 18:18, 106:10; and for the fourfold description of enmity comp. ver. 22. In Mat 5:44 we have only enemies and persecutors according to the best texts; and as καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοὺς μις. ὑμᾶς (note the acc.) is not genuine there, this is the only passage in which καλῶς ποιεῖς ποιεῖν = “benefit, do good to”: comp. καλῶς εἰπεῖν (ver. 26), and contrast Mat 12:12; Mar 7:37; Act 10:33; 1Co 7:37, 1Co 7:38; Php 4:14; Jas 2:8, Jas 2:19; 2Pe 1:19; 3Jn 1:6.—τοῖς μισοῦσιν. For the dat. comp. τοῖς προφήταις (ver. 23) and τοῖς ψευδοπροφήταις (ver. 26). See the expansion of this principle Rom 12:17-21; 1Th 5:15; 1Pe 3:9. Comp. Exo 23:4; Job 21:29; Pro 17:5, Pro 24:17, Pro 25:21. See detached note on the relation of Rom. 12-14 to the Gospels at the end of Rom_13.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Which hear. With the sense of hearing in order to heed : giving heed. Compare Mt 11:15.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.