Tomorrow's Sermon

I will share some of the thinking that comes out of our "Living the Questions" group on Sunday evenings.Keep in mind, these thoughts are just something for us to think about.  They are not written in stone.

Be Reconciled

February 16, 2014

Matthew 5:21–37

Let me begin by sharing our scripture lesson this morning.  Our passage for today continues the Sermon on the Mount. At the end of the previous passage listeners were told their righteousness should exceed that of scribes and Pharisees

In verses 21–22 and 27–28 we find this repeating pattern: “You have heard that it was said…but I say to you….” Jesus contradicted many of the sayings considered the law in his day.  He enlarged upon those commandments to eliminate any chance of someone bending them to serve their own purposes.

²¹ “You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ ²² But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire. ²³ So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, ²⁴ leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift. ²⁵ Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are on the way to court with him, or your accuser may hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison. ²⁶ Truly I tell you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

The first “but I say to you” addresses the commandment not to murder and tells us a higher righteousness demands us to look at what underlies an act of murder—anger. It then looks at how anger affects different relational situations. The severity of the situations progresses and so does the severity of the consequences. To be angry with a brother or sister leads to a judge; to insult leads to the council; and to say “you fool” (even worse offensive language) leads to final judgment. Instead of letting anger control our relationships, we should focus on reconciling with our brother or sister.

Many parts of these pronouncements found in scripture and attributed to Jesus come from the early Christian community. We have to remember that no one followed Jesus around writing down his sayings. Only 5% of people of that ancient culture were literate enough to write and they were the aristocracy. The people of that day had to depend on their memories and the later writers were dependent on that oral tradition. Some of this verse, therefore is doubtful as coming from Jesus but verse 25 and verse 26 almost certainly came from the sayings of Jesus and very probably verses 22 to 25 also came from Jesus in some form although scholars believe the early Christian movement certainly embellished and enlarged upon his words for their community. 

²⁷ “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ ²⁸ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. ²⁹ If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. ³⁰ And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to go into hell.^]

The second “but I say to you” then deals with committing adultery and tells us one should not even look with lust at a woman. This is followed by some harsh sayings indicating the seriousness of this teaching. It is not just about what one does, it is about what one may be intending to do in one’s mind. Again, a higher righteousness is expected.

³¹ “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ ³² But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Jesus is credited with some council against divorce in at least three other early independent sources that prohibit divorce under any circumstances. Matthew, in this verse, allows divorce for infidelity. Since the other three sources categorically prohibited divorce, it is believed this exception may have been a softening of the injunction and therefore be the work of the early Christian community. 

This third “but I say to you” dealt with the way divorce was handled in that culture. After the “but I say to you” we are informed that only if unchastity was involved should divorce be allowed. There were two schools of thought on this. One school allowed a large variety of factors to lead to permission for divorce, such as a woman being a bad cook or talking too much. The other allowed divorce only in the case of unchastity, which Matthew states was Jesus’ interpretation. And as only a man could divorce a woman in that culture, we do not find the reverse situation even addressed.

³³ “Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord.’ ³⁴ But I say to you, do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, ³⁵ or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of God. ³⁶ And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. ³⁷ Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one.

This fourth “but I say” deals with use of oaths and again addresses interpersonal relationships. Jesus said a person’s “yes” or “no” should be enough for us. We bring the integrity of the other person in question if we require some sort of oath. These ethical explanations point to a higher righteousness, to right relationships.

What was also attributed to Jesus is found in this admonition in James:

Above all, my friends, don’t swear by heaven or by the earth, or take any other oath. Your “yes” is to be a simple “yes” and your “no” a simple “no”. Otherwise you may be subject to trial. 

So scholars believe fragments of verses 34-35 and 37 may be original with Jesus. While the balance of the formulations in 33 to 37, may be the work of Matthew and James for the primitive Christian community. .

In verses 21–22 and 27–28 we find this repeating pattern: “You have heard that it was said…but I say to you….”

With each of these, elaborations on Jesus’ teachings follow. The teachings deal with interactions among people of that day. Matthew shares these examples so his listeners can understand how being a Christian is different from what they were before. Some think the text may say—here is how we are different from the church across the street. There was a lot of variation in the early Christian movement. .

What follows each “but” reflects the new way of life people are called to live in the kingdom of God.

So, as followers of Jesus, we too should adhere to a higher righteousness.  Now often we fail… but we should always attempt to make good decisions and live as good a life as we possibly can.  

In everything we do, respect for the other person should be most important. We should treat others as if we see God in them and not view them as objects or things. What is more important is to avoid the things that may damage our relationships with others.

So what does it mean that our righteousness must exceed that of very religious people?

Some of the very “religious” people in the world have begun some of the most disastrous wars in history.  Let us ask ourselves…what do we hear from our culture about the way anger should be handled, sexual desire, the marital covenant, and the acceptance of the integrity of the other person?

Our culture very often does not live up to the commandments of Jesus, does it? The culture changes….sometimes for the best but many times the culture chooses an easy way instead of the ways Jesus taught. Let us also ask ourselves what we think Jesus would say to us during this worship service about these things? 

Undoubtedly Jesus’ message would be different in some ways from the message he brought into his own culture. It was a completely different culture from ours.  His culture was limited in many ways because they lived under the Roman domination system. One had to be very careful not to offend the Romans or even the heads of their religion. Dire consequences could happen.  And in his culture an entire segment of their population was considered untouchable and even unapproachable. Even the simplest skin problem was considered leprosy and that person was segregated from the general population and reduced to begging at the gate of the town. 

. 

Women were also generally segregated.  They were to lower their eyes when approached by a strange man. They generally were to stay in the home. They went to the village well at just certain times of the day so they would not encounter a strange man.  Children, as well as women were considered the personal property of the father and could be sold or given away at the father’s will.  

So Jesus’ message would probably be adapted some to address our culture and the problems we encounter in it…large problems like drugs and promiscuity. But there are also other simpler occasions for us to recall the teachings of Jesus.

Once years ago, I was working with Karan. I was selling advertising and she was writing the copy for the sales department.  Sometimes she changed the copy the client had written to make it sound better on the air. The client had complained to me about that. That annoyed me. When I brought the copy notes in to Karan, I gave her specific instructions not to change a word of it. How I handled it was not politely though. We had words and I stomped off down the hall.  After I reached my office, I terrible felt pangs of guilt and regret. Karan was one of my dearest friends. I quickly jumped up to go back to apologize. I met her in the hall, coming to apologize herself. We hugged and forgave one another right there.  That is the type of problem we often encounter in our everyday lives and how we handle those incidents makes all the difference in the world in how smoothly our lives go. 

But basically, as we see, the teachings of Jesus are still very relevant to us today. His message was all about interpersonal relationships and how we should treat one another and we are also concerned about those relationships in our world.    His message was about using reconciliation rather then hostility to settle differences in our relationships. 

The world would be a much more peaceful place to live if we would use his instruction to handle not only our personal interpersonal relationships but also our international relationships.  War solves nothing. There are peaceful solutions to every confrontation. We simply need to work harder to make peace. Making peace is seldom easy but it is certainly preferable to making war where thousands of innocent people die.  One of the most infamous struggles for peace occurred in South Africa during days of apartheid.  This racially divided country struggled for years with war and killings.  The struggle included the prolonged imprisonment of Nelson Mandella, who had fought for years against this terrible law.  When he was finally released, and apartheid was finally abolished, he recommended a Truth and Reconciliation Committee be formed with Bishop Desmond Tutu as the chairman. . 

The Truth and Reconciliation Committee’s emphasis on reconciliation is in sharp contrast to the approach taken by the Nuremberg trials after World War II and other de-Nazification measures. Because of the perceived success^] of the reconciliatory approach in dealing with human-rights violations after political change either from internal or external factors, other countries have instituted similar commissions, though not always with the same scope or the allowance for charging those currently in power. The success of the "Truth and Reconciliation Committee’s method" versus the "Nuremberg method" of prosecution is open for debate.

In a survey study by Jay and Erika Vora, the effectiveness of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was measured on a variety of levels, namely its usefulness in terms of bringing out the truth of what had happened during the apartheid regime, the feelings of reconciliation that could be linked to the Commission, and the positive effects both domestically and internationally that the Commission brought about in a variety of ways from the political environment of South Africa to the economic one. 

All participants perceived the Truth and Reconciliation Committee to be effective in bringing out the truth, however, in varying degrees. 

Those who committed atrocities were required to confess to their crimes and then  received amnesty. Even such blatant human rights abuses could be solved peacefully although it took years to do so.  

Jesus was definitely a dissident in his world. He was not satisfied with the status quo of the Roman domination system and the collaboration of the religious leaders of his society. But he was a peaceful dissident. He and his disciples did not take up arms against the Romans. He taught ways of reconciling members of his society and here in our scripture lesson he admonished those around him and those who followed him to reconcile their differences peacefully and to deal peacefully and carefully with their Roman oppressors. 

We all should certainly follow his teachings in order to make our world a more peaceful and just world.

It can be done. It takes work and dedication but peace can happen through reconciliation.