# 21: 3-13-18 1

Matthew 5:27-37

Jesus has begun to show His Jewish listeners the true extent of the Law of Moses - it addresses not only the
actions of the body, but the inner motives and intents of the heart.

The Jews, who may have considered external conformance to the Law a possibility, would find it
impossible to keep the spirit of the Law - which is the full expression of the will of God.

Why isn’t it possible for men to truly keep the Law? Because of the lawlessness with which all men are
born - their rebellious natural desire to have their own will over their Creator’s will.

The Law was intended by God to reveal this to the Jews, yet they still sought to keep the Law as a means of
justifying themselves, before God. So Jesus is bringing up example after example from the Law, to drive
home to the Jews the impossibility of them truly keeping it.

The first example that Jesus chose from the Law was murder (5:21). Although most of the Jews could
attest to the fact that they had not murdered anyone, few could say that they had never been angry without
cause; or insulted their fellow man (5:22).

And how many could lay claim to nobody having anything at all against them (5:23-24)? Surely they had
offended someone - hasn’t everyone?

But if they were planning to seek acceptance by God based on their keeping of the Law, they must keep all
of it - every jot and tittle. They could not fail on one point.

Jesus evoked the image of the heavenly court - in which God will be their Judge (5:22, 25-26). Any
infraction of the Law will result in God’s judgment and condemnation - which Jesus made clear will be
punishment in the fires of hell.

As Jesus summed it up, He instead suggested that the Jews agree with their adversary quickly (5:25). That
adversary is their legal opponent - Jesus meant this to represent the Law.

The Law is the Jew’s adversary, if they are trying to be made righteous by it; it will condemn them, instead
(Rm 7:10). But if they will agree with the Law - which is showing them they are sinners - then the Law
will lead them to the One who had come to fulfill the Law on their behalf, and He give them His
righteousness - their Messiah, Jesus (Rm 10:4).

As Jesus continues, He moves into another area of the Law. We continue in verse 27.

[Matthew 5:27-30]

Here we find Jesus introducing another commandment from the Law of Moses with the phrase “You have
heard it said to those of old” - meaning, from the beginning, this is what the Law declared.

Like the commandment against murder (5:21), this one - the seventh, against adultery - is found in the
original ten commandments given to Moses for Israel, which provide a kind of summary of the LORD’s
righteous requirements - toward God and toward man.
# 21: 3-13-18 2

Once again, we then find that Jesus qualifies the commandment with the expression, “But I say to you”.
This does not mean that Jesus was changing the Law; instead, Jesus was explaining it, to His Jewish
listeners - explaining the fullness of what it means, to not commit adultery.

So what is adultery? We would say that it is sexual infidelity in a marriage; sexual relations between a
married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.

But the Law of Moses was more specific than that. Adultery referred to sexual relations between a married
woman and any man who was not her husband; or to sexual relations between a married man and another
man’s wife or betrothed.

Can you see that there was a difference between how the Law applied to the married man and the married
woman? The married woman was an adulteress if she had relations with any other man; the married man
was an adulterer only if those relations were with another married woman, or engaged woman. Nothing is
said in the law of adultery about the married man and other women who are, what we would call, single.

Why is that? Doesn’t God consider men and women equal, before Him? Yes, He does. He created male
and female equal, in a single act of creation (Gen 1:27); they were blessed in the same blessing, and both
were equally given dominion, as co-regents under God over His earth (1:28).

But then what happened? Sin entered the world, with its lusts and desires for self. Men, with their superior
physical strength over women, began to dominate - in relationships, and in societies.

By the time the Law was given, polygamy, slavery and prostitution were well established in many cultures,
including that of Israel. Men were permitted more than one wife; female slaves were considered as
property; prostitution, a business transaction.

The LORD did not overturn the social inequalities that mankind had brought upon themselves through sin -
this is where their freedom of choice had taken them. But through the Law that He gave to His nation
Israel, the LORD affirmed His judgment of adultery as sin, with equal consequences to both the man and the
woman who have committed it.

We find the consequence in Leviticus chapter 20.

[Leviticus 20:10] The fact that the man is “committing adultery” confirms he is a married man. Notice
that the woman involved is specifically a married woman.

The married man who had sexual relations with an unmarried woman, depending on the circumstance,
might be considered a fornicator, but not an adulterer. Both the married man and the married woman who
committed adultery were treated equally, under the Law of Moses; they were to be put to death; surely;
without question.

We have one more detail to look at. Turn to Deuteronomy chapter 22.

[Deuteronomy 22:22] Although the term “adultery” is not used here, we know from the previous passage
that this would be a married man. Notice that the man “is found” lying with the married woman; that is to
say, they were discovered by others, who then became legal witnesses. Both the man and the woman were
to be put to death - and notice the comment, about this: “so you shall put away the evil from Israel”.
# 21: 3-13-18 3

Adultery is a great evil, to a society; why? Because it destroys the bond of marriage; and marriage is the
foundation for the family; and the family is the building block of a society. Adultery therefore destabilizes
society; and left unchecked, it will destroy it.

Although the means of execution is not specifically stated in the Law, the case of the adulterous woman
recorded in John’s gospel suggests that execution was by stoning (Jn 8:5), by the people of the land; that is,
the congregation of Israel. This was a common means of execution for heinous sexual sins (Deut 22:21,
24).

But it was not to be a matter of mob justice; just like for murder, the judges who were appointed to each
city would have first objectively rendered the due process of law. Last time we learned that in Jesus’ day,
the Romans held the right of execution, as the ruling authorities, although the capital punishment was
occasionally carried out, by Israel (Acts 7:57-60).

[Return to Matthew 5]

Jesus did not state the judgment for adultery, but all of the Jews would know from the Law that it was the
same as for murder - death. Like murder, most of them probably could have checked that one off on their
list of righteous requirements, to enter the kingdom of God.

But not so fast - Jesus now qualifies what the LORD always intended, concerning this Law. What does He
say, in verse 28? That whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her.

First, let’s consider what this does not mean. Jesus is not saying that whenever any man looks at any
woman, it is sin. It is natural for men to look at women. How can they avoid looking at women?

And it is also natural for there to be sexual attraction between men and women; God designed the man and
the woman that way, with the view toward marriage and procreation.

But doing what comes naturally is not always good. Having an appetite for food is good; you need food to
live. But some foods are good for you, and some are not; and too much is never good for you. Appetites
must be ruled over, in life. What goes in the mouth, should be controlled; and likewise, what is taken in by
the eye should be controlled.

Jesus is speaking of a kind of looking, that is out-of-control. So, who is doing this looking, here? A man,
or a woman? A man. Within the context of adultery, this would refer to a married man. Notice that Jesus
does not specify a married woman; it’s just “a woman”.

Remember that according to the Law, the married woman was an adulteress for having sexual relations
with any man; but because of cultural distinctions, the married man was only an adulterer if he had sexual
relations with a married woman.

By His words, Jesus has effectively removed those distinctions, showing the equal culpability of the man
and the woman - which was always the LORD’s thought on it.

But Jesus is taking it even further, than the act of adultery - to looking at a woman. Now, this “looking” is
not merely a glance. The word refers to directing the eyes upon something to behold it, and the verb is
continuous action here; the man’s eyes are fixed upon the woman, gazing and gazing at her.
# 21: 3-13-18 4

And his eyes are not fixed there, just in the sense of seeing, or observing. They’re fixed upon the woman to
lust for her. This refers to a strong inordinate desire; the idea is that this married man is essentially
visualizing sexual relations, committing the act with the woman, in his mind.

Jesus is indicating that whether the man commits the act with his body, or whether he commits it in his
mind’s eye, it is adultery, just the same; there’s no difference.

Now of course, lust in the heart is not exclusive to married men; or even to just men - and anyone who
practices it is committing sin. But in this situation, Jesus is making a point concerning the law against
adultery, and that pertains to married men.

One has to wonder - how many married Jewish men who were listening to Jesus that day could genuinely
claim that they had never done that? So when they one day entered the heavenly court, seeking acceptance
by God based on their keeping of the Law, God will look at their hearts and find them instead to be
lawbreakers - guilty of adultery - and therefore liable for condemnation to the fires of hell.

But wait! Jesus has a remedy. Let’s read that again.

v. 29-30 Now, is Jesus exaggerating, or does He really mean what He’s saying? In a sense, He really
means exactly this.

If the Jew is planning to come to God on the basis of his own righteous keeping of the Law, well then, he’d
better keep it - no matter what it took.

Jesus names two parts of the human body; two that would be considered most important. The right was
always valued as the place of honor or preeminence, over the left.

The idea is that if the very dearest part of a person was the instrument that caused him to stumble into sin,
then best to destroy it - rather than for the person himself to be completely destroyed in hell.

Notice that the statement of Jesus here provides further understanding of hell. Hell is a real, literal place -
hell is not a concept; hell is not a state of mind or consciousness. Hell is the real, literal place where the
unrepentant sinner will be punished for his sin. Further, this punishment involves the whole person, and
that will include the physical torment of his body.

It is also clear by what Jesus said that a person can avoid going to hell, which means that going to hell is a
choice; a choice made by every person.

However, once a person has made this choice, God as the Judge is the One who will cast him into hell -
following the Great White Throne Judgment, at the end of the thousand year reign of Christ on the earth
(Rev 20:11-15). As we discussed last week, the Jews had a basic understanding of hell, in Jesus’ day, from
their OT Scriptures.

Just imagine the impact that the words of Jesus would have had on His Jewish listeners. Most of the
married men would have to have judged themselves guilty of adultery, in their hearts. And Jesus was
saying that God as their Judge would not look the other way, but would mete out the full measure of the
punishment, that they had earned. They wanted to be justified by the Law; well, God would judge them, by
the Law.

As Jesus continues, we see that He begins speaking about divorce.

# 21: 3-13-18 5

[Matthew 5:31-32]

Now, we might be inclined to think this was an entirely new topic from the Law that Jesus was raising, but
as we examine it, we see that this is really just another application of the law against adultery - in this case,
concerning divorce.

We’ve observed that Jesus used certain phrasing when He was introducing a particular commandment or
judgment from the Law: “You have heard that it was said to those of old” (5:21, 27, 33), or just “You have
heard that it was said” (5:38, 43).

But notice that Jesus does not say that, here; instead, He says, “Furthermore it has been said”. This
distinction is significant. Jesus is differentiating what He is saying here, because the quotation is not from
the Law of Moses; not from the letter of it, not even the spirit of it. So what is Jesus quoting? The
rabbinical teaching on divorce.

The teachers had taken what God said in the Law concerning divorce, and changed it ever so slightly: but
in doing so, they gave it a different meaning - one which God never intended.

To see this, we need to look at what God did say in the Law, concerning divorce. We find this in
Deuteronomy chapter 24.

This is the most that the Law of Moses has to say specifically, about divorce. Divorce is not directly
addressed by the LORD, in the Law. Why would that be? We’ll find that Jesus answers that later, in
Matthew’s gospel: In marriage, God joins husband and wife together as one flesh; and what God has joined
together, man is not to separate (Matt 19:5-6). Divorce was never intended, by the LORD. We’ll look at that
more closely when we study Matthew chapter 19.

Marriage thrives on the husband and the wife serving one another, in love. Divorce is another consequence
of sin entering the world, with its strong desires to serve self. Although the LORD does not condone divorce,
He did seek to regulate it, when He gave Israel the Law.

This is the part of the Law that speaks about the certificate of divorce, which the rabbis in Jesus’ day had
changed. It begins in verse 1.

[Deuteronomy 24:1-4] You can see that even this is a very specific case. Let’s consider it, together. First
of all, what is the Law commanding here? Is the Law commanding a man to take a wife and marry her?
No; the man chooses to do this.

The Law is citing the case in which a man takes a wife, and then the wife comes into disfavor, with the
husband - based on some uncleanness in her. The Hebrew word for “uncleanness” carries the meaning of
nakedness and shame; it’s an idiom for indecent or improper conduct.

This would not be adultery, or it would be named; but this is certainly some serious sin, on the part of the
wife. Yet by the time of Jesus, some of the rabbis taught that the husband could divorce his wife simply if
he no longer favored her, for any reason - uncleanness was not required.

But in this passage, in the case of the wife’s uncleanness - then does the Law command the husband to give
the wife a certificate of divorce, in the case cited? It does not.
# 21: 3-13-18 6

The language in the KJV sounds that way; the translation reads, “then let him write her a bill of
divorcement”; but there’s no command to be found, in the Hebrew wording. Instead, the Law is still just
continuing to cite the conditions of the case: When a man marries, and if he has found some uncleanness in
his wife, and if he then writes her a certificate of divorce - that’s the literal translation - and the conditions
continue.

So what is a certificate of divorce, anyway? Basically, it was a document which stated that the wife was an
innocent party, in being dismissed by her husband; that is, she was not an adulteress; she had merely come
into her husband’s disfavor.

The certificate of divorce gave the woman the opportunity to remarry. And although the Law mentions the
certificate of divorce here, it is never seen to be given anywhere in the Law; we must suppose that the Jews
came up with this certificate on their own - to make divorce a little easier, all around!

Incidentally, only the husband initiated divorce in Jewish society. The husband was also the judge in the
case. He simply dismissed his wife, sending her out of his house.

The case cited goes on. If the woman then remarries, and if her new husband either writes her another
certificate of divorce, or he dies, then her former husband must not take her back as his wife. Finally, we
have come to the part that the Law is commanding - the first husband must not remarry her. Why not? We
see in verse 4 that she is considered defiled.

But what about all those certificates of divorce? That was man’s statement, on her situation; but God’s
statement on it is that she is defiled.

The first husband had been joined to his wife as one flesh, in marriage. Then she was joined to a second
husband, in marriage. Were they one flesh? And what happens if she now remarries her first husband?
Can they become one flesh again? To remarry the original husband would bring the defilement of divorce
into the holy union that God intended marriage to be.

The LORD indicates in verse 4 that this would be no less than an abomination before Him - for what God has
joined together in holy union, mankind has defiled.

An abomination is a particularly heinous sin, because it has a corrupting, spreading influence - and not just
on the participating parties. Such a defilement of marriage corrupts the families involved - and the society
within which they exist. An abomination then is a sin that corrupts the entire society.

[Return to Matthew 5]

So we see that while Jesus is referring to this passage in Deuteronomy chapter 24, He is actually quoting
what the rabbis of the day proclaimed - stating the certificate of divorce as if it were being given by
command of the Law - and that this certificate was all that one needed, to stamp any divorce with divine
approval - we see nothing about uncleanness, here.

In verse 32, Jesus completely sweeps this certificate aside, and goes right to the heart of the matter, on
divorce. The only case in which a husband may divorce his wife is what? Sexual immorality - fornication
- which for a wife, would be her committing adultery - having sexual relations with a man other than her
husband.
# 21: 3-13-18 7

If a man divorces his wife for any other reason, Jesus says he is causing his wife to commit adultery - that
is, the husband will also be held to blame for adultery if she remarries, despite that certificate she was
given. And the man who marries her will also be held to blame, as an adulterer. It would seem that
certificate wasn’t worth the paper it was written on!

Now, why would the two men also be held accountable? Because unless the wife had in fact committed
adultery during her marriage, that marriage bond with her first husband is still completely intact; they are
still married, in the sight of God. Everyone who violates that bond is therefore an adulterer.

Many of the Jews in Jesus’ day maintained quite a liberal view of divorce, influenced by the surrounding
Gentile culture, as well as the permissiveness of their teachers.

They would never have considered their certified dismissals - which were completely justified, in their
minds - to instead put them in a position where they were judged by God as adulterers!
But how could they avoid seeing the implications of the Law, which Jesus has so carefully defined, for
them?

Then Jesus leaves the case of adultery behind, and moves on to a new area of the Law.

[Matthew 5:33-37]

We see in verse 33 that Jesus has returned to the form He used, when quoting the Law. The quote is not an
exact citation, but the general tenor of the Law, regarding the taking of oaths, and the failure to honor them
- which would be swearing falsely.

But what does Jesus say, in verse 24? Don’t swear at all. Now, if Jesus meant this literally - not at all - He
would be violating parts of the Law and passages of the OT that prescribe the proper way to take an oath, or
make a vow, to the LORD. So what does that tell us? That Jesus doesn’t mean this, literally.

So what does He mean? The clue is in what Jesus told His Jewish listeners not to swear by - heaven, earth,
Jerusalem - or even their own heads.

All of the OT passages concerning taking an oath involve the use of the LORD’s name; Israel was not to
swear by the LORD’s name falsely, which would profane His name (Lev 19:12). The spirit of that law was
that men needed to be truthful, and to do what they say; to keep their word.

But many in Israel instead saw in this law a loophole, in its wording. They could still swear falsely, but just
not do so in the LORD’s name. They would substitute something else for His name; something important,
significant - but they would keep God out of it; then they didn’t have to worry about keeping their word.

But why would they want to swear at all, if they weren’t particularly sure about keeping their word? Well,
sometimes it was just to give weight to their determination to do what they said. A person today might say,
“I swear on the cross, I’m going to learn to skydive!” He may or may not learn to skydive; but he’s
determined to do it, and wants others to know that.

But sometimes, an oath was sworn for more disreputable purposes; like today a shopkeeper might say, “I
swear on the Bible, that’s an authentic piece of the apostle Peter’s fishing boat!” The shopkeeper is
swearing an oath to try to make a sale. He’s hoping his oath will convince the buyer of the genuineness of
his goods.
# 21: 3-13-18 8

Do you think his piece of Peter’s boat is authentic? No. Jesus show that such an attempt to deceive with an
oath is from the evil one - the father of lies (v. 37).

So Jesus is not speaking about all oath taking, but about everyday, casual, foolish oath taking - especially
the kind that is intended to deceive. He is letting the Jews know that, just because they were not profaning
the LORD’s actual name does not mean that God will not hold them to their oaths - no matter how lightly
they may regard them. Indeed, their oaths were no less binding.

Jesus then cites just four things that were often sworn by, to show how each one brings God in to the Jew’s
oath. The first three are all things that belong to God, and serve His purposes.

Heaven is God’s home; it’s where He rules and reigns; where His will is always, everywhere done. Is the
oath-taker purposing to do God’s will - or seeing that his own will is done?

Earth is God’s footstool; the creation He made for Himself, to realize His purposes, for mankind. All that
happens on earth lies under the sovereignty of God. Does the oath-taker recognize the sovereignty of God,
in all of his dealings, on the earth?

Jerusalem is the city of the great King. Who would that be? The Messiah; and in the eternal heavens, God
has already set His King on His holy hill of Zion (Ps 2:6). Does the oath-taker live in submission to God’s
appointed Ruler, or is he willfully ignorant of Him?

To swear by any of these things, which belong to God, brings God into the Jew’s oath - whether he
recognizes it or not.

The last thing that Jesus mentions the Jews swear by is their own heads. This meant the same thing as
swearing by one’s life. Who owns every human life? God does. Like heaven, and earth, and Jerusalem,
human lives belong to their Creator.

The Jew couldn’t make even one hair of his head white or black. Who has white hair? The aged. And in
the Middle East, black was the color of hair, in one’s youth - that is, before it turned white. Can anyone
change their age? No. It’s another way of saying that men cannot change one circumstance of their lives.

Who has control of each life? God does. So for the Jew to swear by his head, or life, is foolish; in swearing
this way, he has brought God into it, the One who owns his life; yet the Jew cannot be sure of how things
will go.

And if he doesn’t keep his word, God will hold the Jew accountable for that, as well as for profaning these
things of God - assuming that this is a Jew who is trying to come to God on the basis of keeping the Law.

Once again, we see Jesus taking the Law directly to the hearts of His Jewish listeners, to expose the
lawless, selfish motives that reside there. But He is far from finished! As we continue next time, we’ll see
that Jesus takes the Law in a new direction - into what we might call, positive territory.

Reading: Matthew 5:38-48, Luke 6:27-36