Basically my reading of the Sermon on the Mount follows the materials produced by Glen Stassen (of Fuller) and Walter Wink — so you might find more helpful material from them if you ‘google’ their names and see what comes up.

But for communicating these ideas with young people, I think there’s a great opportunity to act out the section from Mt 5.38-42 (see notes following SO, below).

The important background material to understand is:

1. The Sermon on the Mount is NOT about the so-called ‘antitheses’ — Jesus is NOT contradicting or abolishing law (as 5.17-20 makes absolutely plain)!

Rather, Jesus is on about ‘transforming initiatives’ (Stassen’s term) — about fulfilling the intent of the laws in a new way through unexpected grace (or ‘surprising challenges’). [Sometimes kids at Primary and Secondary School have done something like this when they’ve looked at how to overcome bullying in non-violent and creative ways — such as ‘act cool’ don’t ‘act aggro’].

2. These transforming initiatives follow after Jesus has quoted the Tradition (‘You have heard it said . . .’) and then explained the Problem (or ‘vicious cycle’ as Stassen calls it — sometimes these are implicit rather than explicit). So, for example:

Tradition: You shall not kill (5.21, which is a great law, and if only Christians alone could agree not to kill each other the world would be a better place!);

Problem: even if we obey that law, hatred and abuse will still flourish (5.22);

Transforming initiative: BEFORE you try to worship God — go and be reconciled with anyone who has anything against you!! (5.23-26) Now wouldn’t that make a difference if we tried PEACEMAKING AS A NECESSARY PRIORITY BEFORE WORSHIP!! And notice that it’s not making peace with people WE don’t like, but rather, finding out who has something against us, and reconciling with them!! That requires a lot of openness and communication.

3. These transforming initiatives are all explained in a patriarchal culture (which makes a big difference to how we understand 5.27ff and 5.31ff); a colonised culture (under the Romans — important for 5.38ff); and an agonistic culture (that is, a culture where honour/shame are primary values — a bit like in the Mafia movies! Important for understanding 5.38ff too).

SO, when we come to the

Tradition: “You have heard it said, ‘An eye for an eye . . .'” (which again, is a good law as an expression of justice in cultures where retribution was often over the top); we see the

Problem: “but I say to you, do not resist evil/evil doers violently (or: ‘do not resist by evil means’)” (entrenched reaction to evil/violence against evil — polarising the issue — does not lead to transformation!); and then follow the

Transforming initiatives:

a) When someone strikes you on the RIGHT cheek (ie. as a master would backhand a slave to publicly shame them), turn the other cheek (ie. invite them to hit you again AS AN EQUAL — you can’t backhand on the left cheek with the right hand; note that the left hand is not used for food or human contact). That is: challenge them to treat you as a person and not a possession;

b) When someone tries to sue you even to the point of taking your coat, give them your undercoat/shirt as well (that is, suggest they strip you naked, which in Jewish culture at least, would publicly shame them and you)! That is: force them to take account of what they are doing to you!;

c) When a Roman soldier forces you to carry their load for one mile (as marked by the Roman milestones on all Roman roads, and as explicitly permitted under Roman law), try to carry it for an extra mile also (which is NOT permitted under Roman law and may get the soldier into trouble) — forcing them again to consider what they are doing to you and how they are exploiting you;

d) BUT when someone BELOW you on the social scale (rather than in a position of power, as in the examples above) comes and begs from you, show mercy (5.42).

SO instead of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’, maybe it’s ‘an eyeful for an eye and a truth for a tooth’!!

These transforming initiatives are more difficult for us to see in what Jesus says about adultery and divorce – but they are there nonetheless. The clue is to recognize the patriarchal assumptions of the culture of the day (and still of our day!), and that Jesus directly challenges those assumptions in what he says. That is: you men take responsibility for how you look at women and how you think about them (and take drastic action – forcefully, but figuratively stated!! – to avoid the evil consequences of your unbridled lusts); you men (and only men could divorce under Jewish law at the time) take responsibility for the way you force women into adultery by your abuse of the divorce laws (by upgrading and discarding wives and leaving them vulnerable

Again, Jesus does not oppose the Mosaic laws (including the divorce provisions — again, read Mt 5.17-20), but rather focuses on the transforming initiative that will fulfill the intent of those laws as they are justly interpreted and applied.

Keith Dyer (Whitley College, Melbourne)