Implicatures: The Unsung Heroes of Good Exegesis

 I don't know if you ever watched The Fall Guy as a kid but it was one of my favorite shows. The theme song at the beginning of the show tells of how stuntmen in movies are the unsung heroes of the movies. They do all the cool stuff. If it were not for stuntmen, all of those action movies would never likely be made (all Tom Cruise action movies excepted of course). These men do behind the scenes the stuff that makes the magic happen. But they are largely unseen by the audience. Well, seen but unseen. And if one wanted to deny their existence, he or she could simply say, "That guy was never in the movie because I never saw him and you can't show me him in the movie." They would be wrong but difficult to prove wrong because their presence isn't explicitly made known. 

Implicatures in language function the same way. Scripture uses language to communicate not only in the explicit statements but also in implied statements/propositions that are assumed by what is explicitly stated in order to form an argument. 

For instance, Paul's argument in Galatians 3 is that Christ is the only offspring of Abraham that receives the promises of Abraham and that those who believe in Christ become offspring of Abraham "in" Him and by "putting Christ on." Therefore, the distinctions in individual identity that would exclude someone from being an heir of Abraham's promises no longer exist because all are "one in Christ." These are the explicit statements in Chapter 3. 

However, what is often missed are the implicatures. For instance, how is Christ the heir of Abraham? And how am I the heir of Abraham if I am made one with Christ? 

The first implicature is easy for most to get. Christ is the heir of Abraham because he is the only perfectly faithful Israelite who has ever lived. But not just an Israelite. He is of the line of Judah, so he is Jew of Jews. So Christ, Paul's argument implies, is the only heir of Abraham as a Jewish Israelite.

But the second implicature is often missed. This is that if a person is one with Christ, and Christ is a Jewish Israelite, then as His hand is a Jewish Israelite hand and His feet are Jewish Israelite feet, all that are one body with Him are Jewish Israelite. Hence, all in Christ, one with Him, have put Him on, are Jewish Israelites in Him, and thus, sons of Abraham in the same way, not in a different way, that He is.

That's Paul's argument. That's what is often missed. Hence, he ends the letter by calling the entire church "the Israel of God" because that is what they have become in Christ. 

But implicatures are often ignored or dismissed by those who would like to interpret texts to fit their theology instead. Like those who deny that stuntmen were in the movie, these people can simply say, "I don't see where Paul explicitly says any of this and so it's not there."

But implicatures are interesting parts of language. They actually are assumed by the author and he assumes his audience will also assume them. If I say, "I gave two dollars to my friend," this sentence assumes all sorts of implicatures that are not explicitly stated. I exist. I have at least two dollars. I have a friend. My friend received the two dollars. etc. etc. If I had to explicitly detail every implicature, language would be laborious. Instead, I assume you can get all of that by my explicit statement. 

And this is important to note. It isn't an eisegetical assumption. It is an exegetical one. Not all assumptions are eisegetical but you must show their necessity by the explicit statements in the text. 

What I find is that most cults and people with bad interpretations ignore and dismiss the necessary assumptions that the author intends that you make in order to substantiate his argument. To reject these is to reject the communicative process and to refuse, therefore, to partake generously in the language game of the author.

In other words, to ignore the implicatures is to leave the author's statements up for subjective interpretations that massacre his meaning and subject it to a possible replacement it with their own. 

When I see people who seem to lack reading comprehension skills it is often due to this inability to follow a logical argument through the implicatures, so this skill is definitely one that should be taught in exegesis courses but is, unfortunately, most often completely unidentified as a key contributor to understanding the text, and therefore, left out.

It's the unsung hero that would save the day from bad interpretation but is too often ignored because of its inconvenience to what are truly eisegetical assumptions that the poor exegete uses to change the text.

Is σκύβαλον a Curse Word?

A common misunderstanding of the word σκύβαλον is that it is a curse word Paul uses in Philippians 3:8. It is supposedly equivalent to our "sh" word or the lesser offensive but still crude "cr" word. Hence, many Christians feel vindicated in their belief that they are free to use curse words as Paul did. I will attempt to show here that this is completely false and that the word is never used as a curse word within Second Temple Jewish literature, which is Paul's linguistic context.

I chalk this one up to one of the evangelical myths of our time, where something gets repeated enough that everyone just believes it without ever studying the issue.

As an example of this one might quote BDAG, the standard lexicon for NT Greek.

σκύβαλον, ου, τό useless or undesirable material that is subject to disposal, refuse, garbage (in var. senses, ‘excrement, manure, garbage, kitchen scraps’: Plut. et al.; PSI 184, 7; PRyl 149, 22; PFay 119, 7; Sir 27:4; Philo, Sacr. Abel. 109; 139; Jos., Bell. 5, 571; SibOr 7, 58.—τὰ σκύβαλα specif. of human excrement: Artem. 1, 67 p. 61, 23; 2, 14 p. 108, 21; Jos., Bell. 5, 571 [cp. Epict., Fgm. Stob. 19 ἀποσκυβαλίζω].—MDibelius, Hdb. on Phil 3:8) πάντα ἡγεῖσθαι σκύβαλα consider everything garbage/crud Phil 3:8 (cp. AcPl Ha 2, 23; Spicq. s.v. “to convey the crudity of the Greek … : ‘It’s all crap’.”).—DELG. TW. (BDAG 932).

BDAG somewhat captures this but in quoting Spicq includes the unfortunate misperception that so many evangelicals have adopted, which is that the word refers to some sort of curse word. Spicq gives no evidence for this whatsoever. Instead, the word has no crude connotations in Greek usage, so even though Spicq might mean "useless" by his use of the "cr" word, it is still a false equivalent because σκύβαλον has no such crude element to it as the "cr" word has in many contexts. The word σκύβαλον simply refers to things that are not useful and one would have no issues saying it in mixed company. 

In Sacrifices, Philo uses the word is paralleled with φορῠτός, which is whatever is left over from the winnowing process, i.e., chaff blown in the wind.

But the first fruits are the holy motions of each in accordance with virtue; on which account they have been compared to a threshing-floor. As, therefore, on a threshing-floor there is wheat and barley, and as many more of such things as are capable of being separated by themselves, and husks and chaff, and whatever other refuse [φορῠτός] is dissipated and scattered in different directions, so too, with us, there are some things which are excellent and useful, and which afford real nourishment, by means of which a good life is brought to perfection; all which things we should attribute to God. But there are other things which are not divine, which we must leave like refuse [σκύβαλα] to the race of mankind; but from these some portions must be taken away, (Charles Duke Yonge with Philo of Alexandria, The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged [Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995], 107–108).

In On Dreams (2.21-22), he uses the word similarly of what is discarded because it is seen as poor quality or non-nutritious.

But when I hear Jacob relating his dream I marvel at his having fancied that he was binding up the sheaves, and not reaping the corn; for the one is the task of the lower classes and of servants, but the other is the occupation of the employers, and of men more skilled in agriculture. For to be able to distinguish what is necessary from what is mischievous [σκύβαλον], and what is nutritious from what is not so, and what is genuine from what is spurious, and useful fruit from a worthless root, not only in reference to those things which the land bears, but also in those which the intellect bears, is the work of most perfect virtue. (Ibid., 389).

Likewise, as he does in Sacrifices, in On the Virtues, he uses the word to contrast the chaff with wheat.

For it is he who, before the sowing was performed, cut the furrows through the deep-soiled plain, and prepared the field for the operations of heaven and for the labours of the husbandman; for the latter, so that he might sow it at a seasonable time, and for the other, that the deep bosom of the earth might receive its bounty displayed in gentle showers, and in consequence might treasure up rich nutriment for the seed and dispense it to it gradually until it should swell into the full ear and bring its annual fruit to perfection. And, after the corn is brought to perfection, then again the ox is necessary for another service, namely, for the purification of the sheaves, and the separation of the chaff [σκυβάλων] from the genuine useful grain. (Ibid., 654).

He uses it also in Sacrifices (138-139) to refer to what is discarded in burnt offering sacrifices.

Therefore the lawgiver judging a place which was capable of receiving both these opposite qualities, namely, what is honourable, and what is disgraceful, and which was adapted to each, and distributed equal honour to both, to be quite a much impure as holy, removed it from the altar of God. For what is disgraceful is profane, and what is profane is by all means unholy; and this is why the dominant part is kept away from sacrifices, but if it is subjected to examination, then, when all its parts have been purified, it will be consecrated as a burnt offering, free from all stain, and from all pollution. For this is the law respecting whole burnt offerings, that with the exception of the refuse [σκυβάλων, i.e., everything that belongs to the category of things to be discarded] of the food, and of the skin which are tokens of the weakness of the body and not of wickedness, nothing else should be left to the creature, but that all the other parts which exhibit the soul perfect in all its parts, should be presented as a whole burnt offering to God. (Ibid., 111).

In the law, this refers to anything discarded in a burnt sacrifice, including the feathers and crop of a bird (Lev 1:16). 

Finally, in On Providence, he uses it to refer to debris and burning garbage heaps in which critters, like reptiles, live. 

. . . for it is seen that these creatures flee out of the cities into the fields and into desert places, to avoid man as their master. Not but what, if this is true, there is a certain sense and principle in it; for rubbish [φορῠτός]is heaped up in recesses: and quantities of sweepings [σκυβάλων--Note: Yonge's translation here is a bit odd. The Greek only contains one phrase but Yonge seems to translate two trying to explain σκυβάλων as both sweepings and refuse], and refuse, and such things, are what venomous reptiles love to lurk in, besides the fact that their smell has an attractive power over them. (Ibid., 755).

The one use in the LXX is found in Sirach 27:4, where it refers to the extra/remaining particles that fall out of a sieve when shaken. 

When a sieve is shaken, the useless material appears; so do a person’s faults when he speaks. 

The word appears only twice in the Pseudepigrapha, both in the Sibylline Oracles (7.55-59 and 11.185).

Prophesy, Colophon, a great terrible fire hangs over you. Ill-wedded Thessaly, the earth will no longer look upon you, even as ashes, but you will be sailing alone, a refugee from the mainland. Thus, O devastated one, you will be the sorrowful leftovers of war, O one who falls to dogs and rivers and swords.

You will be the mournful leftovers of a terrifying war among all the tribes.

In Wars of the Jews 5.571, Josephus uses it only one time to refer to the unused food particles left over in both human and animal dung that the Jews resorted to eating during the starvation of the Roman siege on Jerusalem.

 . . . as also that a medimnus of wheat was sold for a talent; and that when, a while afterward, it was not possible to gather herbs, by reason the city was all walled about, some persons were driven to that terrible distress as to search the common sewers and old dung hills [ὄνθος] of cattle, and to eat the dung [σκύβαλον] which they got there; and what they of old could not endure so much as to see they now used for food. (Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged [Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987], 726).

Beside the one NT use of the word in Philippians 3:8, the quotations above make up the only uses of the word in Second Temple Jewish literature. The word clearly refers to that which is left over/useless/unnecessary/unusable. There is absolutely no crude connotation made by the word. It is simply not a curse word.

"The Israel of God" in the Context of Paul's Argument in Galatians

 I recently heard the argument that Paul is really arguing in Galatians that the true Jew is one who is both ethnically and religiously Jewish, and that his idea of the true Jew does not include Gentiles as a part of Israel. Let's map Paul's argument through Galatians and see if that claim is true.

Paul begins and ends the letter as he does other letters he writes by greeting the multiple Galatian churches he is addressing and declaring grace/mercy and peace upon it (this will become significant later).

ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῆς Γαλατίας, χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ⸂ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου⸃ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (1:2-3)

To the churches of Galatia, grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ ⸀στοιχήσουσιν, εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ. (6:16)

And to those who as far as they have conformed to this principle, peace is to be upon them and mercy and upon the Israel of God.

This creates an inclusio for the entire book, and as such, one can see just by this that Paul identifies the church as Israel.

But let's look at the rest of the argument in between these statements that get him there.

Paul argues that the gospel that is being presented by certain people to the Galatian church is another gospel (1:6-9).

Paul explains that his gospel is not something that would have come from his understanding of Judaism, but rather had to be given via revelation and confirmed by the other apostles and the Jerusalem council (1:10-2:10).

In 2:3-4, Paul begins to reveal what the problem is with the gospel that is being peddled in Galatia by certain "false brothers." The problem is that some Jews, who Paul refers to here as the circumcised or those who belong to the pro-circumcision party, are insisting that Gentiles also become circumcised. 

Paul continues to reveal the problem is even larger than that by saying that Peter and Barnabas had even fallen prey to the thinking of these particular Jewish teachers so that they did not eat with those who were Gentiles anymore, which indicates that these Jewish teachers were advocating for a position that all Christians, Jew or Gentile, must observe the ritual customs of circumcision, cleanliness laws, and perhaps, even food laws since the Jews refused to eat with the Gentiles either because they were considered unclean just from being defiled as uncircumcised or the food they were eating was considered unclean, thus making those who ate it unclean (2:11-13)

In 2:14, Paul gives us a key verse that tells us what the issue primarily is in relation to the gospel.

But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” 

So what is not consistent with the gospel is to insist that a Gentile who has believed in Christ must now "live like a Jew," even though, because of the gospel, Jews like Peter are now allowed to "live like a Gentile." In other words, Gentiles are not circumcised, have any sort of food laws, cleanliness laws, etc. that they must observe. Paul (and Peter) understood that the gospel freed them from having to observe these ritual laws. Why it frees them will be made clear after this so put a pin in this. It is simply important to note that the gospel Paul is preaching frees all who believe from having to observe these external identity markers that indicated one was a recipient of God's promises to Israel via Abraham.

Paul argues in vv. 15-16 that even though both he and Peter are Jews by birth, performing acts of the Mosaic law code doesn't make them right before God. Instead, one must be made right by faith in Christ. 

He anticipates a counter argument to this in vv. 17-21 when he argues that faith in Christ does not make someone a sinner because the person who does so dies to sin and loves Christ who died for him. 

This argument implies that the issue is not simply one of sanctification but rather being made right with God both in what might be artificial distinctions of justification and sanctification in Paul's argument. He is describing how one is made right, not only in one's initial justification but also in terms of sanctification. What this means is that the Mosaic law does not produce righteousness for either one. This argument has a direct application against the Jewish teachers who are teaching that the rituals in the Mosaic law code either make someone right with God or sanctify one before God. Instead, Paul argues that if this were true, Christ died for nothing. No one is made right, either in justification or sanctification, by observing the Mosaic law code.

In 3:1-6, Paul furthers his argument by asking the Galatians (both Jew and Gentile) whether the Spirit/spirit was given to them by doing something in the flesh or by faith, with the assumed answer being "by faith." And that this is the same faith that Abraham had to be the recipient of God's original promise to inherit the world in the first place (see Rom 4:13). Paul sets up here the means by which someone partakes of the life of God so that his following argument, which will be worldview-altering for the Jews listening to it, can be understood.

Paul now makes a key statement in v. 7:

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham

This verse is absolutely essential to understanding Paul's argument in Galatians because it explains now why the Jews themselves no longer have to obey the rituals of the Mosaic law code, i.e., it's not what makes them Israelites/Jews because it's not what makes them sons of Abraham. 

It's an important caveat here to mention that gentilics in Scripture are written one of two ways. One way is simply to have a yod ending on a name, but the more common way of doing it is to simply put the term "sons of" in construct to a name. This indicates that the group that is related to a person are all considered sons of that person and make up the nation that came from that person. Hence, "sons of Abraham" technically means "Abrahamites." But ethnic Jews view themselves as "Abrahamites" because they are ethnically "Israelites/Jacobites," i.e., "sons of Jacob" who is a "son of Abraham." Since Jacob receives the promise of Abraham as Abraham's son/grandson, Israelites who are sons of Jacob receive Abraham's promise. 

Paul now counters this by saying, the promise is not received by flesh as the Spirit/life of God was not given by the flesh, but by faith. In other words, Paul now argues that no one is a true son of Abraham and recipient of the Abrahamic promise because they are physically a descendent of Abraham. Instead, since it must be by faith that one becomes a son of Abraham, then both Jew and Gentile have become sons of Abraham through it, which is why Paul ends this part of his argument in Chapter 3 by saying there is now no Jew or Gentile, male nor female, slave nor free but all are one in Christ (v. 28). They have all become heirs of the promise of the world to come because they have all become true Israel by faith in Jesus Christ (vv. 8-9).

Before that statement, however, in vv. 10-14, he continues to argue that faith in Christ makes both Jew or Gentile a true son of Abraham because the law cannot do this. Instead, rather than receiving the promise by making people Israelites, which is what the Judaizers are attempting to do by circumcising Gentiles, following the law brings a curse and proves one not to be a true Israelite. 

Paul argues that the Mosaic law code is not an addition of requirements to be an Israelite but rather was added as an aid to teach the sons of Abraham about sin and the need to have faith in Christ in order to receive the Abrahamic promise and inherit the world to come (vv. 15-24).

However, the stunning argument is found in v. 16 and followed up in vv. 25-29:

Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ . . . But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

So Paul now argues that the reason why all who have faith are sons of Abraham is because they are "in" Christ Jesus who is the offspring/descendent of Abraham to whom the promise refers. Hence, Christ alone will receive the promise given to Abraham as Christ alone is the one seed/offspring of Abraham who inherits the promise. As such, those who are "in" Christ have that promise because those who are "in" Christ are one with Christ. 

This is why I stress the preposition "in" here. To be "in" Christ is to be unified with Him, one with Him, His body. This is why Paul earlier argued that he was crucified with Christ. This is only possible if Paul was either literally on the cross with Christ, which of course makes no sense, or if Paul has been made one with Christ so that when Christ died, Paul who was in Christ died with Him. This is why the doctrine of federal headship/unification is so important. To be "in" Christ is to be everything that the man Christ Jesus is. If He is crucified, so are those in Him. If He is exalted, so are those in Him. If He inherits the world, so will those in Him. But how do they receive Abraham's promise? Because if Christ is the one true son of Abraham, the one true Israelite, then all who are "in" Him are the one true son of Abraham, the one true Israelite. In fact, Paul's argument has implications that if all that is true of the man Christ Jesus is true of all who are in Him, and Jesus is a son of Abraham through Israel through Judah, then all who are in Him by faith are sons of Abraham through Israel through Judah, and therefore, Israelites and Judahites/Jews. Hence, there is no need to become an Israelite or Jewish through circumcision or any of the markers that identify one as an Israelite in the Mosaic law code because all, Jew or Gentile, who are in Christ through faith have already become so. Likewise, there is no reason for Jews, like Paul or Peter, to perform these rituals anymore either because they are confirmed as true Israelites/Jews by faith in Christ, and not by the Mosaic law code. Hence, this is why there is no Jew or Gentile, male or female, slave or free. Everyone is Christ who is in Christ for the purposes of identifying whether they receive the promise given to Abraham and his single descendent. It is not saying that there is no such thing as a male or female or slave or free man or ethnic Jew or ethnic Gentile. It is saying that in terms of what God considers the offspring of Abraham, those who have been made right with God, for purposes of inheriting the promise of Abraham, inheritance of the world to come, everyone who is in and of Christ is considered that one true offspring/descendent of Abraham.

This is the core of Paul's argument in the Epistle.

But Paul goes beyond just being a son of Abraham and now argues in 4:1-12, that those who in Christ have now been adopted into becoming sons of God, which is why those in Christ have received His Spirit/the Spirit of God/the life of God. The law was a manager, a tutor, for those who, like little children who had not yet come into their maturity and are equal to slaves, needed to be trained what holiness and goodness looks like. But now that God has sent Christ into the world to redeem those under the law, those who have faith in Christ are given His Spirit/the life of God and now have come into their sonship, having no need of a law that restricts them as though they were still slaves, and in fact, is weak and worthless in terms of producing any righteous character of God in an individual (v. 9). He ends by lamenting that they are under a mindset of slavery when they observe "days and months and seasons and years," which contextually is clearly a reference to the Mosaic laws concerning sabbath, holy days, and the larger Jewish calendar (v. 10). It is clear that Paul is arguing that to do so means that the Gentile Galatians will not be saved since the law cannot save, and observing it means that the gospel of Jesus Christ is no longer being believed by them. It is also clear that he is primarily speaking to Gentiles here, not Jews as some dispensationalists would argue, since he makes the statement that he desires for them to become like him since he has become like one of them (v. 12), implying, again, contextually, that he no longer observes the Mosaic holy days for purposes of righteousness anymore. 

Paul appeals to them further in vv. 13-20 by communicating that they had once taken care of him without any judgment toward him when he was chronically ill among them. They loved him but now they are treating him like an enemy because he has come up against these false brethren who have bewitched them from following the gospel presented above. 

From this appeal, he now argues against those brothers who are being persuaded to be under the law in vv. 21-31 that there are two "Jerusalems" represented allegorically by Hagar and Sarah, one in slavery and one free. The one in slavery is the physical Jerusalem made up of ethnic Jews who are under the law. Those are the children of slave woman Hagar. The other Jerusalem is above (as a side note, this means there is a heavenly Jerusalem where Christ sits on David's throne). The Jerusalem above is not under the law and is the mother of all of those who have faith in Christ (v. 26). These are the children of Sarah, the free woman, and thus, they are free from the slavery/restrictions of the law. The former will not inherit the promise. The latter are like Isaac and will inherit it. But also like in the case of Ishmael and Isaac, the one persecuted the other. So those who are sons of Sarah, i.e., Isaac, the son of the promise, will be persecuted by the sons of Hagar, ethnic Jews under the law who think the Mosaic law code must be the means of inheriting God's promise of righteousness and the world to come.

Paul then argues in 5:1-6 that if Christ set us free, He did so that we might live as free people rather than people who put themselves back under the Mosaic law code by being circumcised and observing the food laws and old covenant calendar (the three things he has alluded to thus far in the epistle but obviously represent the whole of the law code as he has stated). He further notes that anyone who attempts to be made an "Israelite" this way in order to obtain the promise of righteousness and the world to come will be obligated to keep the whole law, which, as he argued in Chapter 3, no one is able to do and instead will receive the curses as a violator of the law. Not only this, however, but Paul adds here now that one who does this has rejected the path God has set before him in order to obtain righteousness and the promise, and thus, he has been severed from Christ. He does not get to be under the law and be in Christ at the same time. Paul makes it clear here that it is one or the other. Either one is made righteous through faith in Christ or one is made righteous by the works of the law. It is either the free woman or the slave woman, not both. It is the Jerusalem below or the Jerusalem above, not both. It is grace or law, not both. They cannot be combined.

Instead, the argues that it is by the Spirit/the life of God that they have received by faith that causes them to love that looks to be made fully righteous as an expectation of the future. Whereas the law attempts to be made righteous now through external acts, the full transformation of the Spirit is a hope that has not fully occurred as of yet. Those of the circumcision attempt to fill in that gap by these externals, but this is to deny the work of Christ through faith that does not come through these externals but is an inward work of the Spirit that works over the lifetime of an individual and perhaps beyond. Hence, Paul states that those who are of the Spirit are eagerly awaiting to be made righteous (v. 5). Therefore, he concludes that "in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love" (v. 6).

In vv. 7-12, Paul makes known that these false brethren who are confusing them are cursed and should be avoided. Their arguments don't come from Christ but the devil (v. 8). They are leaven that leavens the whole lump of dough, which is often an analogy for sin and corruption (v. 9). They will bear the penalty, which is often a reference to the death penalty, and likely hell in this case (v. 10), which corresponds to the anathema and label of false brothers he gives in the earlier sections of the epistle. They are not preaching what Paul preaches since if he still preached that one must obey the law then he wouldn't be offending the Jews and persecuted by the them so much (v. 11). He ends by saying that these false teachers should go all the way and cut off their testicles (v. 12), indicating the opposite of circumcision which was originally a dedication of one's fertility to the Lord. Since these people advocating for a Judaic-Christianity are not really the people of God they should have the opposite sign of circumcision.

Paul now turns in 5:13-25 to argue that the freedom given to those who have faith in Christ has entered them into a new life of the Spirit who gives a love to them that will transcend the good found in the Mosaic law (vv. 22-23). Hence, the love produced by the Spirit that has been given through faith will look for opportunities to serve one another since the whole law is summarized in the one law of love, "You will love your neighbor as yourself" (v. 14). The opposite of this work of the Spirit, and likely presence of the legalistic spirit of slavery, is biting and devouring one another, i.e., judging and slandering one another (v. 15). This is the work of the law among those who have not received the Spirit. Paul warns that if this is the way things are, this lack of love that evidences a lack of the Spirit will eventually consume the community (by this, he does not merely mean it will lead to the community falling apart but that they will be damned--something he will make explicitly clear later).

He argues in vv. 16-6:6 that those who live by the Spirit and not the law, do not evidence a life of the flesh's desires, since the Spirit is given to hinder those desires. The work, therefore, is internal and works outward to a life of love and service to one another. Those under the law, however, evidence a life that is not transformed internally and therefore produces works of a spiritless/untransformed life. So living in the life of God granted to those in Christ through faith brings love (v. 22) and all of the goodness therein (vv. 22-23), but living in the flesh, a life not controlled by the Spirit, brings the spirit of jealousy and competition (v. 25) that breeds all of the evil therein (vv. 19-21). Instead of this spirit of jealousy and competition that bites and devours one another, Paul instructs the true brethren to look upon one another with love and restore anyone who is in sin with humility, not thinking of himself as better than the other, knowing that he can fall as well, and bear one another's hardships together, since this is to fulfill the law of Christ, which is the rule of love (6:1-5). Finally, in this section he argues that love looks like sharing all good things with those who have taught them. It looks to taking care of the needs of the teachers who have led them into these truths as opposed to the false teachers who have led them away from them (v. 6). As these teachers have saved their lives with the truth, so the brethren will love and save the lives of their teachers with their material wealth.

In continuation of the preceding argument, in vv. 7-10, Paul warns that what one sows is what one will reap. If a life of love and service to one another as described above, one will reap eternal life. The one who sows a life to the flesh, i.e., his own desires, self-inflation, self-achievements, etc., he will reap death, i.e., be damned. Instead, those who sow to the Spirit by cultivating a faith in Christ that produces love and service to others should persevere in that knowing that it will reap an eternal benefit in the future (v. 9). Hence, those who are of the Spirit should continue to do good to everyone without exception within the household of God, implying both by this and his argument throughout the book that divisions based upon ethnicity or ritual practice have been abolished (v. 10).

Paul then finishes his argument by charging those who preach circumcision from a pragmatic standpoint as doing so in order to be free of the persecution from Jews that would come when the cross is preached. He states that they don't even follow the law either, but would make Gentiles circumcise themselves so that the Jews would be satisfied and look respectfully upon their religion (vv. 11-13). Instead, Paul states that it should be far from him that he would ever do such a thing since our pride is in the cross and not in the world. As he declares, it is the cross "by which I have been crucified to the world and the world to me" (v. 14). Hence, he implies that Christians, Jew or Gentile, should not care about pleasing the world but only Christ by lifting up the gospel as their sole object of pride and hope.

And now we come to the final statement of this entire argument. 

καὶ ὅσοι τῷ κανόνι τούτῳ στοιχήσουσιν, εἰρήνη ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς καὶ ἔλεος καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ

For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And as for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. (6:15-16)

It is the new creation of an individual in Christ Jesus, not their original ethnic identity that has made them heirs of the promise given to Abraham and given them a new nature of love that fulfills all true righteousness. As such, they are true Israel, the true sons of God, who will inherit the world to come. So it does not matter if one is circumcised or uncircumcised since this does not make him a Jew or Gentile. What makes him a Jew or Gentile, the people of God versus the pagans, is his being a new creation in Christ through faith or someone in the flesh (in this case someone under the Mosaic law as this is how the flesh is manifest in a Jewish religious context). 

Contrary to the claim that the καὶ shows that the Israel of God is talking only to Jews, something that would ignore the entire argument that Paul just made, the καὶ simply differentiates the individuals in Galatia who would listen to Paul and the entire people of God, i.e., church, everywhere. Paul's letters are filled with endings that are individual/specific and then more general as well. There is no argument from grammar here. In fact, the καὶ can even be taken as epexegetical as it often is in the NT, where it further names or describes the preceding group. This would make it read, "And to the extent that there are those who walk according to this principle, peace and mercy be upon them, that is, upon the Israel of God." So the καὶ can be taken in either way, and it does not violate the argument. What would violate the argument is to take it as a separate group within the church that Paul just argued should characterize the whole church.

What would make no sense is for Paul to suddenly pivot and now argue that the Israel of God is ethnic Israel who believes but excludes Gentiles, even though Paul just made the argument that they are Israel through Jesus the seed of Abraham. In fact, they are ethnic Israel through Jesus, since to be in Him is to be one with Him and one body with Him. He is ethnic Israel. Ergo, whoever is in Him is ethnic Israel. But beyond this, all who are in Him are sons of the mother Jerusalem above, which also makes them Israel. Furthermore, the Israelites are the sons of God as opposed to the wicked nations, but all in Christ have become sons of God through Him, and are thus, true Israel. They therefore receive the blessings and peace and mercy of Israel, the Israel not of the world, but of God.

Paul then ends how he begins. He greets and blesses the whole church and ends by blessing the whole church, and the Israel of God is the church. 

Biblical Patriarchy

Part 1 

Part 2

The Sermon on the Mount: A Commentary, Part 3

 Matthew 5:21-7:12

This section consists of the body of Christ's new covenant law. The law will expand upon the moral law of the old covenant founded upon the Ten Commandments. It sits between the inclusio created by the blessings and declaration of Christ that it is His intent to fill up the law in 5:3-20 by demanding it to be obeyed and taught and the declaration that Christ demands His law to be observed along with the cursings for not teaching and observing it in 7:13-27, which all end in judgments of damnation. 

Contrary to popular opinion, the judgment scenes make it clear that Christ is not simply giving the law that He knows will not be obeyed (as though He was giving us the first use of the law that simply functions as the precursor to receiving grace through faith), but rather that His law is the fruit that will come from those who have been transformed into the poor in spirit, the mourners, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for justice, the merciful, the pure in thoughts, the peacemakers and the persecuted. It is the third use, therefore, not the first, and as such, those who dismiss or make light of it prove themselves to be false prophets and those who follow them on the wide road to the fiery Gehenna.

Christ now elaborates as the new Moses what the Law and the Prophets, i.e., the Old Testament, taught and what He came to fill up and expand rather than abolish. He gives a correction, not to the Scripture, which would have been stated as "It is written," but rather to the tradition of the rabbis which Second Temple Judaism argued was ancient tradition that interpreted the text. Hence, he begins by stating what they have "heard that has been said," not what has been written. Sometimes he does this by stating both the law and the interpretation of the law, and sometimes he states just the law because it is clear that the rabbis, like the Pharisees who held their traditions, were just limiting the scope of the commands to the explicit and literal application stated in the law. Jesus now expands the commands in contradiction to this by stating, "But I say," giving His interpretation of the law that both contradicts the misapplications and lack of applications of the rabbis. It should also be said that Christ is not affirming that this tradition is ancient, nor does the word necessarily refer to how ancient it is, it could simply refer to the traditions of previous generations that go back further than just a one or two generations. Either way, Christ merely comments that the people have heard that it was said by ancient tradition, not that it actually was said by it.

The following law is the teaching that Christ says is the point of the Law and the Prophets and that not one jot or tittle of the Scripture that is meant to teach what Christ teaches in the SoM will pass away until all is accomplished. This is also the law that Christ requires His people to obey if they are going to call Him Lord, and as such, those who do not obey it and tell others they can work around it, are the ones who will be considered lawless at the judgment scene that ends the Sermon.

It should be stated that not one law in the SoM is a ritual law. Every law deals with the moral law. In fact, every law deals with all of the ten commandments (e.g., devotion to God first, rejection of idols in the form of money, not using God's name in an unholy manner, murder, stealing by way of talking about its opposite: giving, adultery, bearing false witness, coveting) in its relation to other laws in the Mosaic law code, especially their relationship to love. The only exceptions are the Sabbath law, which Matthew will deal with later in the book as a part of ritual law that is to be seen as lesser than the moral law code and the commandment to honor one's father and mother which Matthew will address later in the book as an example of the superiority of the moral law over ritual. What could be construed as instructions concerning ritual, i.e., alms-giving, prayer, fasting, are actually laws concerning self-worship/glorification over the true worship and glorification of God, and have more to do with the first commandment than ceremonial laws within the Mosaic law code.

You Will Not Murder

21 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις·* οὐ φονεύσεις· ὃς δʼ ἂν φονεύσῃ, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει. 22 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ⸆ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ· ⸀ῥακά, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῷ συνεδρίῳ·* ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ ⸇· μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός. 23 Ἐὰν οὖν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κἀκεῖ μνησθῇς ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἔχει τι κατὰ σοῦ,* 24 ἄφες ἐκεῖ τὸ δῶρόν σου ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καὶ ὕπαγε˸ πρῶτον˸1 διαλλάγηθι τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου.* 25 * Ἴσθι εὐνοῶν τῷ ἀντιδίκῳ σου ταχύ, ἕως ὅτου εἶ ⸉μετʼ αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ⸊, μήποτέ σε παραδῷ ὁ ἀντίδικος τῷ κριτῇ καὶ ὁ κριτὴς ⸆ τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ καὶ εἰς φυλακὴν βληθήσῃ· 26 ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν, ἕως ⸀ἂν ἀποδῷς τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην.* 

You have heard that it has been said by ancient tradition, "Do not murder; and whoever murders will be declared guilty in the judgment." But I say to you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be declared guilty in the judgment. And whosoever says to his brother, "Loser," will be declared guilty before the high court. And whosoever says, "Idiot," will be declared guilty enough to be thrown into the fiery hell. 

Because of this, if you are presenting your offering upon the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave there your offering before the altar and go. First restore the relationship with your brother, and then come present your offering. Make things right quickly with your plaintiff  while you can, as you meet with him along the road, so that the plaintiff might not hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the deputies, and ultimately to the guards to be thrown in. Truly I say to you, you will never come out of there until you have repaid the last penny.

The law is pretty straightforward except a few things that may need explanation. The ancient tradition is not necessarily ancient, but simply more than a couple generations back, as stated before. The Aramaic word used here seems to mean "empty," which many lexicons and scholars take to mean "empty-headed," but it likely has more the idea of calling someone empty of value, worthless, a loser. It is to degrade the humanity of another in one's anger or hatred, which is the beginning of the act of murder. Hence, Christ shocks the crowd by stating that such anger and hatred that would lead to an uncontrolled mouth that would speak something degrading of another brother is not the precursor to murder. It is the act of murder. It is simply the beginning and not the end of it. One who speaks such things out of anger or hatred has already begun to murder his brother whether he ever goes all the way through with it or not. Hence, as a murderer, he is worthy of the murderer's punishment before the throne of God. As the punishment for murder is death in the old covenant, in the new covenant which looks toward eternal rewards and punishments, the punishment is the fiery hell where the murderer will pay up every last cent for his crime. 

The phrase, ἔσχατον κοδράντην "the last quadrans" means that the full punishment of a murderer in hell will be exacted. A quadrans is the smallest measurement of Roman usury. Not one smallest bit of the punishment will be forgiven. The murderer will pay every bit of his crime. 

Because of this Christ warns to make sure that one has not done this to his fellow disciple of Christ, for then he will end up at the judgment seat of Christ where it will be too late and the declaration to depart from Christ will be given and the false believer who is a murderer will go into the fiery hell, having been denied access to the kingdom of God. Hence, even if in the middle of worshiping God, Christ tells him to drop what he is offering up and immediately go make things right with the one who was slandered. This language is so harsh one can only conclude that Christ is warning from a reality concerning God's justice at the judgment seat that is often dismissed as a minor sin, and yet, will receive the most severe of punishments, that of a murderer.

You Will Not Covet Your Neighbor's Wife/You Will Not Commit Adultery

27 * Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη⸆· οὐ μοιχεύσεις. 28 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ βλέπων γυναῖκα πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι ⸀αὐτὴν ἤδη ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 29 Εἰ δὲ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ὁ δεξιὸς σκανδαλίζει σε,* ἔξελε αὐτὸν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ· συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου ⸀βληθῇ εἰς γέενναν. 30 ⸋καὶ εἰ ⸂ἡ δεξιά σου χεὶρ⸃ σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔκκοψον αὐτὴν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ· συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου ⸄εἰς γέενναν ἀπέλθῃ⸅.⸌ 

31 Ἐρρέθη δέ·* ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, δότω αὐτῇ ἀποστάσιον. 32 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ⸂πᾶς ὁ ἀπολύων⸃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι,* ⸄καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἀπολελυμένην γαμήσῃ, μοιχᾶται⸅. 

You have heard it said, "You will not commit adultery." But I say to you that anyone who sees a woman to covet her has already committed adultery in his mind. But if your right eye makes you sin, tear it out and throw it from you. For it is better for you that one part of your body be ruined rather than your whole body thrown into hell. And if your right hand makes you sin, cut it off and throw it from you. For it is better for you that one part of your body be ruined rather than your whole body be ruined in hell.

And it has been said, "Whoever divorces his wife, let him give to her a certificate of divorce." But I say you that anyone who divorces his wife except for the matter of the marriage being illegitimate makes her commit adultery, and whosoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

There are two laws here but both related. The first deals with the law that prohibits coveting by mentioning the first object of the coveting prohibition which is the wife of one's neighbor. Christ relates this to the adultery law in that coveting is the beginning of adultery, not just the precursor to it. Adultery, then, is a larger act than just the final betrayal of it. It begins in the mind and ends in the bedroom. Hence, one who covets another woman other than his wife has already committed adultery, not because he has completed the full act but because he has entered into the sin already by beginning it in his mind. 

As the previous law of murder, which begins with anger and a loss of control of one's body parts, i.e., the mouth, it can be assumed that the punishment of the beginning of the sin is equal to the end of the sin. It does not mean that Christ is saying that to desire a woman who is another's wife is the same thing as joining with her. The beginning of a sin is not the end of it. What He is saying is that one has entered into the sin of adultery be beginning it as one has entered a race by running from the starting line toward the finish line. The starting line is not the finish line but one who has begun a race is in it. Likewise, one who has begun the sin in the mind has begun the sin of adultery, and so Christ here makes coveting, not a precursor to sin, but the entering into the sin itself. Hence, the punishment for the sin of adultery is death, and in the Sermon, that means hell. So much so, in fact, that Christ warns that this should be taken so seriously that one should be willing to cut out his eye or cut off his hand rather than to disregard this application, this filling up, of the law concerning coveting another's wife. Clearly, what would be seen as a harmless sin is spoken of in the most severe of ways so that Christ's disciples don't dare dismiss it as a peripheral issue.

The second command within the dual adultery law is actual adultery that has come to its fruition. It is the finish line. This is the case because one who is made one flesh, as Christ will explain further in Chapter 19, with his wife and divorces her makes her join another while one flesh with him. Hence, he causes another to commit adultery, which seems to be worse than the sin itself (18:5-9). Likewise, the one who marries a divorced woman also commits adultery because he has now been joined to a woman who is still one flesh with her husband. The man-made certificate does not break the union made by God. Hence, every divorce and remarriage creates the sin of adultery. This expansion of the law of adultery to divorce and remarriage by Christ forbids all polygamy, whether the polygamists have pieces of paper that separate them from marriage contracts or not. 

As said of the first of these two laws, the penalty for adultery must be understood in light of the entirety of the SoM. One who practices such practices lawlessness and will not enter the kingdom of God. Hence, as adultery takes the punishment of death, death becomes in the expansion of the law the fiery hell mentioned under the law of murder.  

You Will Not Lift Up the Lord's Name for Nothing

33 Πάλιν ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις· οὐκ ἐπιορκήσεις,* ἀποδώσεις δὲ τῷ κυρίῳ τοὺς ὅρκους σου. 34 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ὀμόσαι ὅλως· μήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶν τοῦ θεοῦ, 35 μήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι ὑποπόδιόν ἐστιν τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ, μήτε εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, ὅτι πόλις ἐστὶν τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως,* 36 μήτε ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ σου ὀμόσῃς, ὅτι οὐ δύνασαι ⸂μίαν τρίχα λευκὴν ποιῆσαι ἢ μέλαιναν⸃.* 37 ⸀ἔστω δὲ ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν ⸂ναὶ ναί,⸃ οὒ οὔ· τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τούτων ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστιν.* 

Again, you have heard that it is said by the ancient tradition, "You will not swear an oath falsely, but you are to carry out your oath to the Lord." But I say to you, Do not make any oath at all, neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God, nor by the earth, for it is a footstool of His feet, nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great king, nor make an oath by your head, for you are not able to make one hair white or black. But let your word be, Yes, Yes, No, No. Anything beyond these is of the evil one.

Here the Lord applies the use of God's name, and anything holy that represents God, for an unholy use, i.e., for no good reason, to oath taking. Hence, not only should God's name not be invoked in oath taking, but neither should heaven nor earth nor Jerusalem, which all represent God in some way. In other words, the name of God, either explicitly or euphemistically, should not be used to back someone's word to make him more trustworthy. Instead, the person should be reliable and show himself to be so himself by merely saying Yes Yes or No No. Any manipulation using God to make someone who is not trustworthy seem more trustworthy is of the devil, as it uses God's name in an unholy manner. A trustworthy man will be trustworthy with just a yes or not without an empty invocation of God's name.

You Will Not Steal

38 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη· ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ °καὶ ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος. 39 * ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλʼ ὅστις σε ⸀ῥαπίζει ⸁εἰς τὴν ⸂δεξιὰν σιαγόνα [σου]⸃, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην· 40 καὶ ⸂τῷ θέλοντί⸃ σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν,* ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον⸆· 41 * καὶ ὅστις σε ⸀ἀγγαρεύσει μίλιον ἕν,* ὕπαγε μετʼ αὐτοῦ ⸆ δύο. 42 τῷ αἰτοῦντί σε ⸀δός, καὶ ⸂τὸν θέλοντα ἀπὸ σοῦ⸃ δανίσασθαι μὴ ἀποστραφῇς. 

You have heard that it is said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not fight with the evil person, but whoever slaps you on the right cheek turn to him the other also. And one who desires to sue you and take your cheaper clothes offer up to him your more expensive clothes as well. And whoever makes you go one mile, go with him two. Give to the one who asks you and from the one who wishes to borrow from you, do not turn away.

One might wonder how this passage relates to stealing, but Jesus here expands the command not to steal to a command to give to someone within the community who steals from His disciples. Hence, if someone steals honor by insulting another in the community, he is to offer him up more of his honor instead of retaliating by stealing his honor. Instead of stealing a possession of someone, the disciple of Christ is to give to one who steals a possession from him. If one seeks to steal labor from a disciple, that disciple of Christ is to not only give him that labor but offer up to him even more labor performed for free. This is a radical teaching that does not simply leave the disciple of Christ as one who avoids the negative activity of a sinner but also demands his positive service and giving to others in the community who may sin against him. Hence, it is the giving and lending spirit that is the opposite of a thieving heart, not simply the mere absence of stealing in one's activity.

You Will Not Bear False Witness against Your Neighbor

43 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη·* ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου καὶ μισήσεις τὸν ἐχθρόν σου. 44 * ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν· ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν ⸆ ⸂καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν⸃ διωκόντων ὑμᾶς, 45 ὅπως γένησθε υἱοὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ὅτι τὸν ἥλιον αὐτοῦ ἀνατέλλει ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς καὶ βρέχει ἐπὶ δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους. 46 * ἐὰν γὰρ ἀγαπήσητε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶς, τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε;* οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ τελῶναι ⸂τὸ αὐτὸ⸃ ποιοῦσιν; 47 καὶ ἐὰν ἀσπάσησθε τοὺς ⸀ἀδελφοὺς ὑμῶν μόνον, τί περισσὸν ποιεῖτε;* οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ ⸁ἐθνικοὶ ⸂τὸ αὐτὸ⸃ ποιοῦσιν; 48 ἔσεσθε οὖν ὑμεῖς τέλειοι ⸀ὡς ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ⸁οὐράνιος τέλειός ἐστιν. 

You have heard that it is said, "Love your friends and hate your opponents." But I say to you, Love your opponents and pray for those who persecute you so that you might be sons of your Father who is in the heavens because His sun rises upon the evil and the good and He causes it to rain upon the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not the worst of men do the same? And if you greet those in your group only, what greater thing are you doing? Do not the pagans also do the same? Therefore, you are to be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect. 

One might also wonder how this law relates to the Ten Commandments. However, in the same kind of twist that Christ makes of the law prohibiting stealing, he does the same when it comes to bearing false witness. Instead of simply telling His disciples not to bear false witness, He tells them not to retaliate against false witness and unwarranted persecution from another person in the covenant community. He calls them, therefore, not to curse and say all sorts of things falsely against them, which, as we have discussed, is what persecution refers to in the Sermon (see 5:10-12). It is social persecution, not physical. Instead of retaliating by spreading false things, i.e., bearing false witness against a fellow covenant member (i.e., your neighbor), Christ's disciples are to love them and pray for them, especially since these people would be viewed by Christ in the Sermon as false believers who are going to hell. Love and pity must cause His disciples to pray for those who are under the judgment of God and under the delusion that they are saved. Hence, as God does good to both the just and unjust in nature, Christ's disciples are to use this as an example of what they should do to both the just and unjust within the covenant community. As God has a perfect love, they are to have a perfect love that is not for only part of Christ's visible community but for the entirety of it. Hence, as God's love does not restrict His goodness from the unjust so they should not restrict their love and prayers from the unjust within the community. Hence, instead of bearing false witness against those who do the same to them, and bearing false witness is a way to get others to curse them, Christ's disciples are to love and pray for blessing upon these unjust people. As the law before it, this law teaches that it is not the absence of bearing false witness that is contrary to the spirit of the slanderer, which is ultimately the spirit of murder as we see in the first of Christ's commands in His law, but rather love and the seeking of blessing for another in the community who has gained ill will by Christ's disciple through their slander of him. Here, the radical expansion of the old covenant moral law leads to taking upon itself the very character of God who is gracious to the unjust, and in this very act, displays the very gospel that saved the disciple of Christ in the first place.

You Will Not Worship Other Gods before Me 

Προσέχετε °[δὲ] τὴν ⸀δικαιοσύνην ὑμῶν μὴ ποιεῖν ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων πρὸς τὸ θεαθῆναι αὐτοῖς·* εἰ δὲ μή γε, μισθὸν οὐκ ἔχετε παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν τῷ ἐν °1τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 2 Ὅταν οὖν ποιῇς ἐλεημοσύνην, μὴ σαλπίσῃς ἔμπροσθέν σου,* ὥσπερ οἱ ὑποκριταὶ ποιοῦσιν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς ῥύμαις, ὅπως δοξασθῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων·* ἀμὴν ⸆ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 3 σοῦ δὲ ποιοῦντος ἐλεημοσύνην μὴ γνώτω ἡ ἀριστερά σου τί ποιεῖ ἡ δεξιά σου,* 4 ὅπως ⸉ᾖ σου ἡ ἐλεημοσύνη⸊ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ·* καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ⸆ ἀποδώσει σοι⸇. 

5 Καὶ ὅταν ⸂προσεύχησθε,* οὐκ ἔσεσθε⸃ ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί, ὅτι φιλοῦσιν ⸆ ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς γωνίαις τῶν πλατειῶν ἑστῶτες ⸀προσεύχεσθαι,* ὅπως ⸇ φανῶσιν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις·* ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ⸆1 ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 6 σὺ δὲ ὅταν προσεύχῃ, εἴσελθε εἰς τὸ ταμεῖόν σου καὶ κλείσας τὴν θύραν σου πρόσευξαι τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ·* καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι⸆.* 

7 * Προσευχόμενοι δὲ μὴ βατταλογήσητε ὥσπερ οἱ ⸀ἐθνικοί,* δοκοῦσιν γὰρ ὅτι ἐν τῇ πολυλογίᾳ αὐτῶν εἰσακουσθήσονται.* 8 μὴ οὖν ὁμοιωθῆτε αὐτοῖς· οἶδεν γὰρ ⸂ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν⸃ ὧν χρείαν ἔχετε πρὸ τοῦ ὑμᾶς ⸄αἰτῆσαι αὐτόν⸅. 

9 Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς·* 

      Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν ⸂τοῖς οὐρανοῖς⸃· 

      ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου· 

      10 ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου· 

      γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, 

      °ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ ⸆ γῆς· 

      11 τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·* 

      12 καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν ⸂τὰ ὀφειλήματα⸃ ἡμῶν, 

      ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ⸀ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν· 

      13 καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν,* 

      ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. ⸆ 

14 * Ἐὰν °γὰρ ἀφῆτε τοῖς ἀνθρώποις τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, ἀφήσει καὶ ὑμῖν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ⸀οὐράνιος· 15 ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀφῆτε τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ⸆, οὐδὲ ὁ πατὴρ ⸂ὑμῶν ἀφήσει⸃ τὰ παραπτώματα ὑμῶν. 

16 * Ὅταν δὲ νηστεύητε, μὴ γίνεσθε ⸀ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταὶ σκυθρωποί,* ἀφανίζουσιν γὰρ τὰ πρόσωπα ⸁αὐτῶν ὅπως φανῶσιν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις νηστεύοντες·* ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ⸆ ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 17 σὺ δὲ νηστεύων ἄλειψαί σου τὴν κεφαλὴν καὶ τὸ πρόσωπόν σου νίψαι,* 18 ὅπως μὴ φανῇς ⸉τοῖς ἀνθρώποις νηστεύων⸊ ἀλλὰ τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν ⸂τῷ κρυφαίῳ⸃·* καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν ⸂τῷ κρυφαίῳ⸃ ἀποδώσει σοι⸆. 

Be careful not to practice your righteousness before men to be seen by them, since if you do that you have no reward with your Father who is in the heavens. Therefore, when you give charity, do not sound a trumpet to call attention to yourself as the hypocrites do in the religious meetings and in the streets in order to be admired by men. Truly I say to you, You have your reward. But when you give charity do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing so that you give in secret and your Father who sees in secret will give to you.

And when you pray, do not be as the false converts because they love to pray in the meeting places and while standing at the streetcorners, so that they might be seen by people. Truly I say to you, they have their reward. But when you pray, go into your inner room and close your door to pray to your Father who is in the secret place. And your Father who sees in the secret place will reward you.

And when you pray, do not ramble on repetitiously like the pagans do, for they think that they will be heard in their many words. Therefore, do not be like them. For your Father knows of what you have need before you ask Him.

Therefore, you are to pray like this:

Our Father, who is in the heavens,

May Your name be considered holy.

May Your kingdom come.

May Your will be done as it is in heaven so also upon the earth.

Give to us today our daily food.

And forgive us our debts as we also forgive our debtors.

Do not bring us into temptation but deliver us from evil.

For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you do not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

And when you fast, do not be visibly downcast as the false converts, for they change their faces so that they might make known their fasting before men. Truly I say to you, They have their reward. But when you fast anoint your head and wash your face so that you do not show your fasting to people but to your Father who is in the hidden place and your Father who sees in the hidden place will reward you.

Here we see Christ contrast true and false worship, one done for the self and one done for God. In this way, He addresses the worship of God alone in the first commandment in such a way as to present the true deity that rivals Him in false religion. The breaking of the first commandment was being committed by those who had never uttered a prayer to Zeus, never gave alms to his priests, nor fasted to gain his favor. Instead, they prayed, gave alms, and fasted supposedly to the God of the Bible. Yet, Christ argues here that they actually did all of these for themselves, so that men might praise them and honor them. Hence, their worship was not to bring honor and glory to God but to themselves. Although we often hear this application in our own day, this would have been a radical understanding and application of the law, since the 2d Temple Jews commemorating the days of freedom from tyranny under Antiochus IV and always on watch against Roman paganism that various governors and emperors sought to impose upon the Jews, their faithfulness would have been seen as having nothing to do with other gods. The irony, of course, is that all such gods are substitutes for the one true object of every pagan's worship, the self.

You Will Not Make for Yourself an Image . . . You Will Not Bow Down to Them or Serve Them; for I YHWH Your God Am a Jealous God

19 Μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς,* ὅπου σὴς καὶ βρῶσις ἀφανίζει καὶ ὅπου κλέπται διορύσσουσιν καὶ κλέπτουσιν·* 20 * θησαυρίζετε δὲ ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐν οὐρανῷ* ὅπου οὔτε σὴς οὔτε βρῶσις ἀφανίζει καὶ ὅπου κλέπται οὐ διορύσσουσιν ⸂οὐδὲ κλέπτουσιν⸃· 21 ὅπου γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θησαυρός ⸀σου, ἐκεῖ ἔσται °καὶ ἡ καρδία ⸀σου. 

22 * Ὁ λύχνος τοῦ σώματός ἐστιν ὁ ὀφθαλμός.* ἐὰν °οὖν ⸂ᾖ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ἁπλοῦς⸃, ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου φωτεινὸν ἔσται·* 23 ἐὰν δὲ ⸉ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου πονηρὸς ᾖ⸊, ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου σκοτεινὸν ἔσται. εἰ οὖν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἐν σοὶ σκότος ἐστίν, τὸ σκότος πόσον. 

24 * Οὐδεὶς ⸆ δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν·* ἢ γὰρ τὸν ἕνα μισήσει καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ἀγαπήσει, ἢ ἑνὸς ἀνθέξεται καὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου καταφρονήσει. οὐ δύνασθε θεῷ δουλεύειν καὶ μαμωνᾷ.* 

25 * Διὰ τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν·* μὴ μεριμνᾶτε τῇ ψυχῇ ὑμῶν τί φάγητε ⸂[ἢ τί πίητε]⸃, μηδὲ τῷ σώματι ὑμῶν τί ἐνδύσησθε. οὐχὶ ἡ ψυχὴ πλεῖόν ἐστιν τῆς τροφῆς καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἐνδύματος;* 26 ἐμβλέψατε εἰς τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὅτι οὐ σπείρουσιν οὐδὲ θερίζουσιν οὐδὲ συνάγουσιν εἰς ⸆ ἀποθήκας, καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος τρέφει αὐτά· οὐχ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον διαφέρετε αὐτῶν;* 27 τίς δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν μεριμνῶν δύναται προσθεῖναι ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ πῆχυν ἕνα; 28 Καὶ περὶ ἐνδύματος τί μεριμνᾶτε; καταμάθετε τὰ κρίνα τοῦ ἀγροῦ πῶς ⸂αὐξάνουσιν· οὐ κοπιῶσιν οὐδὲ νήθουσιν⸃· * 29 λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐδὲ Σολομὼν ἐν πάσῃ τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ περιεβάλετο ὡς ἓν τούτων. 30 εἰ δὲ τὸν χόρτον τοῦ ἀγροῦ σήμερον ὄντα καὶ αὔριον εἰς κλίβανον βαλλόμενον ὁ θεὸς οὕτως ἀμφιέννυσιν,* οὐ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς, ὀλιγόπιστοι;* 31 Μὴ οὖν μεριμνήσητε λέγοντες· τί φάγωμεν; ἤ· τί πίωμεν; ἤ· τί περιβαλώμεθα; 32 ⸉πάντα γὰρ ταῦτα⸊ τὰ ἔθνη ⸀ἐπιζητοῦσιν·* οἶδεν γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος ὅτι χρῄζετε τούτων ἁπάντων. 33 ζητεῖτε δὲ πρῶτον τὴν ⸂βασιλείαν [τοῦ θεοῦ]* καὶ τὴν δικαιοσύνην⸃ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ταῦτα πάντα προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν. 34 Μὴ οὖν μεριμνήσητε εἰς τὴν αὔριον, ἡ γὰρ αὔριον μεριμνήσει ⸀ἑαυτῆς· ἀρκετὸν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἡ κακία αὐτῆς. 

Μὴ κρίνετε, ἵνα μὴ κριθῆτε·* 2 ἐν ᾧ γὰρ κρίματι κρίνετε κριθήσεσθε,* καὶ ἐν ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε ⸀μετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν. *3 Τί δὲ βλέπεις τὸ κάρφος τὸ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου, τὴν δὲ ἐν τῷ σῷ ὀφθαλμῷ δοκὸν οὐ κατανοεῖς; 4 ἢ πῶς ⸀ἐρεῖς τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου· ἄφες ἐκβάλω τὸ κάρφος ⸁ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σου, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἡ δοκὸς ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ σοῦ˸;* 5 ὑποκριτά, ἔκβαλε πρῶτον ⸉ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σοῦ τὴν δοκόν⸊, καὶ τότε διαβλέψεις ἐκβαλεῖν τὸ κάρφος ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου. 

*6 Μὴ δῶτε τὸ ἅγιον τοῖς κυσὶν μηδὲ βάλητε τοὺς μαργαρίτας ὑμῶν ἔμπροσθεν τῶν χοίρων,* μήποτε ⸀καταπατήσουσιν αὐτοὺς ἐν τοῖς ποσὶν αὐτῶν καὶ στραφέντες ῥήξωσιν ὑμᾶς. 

*7 Αἰτεῖτε καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν,* ζητεῖτε καὶ εὑρήσετε, κρούετε καὶ ἀνοιγήσεται ὑμῖν· 8 πᾶς γὰρ ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβάνει καὶ ὁ ζητῶν εὑρίσκει καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ⸀ἀνοιγήσεται. 9 ἢ τίς °ἐστιν ἐξ ὑμῶν ἄνθρωπος, ὃν ⸀αἰτήσει ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ ἄρτον, μὴ λίθον ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; 10 ⸂ἢ καὶ ἰχθὺν αἰτήσει⸃, μὴ ὄφιν ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; 11 εἰ οὖν ὑμεῖς πονηροὶ ὄντες οἴδατε ⸂δόματα ἀγαθὰ⸃ διδόναι τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν,* πόσῳ μᾶλλον ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς δώσει ἀγαθὰ τοῖς αἰτοῦσιν αὐτόν˸. 

*12 Πάντα °οὖν ὅσα ἐὰν θέλητε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι,* οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς· οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται. 

Do not save up for yourselves valuables upon the earth where moth and rust disintegrate and where thieves break in and steal. But save up valuables for yourselves in heaven where neither moth nor rust disintegrate and where thieves do not break in nor steal. For where what you value is there is also your focus.

The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore, if your eye is clear, your whole body is enlightened but if your eye is evil then your whole body is darkened. Therefore, if the light which is in you is dark, how much more is the darkness.

No one is able to serve two lords. For either he will hate the one and love the other or be devoted to one and treat the other as lesser. You are not able to serve God and your portfolio.

Because of this, I say to you, Do not worry about your life, what you might eat, or what you might drink, nor with what you will clothe your body. Life consists of more than food and the body than clothing. Think about the birds of the sky. They neither sow nor reap nor gather into storehouses. Yet, your heavenly Father takes care of them. Are you not worth far more than them? But who among you by worrying is able to add a single cubit to his life? And concerning clothing, why do you worry? Learn from the lilies of the field, how they grow. They do not do the labor of either a man or a woman. Yet, I say to you that not even Solomon in all of his glory was arrayed like one of these. But if God clothes in such a manner the plant of the field that exists today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, are you not worth so much more, O Ones of Little Faith? Therefore, do not worry, saying, What should we eat? What should we drink? What should we put on? For all of these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all of these things. But pursue above everything else the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things will be added to you. Therefore, do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble within it.

Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in whatever manner you use to judge someone else you will be judged the same way; and by whatever standard of measure you measure someone else, you will be measured by the same. Indeed, why do you see the speck in your brother's eye, but the giant ceiling support beam in your own eye you don't even notice? Furthermore, how can you say to your brother, "Let me remove the speck from your eye," and lo and behold, the giant ceiling support beam is in your eye? Hypocrite! First remove the giant ceiling support beam from your eye and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Do not give your holy gift to dogs nor throw your pearls before pigs lest they trample them under their feet and turn and tear you apart.

Ask and you will receive. Seek and you will find. Knock and it will be opened to you. For anyone who asks receives and who seeks finds and to the one who knocks it will be opened. What man among you when he has a son who asks for bread will give him a stone? Or he asks also for a fish and he gives him a snake? Not a man among you would do this. If you, therefore, being evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those who ask Him?

Therefore, everything whatsoever you want people to do for you, so also do for them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

As every god seeks a worshiper, every god has a means by which he is worshiped. If the actual false god of humanity is the self, then what gives the greatest pleasure to the self is money, since it brings a sense of stability, comfort, and luxury to the self. It brings about the admiration of other people, men and women, it brings about a sense of success and importance. It brings power. It is, therefore, the first and foremost thing that men seek to use as a means to worship themselves. All of this, as Christ argues here, however, is temporary, and only a fool would live for what passes away so quickly. Rather, what He argues is the if people truly want to build up a life for themselves, they should seek God first and His righteousness/justice. In other words, to worship God is to do good to the self as well, but to worship the self is to do violence to the self and to ultimately lose it. 

He makes the statement that the eye is the light of the body and that if one has an evil eye the entire body will be dark. The idiom "evil eye" refers to one who is greedy. If one is greedy he will not do what is just in his life, i.e., his whole body will be darkness, because he won't even be able to see the poor. That is the point of the saying. Having an evil eye is to have a dark eye that makes one blind toward those who are in need.

He warns believers that they will not be able to serve both God and wealth. They cannot spend their lives building up their legacies on earth and in heaven as well. One will take over the other because eventually the poor that will always be with the church will need that money and one will have to make a choice between the worship of God with money and the worship of self with money, and he will have to make this choice again and again in his life so that one storehouse, either the one on earth or in heaven, will be depleted.

So He then proceeds to remove an excuse that some may have, "But I or my family need this money to survive in the future." He answers this objection by challenging His disciples to either believe Him or doubt Him. He argues that God will take care of His disciples even more than He takes care of the birds that he feeds and the flowers of the field that he clothes. If God takes care of all of the needs of these created things that were made for people, how much more will God take care of those people who belong to Him?

Of course, no one thinks he is a worshiper of self through money, so Christ challenges this delusional belief by daring His disciples to prove it by giving up the false security of their money to help poor believers. So, now, he removes another series of excuses that is often given by those who do not really want to give that have to do with judging the unworthiness of the potential recipients of money: "They're poor for reason. They misuse money. They didn't save their money. They deserve to be in the position they're in."

Instead, Christ tells his disciples not to judge in this manner since they too are needy and must gain their eternal wealth from God who could easily dismiss them in the same way. In fact, Christ argues that if the one who holds money judges in this way, God will also judge them the same way, which is a much more terrifying warning than how one often reads this passage when disconnecting it from the money issue. However, it is clear that the warning not to judge has to do with the money issue as the full passage dealing with the subject does not end until 7:12, which both ends the section about money as well as summarizes the entire law of the Sermon on the Mount.

Christ argues, therefore, to judge oneself first and gain some humility as one who will receive God's mercy so as to then show such mercy to those who are in need. In becoming merciful, one is able to help his brother both with any deficiencies he might have in his moral practice or financial situation. 

The command in 7:6 is often misapplied out of context to refer to someone unworthy to hear the Word of God or the gospel, but this has nothing to do with the context. The context is still about money and the reference to holy pearls/wealth allows the reader to understand that sacred alms are to be given only to believers. The terminology of dogs and pigs make it clear that this is a reference to unbelievers, since this is common terminology for people outside the community of God. Gentiles are often called dogs. Paul uses the same term ironically for Judaizing apostates who work against the gospel. Pigs, of course, are seen as unclean animals. So the command is to not give the money that needs to be given to God's people to people who do not belong to God. The worship of God with one's money comes through the help of His people, not the help of the devil's people. These people will simply receive the support of God's people to harm God's people, and it will not be received in such a way as to be used to glorify and worship God.

He then wipes out the final excuse, "But I don't have anything to give so these commands do not pertain to me," by saying that His disciples need to pray to ask God who, as a good Father, will absolutely give what is good to His children. Hence, if they ask God to give them what they need to help others, He certainly will do so. The challenge, again, is whether once one receives those gifts whether they will give them to those in need or hoard them for themselves. This, along with one's obedience to the command to do to others what one wishes to be done for them, distinguishes the true believers from the false ones, as the following passage that completes the Sermon will explicitly make clear.

Christ ends this passage about helping needy believers with one's finances, as well as the entire section of the new law code, with the statement that anything whatsoever that someone might want others to do for him, that's what he should do for other believers. He states that this is, in fact, the Law and Prophets, i.e., the point and summation of the entire Hebrew Scriptures. This also creates an inclusio with 5:17-18 as the following remainder of the Sermon will finish off the inclusio between 5:19-20 and 7:13-27. 

As Matthew began with the blessings often seen in covenant treaties such as Deuteronomy in the opening section of the Sermon, he will end the Sermon with the covenant curses. The text we just looked at sandwiches the law of Christ in between. The new Moses has given us the law of the new covenant and it is ends up being the entire point of the old covenant: Love God and love your neighbor as yourself, which is what will be repeated by Christ in the expansion of the law in the Sermon later in the book, which creates an inclusio for Christ's public ministry in Matthew followed by the curses applied to the Pharisees and those Christian pastors/teachers who would follow their pattern of life and teaching in the church (22:37-25:46).

Alone by Edgar Allan Poe

From childhood’s hour I have not been as others were

I have not seen as others saw

I could not bring my passions from a common spring

From the same source I have not taken my sorrow

I could not awaken my heart to joy at the same tone

And all I lov’d—I lov’d alone—

Then—in my childhood—in the dawn of a most stormy life—was drawn

From ev’ry depth of good and ill

The mystery which binds me still

From the torrent, or the fountain—

From the red cliff of the mountain—

From the sun that ’round me roll’d

In its autumn tint of gold

From the lightning in the sky

As it pass’d me flying by

From the thunder, and the storm

And the cloud that took the form

(When the rest of Heaven was blue)

Of a demon in my view