Eye for an Eye and Tooth for a Tooth

When I read through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, one phrase jumps out every time I read it, "But if there is harm, then you shall pay life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe" (Exodus 21:23-25, ESV). Immediately my brain thinks of Jesus' statement in the Sermon on the Mount, "You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39, ESV).

My memory is subsequently filled with the stammering and stumbling attempts of lay people and bible study leaders attempting to explain how the God of Israel who gave this commandment in Exodus could say what he says in the person of Jesus in Matthew.

There are a few things in play here:

1) It seems important to distinguish the different situations of the covenant people of God in each of these passages. In Exodus, God is speaking the intentions he has for those that agree to abide by the same set of rules. In other words, someone can demand repayment from someone only if both parties have agreed to a prior stipulation. Thus, in the passage of Exodus quoted above, the offender and the wronged party are both governed by the same contractual agreement by which they are both held accountable. Alternately, in the context of the Sermon on the Mount, the word of God is issuing forth from the context of exile. As such, I would contend that Jesus is informing the Jews who are listening that, should they be wronged by Gentiles, they cannot and should not demand appropriate retribution because Gentiles have not agreed to the covenant that God had made with Israel.

2) Even with this said, the apparent distance between Jesus' statement from the mount in Matthew and God's statement from the mount in Exodus seems insurmountable (all pun intended). How can we say that these two, the God of Israel and Jesus, are, in fact, one and the same? Our translations do us a great disservice when they insert a paragraph change between verses 25 and 26 of chapter 21. Listen to the two verses that follow the passage quoted above from Exodus: "When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his [or her] eye. If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth" (Exodus 21:26-27, ESV). Suddenly, Jesus' statement does not sound so different does it? Apparently, what God meant by "eye for a eye and tooth for a tooth" was "eye for freedom and tooth for freedom." Or perhaps it would more aptly stated as "eye for appropriate compensation and tooth for appropriate compensation."

It may be that Jesus was redirecting a wrongful interpretation that had issued from the Jewish leadership, we cannot be sure. However, we can say with some certainty that Jesus is by no means taking a statute from the Torah and disclaiming it as barbaric (a Greek term which would translate as Gentile-like). Rather, he is taking a barbaric (Gentile-like) interpretation and nullifying its validity for the covenant community.