t See esp. Harnack, Das Wesen des Christentwms, 1901, pp. 45-47 [Eng. tr. pp. 70-74].
§ Matt. Arnold, Literature and Dogma, p. 181f. See also Mt 2649-54, Mix 831-37, Lk 954.55, and cf. Is 506 531-12, St. Paul also teaches with great emphasis the same forgiving and self- oe principle of life (Ro 1217-1, 1 Co 61-8, 1 Th5!5; cf. also 1 P 39).
this principle God acts towards men, and on this principle men must act towards one another. Jesus not only taught this standard of life, but He realized it in His ministry and in His death, thereby becoming the perfect example of human love and service. These are the qualities which make true brotherhood. One cannot for a moment suppose that Jesus, in setting forth this principle as the supreme guide in men’s dealings with one another, had the intention of overthrowing the civic laws which society requires for its preserva- tion and welfare; any such interpretation would reduce His sayings to absurdity. What He pur- posed was to make men recognize the wretchedness of a standard of conduct which rests upon the ideas of revenge and retaliation, of for ever insist- ing upon one’s rights and one’s dignity, of working only for one’s self and never for others, of getting as much and giving as little as possible. Civic laws and private practice must accept this teaching of Jesus and embody it, not necessarily in the same way, but to the same end.”
* Similarly Bacon, Sermon on the Mount, pp. 109-114: ‘ The Sermon is not legislative, as our First Evangelist seems to regard it, but prophetic. It does not enact, but interprets. It does not lay down rules, but opens up principles. . . . Matthew, as we have seen, is quite absorbed in the relation of the new Torah to the old. So much so that he fails to appreciate that his material is not really a series of new enactments, but in reality, just.as Luke perceives, a simple application to the situation of that one principle which Jesus elsewhere enunciates more briefly ; and not then as enacting something new, but as ex- plaining the old [Mt 2235-40].’ Mé 52148 gives ‘illustrations of the one principle which Jesus saw in ‘‘all the Law and the Prophets,” and saw as well in all nature and history, that the divine calling is to ministering love and service—that and that alone.’ Thayer, Journal of Bibl. Lit. 1900, p. 149: ‘Jesus is not intent on giving precepts, but would lay emphasis on prin- ciples. The distinction between the two is most important. A precept is a direction respecting a given action ; it is definite, precise, specific, fitting and belonging to particular cases. A principle, on the other hand, is comprehensive and fundamental ; it prescribes, not particular actions, but a course of conduct. . .. Aprecept bids him do, a principle trains him to be; and so begets that inwardness and continuity which are essential to character.’ B. Weiss, Meyer-Komm. ti. d. Mattevgm. in loc. : ‘Jesus explains that His will, as He would have it fulfilled in the Kingdom of God, demands the forbearing, self-forgetful love which renounces all standing on one’s rights and desire for retaliation. Jesus illustrates the general principle by concrete examples, which are not to be understood as literal commands to be obeyed, but as setting forth a general standard according to the main idea contained in them.’ Tholuck, Bergrede®, p. 291 (Eng. tr. pp. 269, 270]: ‘The commands in vv.%942 are to be regarded as only concrete illustrations of the state of mind and heart required. .. . It is only the spirit of revenge that our Lord condemns, and therefore it is not inconsistent with His command to seek the protection of the law.’ Burton and Mathews, Constructive Studies in the Life of Christ, p. 105: ‘Some have undertaken to apply such sayings as ‘‘ Resist not him that is evil,” and ‘‘Give to him that asketh of thee,” literally as fixed rules. But this is utterly to misinterpret Jesus. This whole discourse is a criticism of the Pharisees for making morality consist in a literal keeping of the rules of the OT. It is im- possible to suppose that it simply imposes a new set of rules. Others, feeling that a literal obedience to these rules is impos- sible, if not also harmful, give up all attempt to obey the teachings of this discourse. Both are wrong. (Jesus teaches here] the principle, which we ought always to strive to follow. The single precepts are intended to correct the selfishness and narrowness that Jesus saw about Him, and to point out some of the ways in which the principle may be applied. They, too, are to be obeyed, always in spirit, and in letter when such an obedience is consistent with the principle. If a man would follow Jesus, he must not resist an enemy in a spirit of re- yenge; nor should he refuse to give to a beggar from a selfish motive. If he resist or withhold,‘he must do so because love, regard for the highest well-being of society in general, requires it’ Plummer, Comm. on Luke, p. 185: ‘The four precepts here given (629-30) are startling. It is impossible for either governments or individuals to keep them, A State which endeavoured to shape its policy in exact accordance with them would soon cease to exist; and if individuals acted in strict obedience to them, society would be reduced to anarchy. Violence, robbery, and shameless exaction would be supreme. The inference is that they are not precepts, but illustrations of principles. They are in the form of rules; but as they cannot be kept. as rules, we are compelled to look beyond the letter to the spirit which they embody. If Christ had given precepts which could be kept literally, we might easily have rested content with observing the letter, and have never pene- trated to the spirit. What is the spirit? Among other things, this : that resistance of eviland refusal to part with our property must never be a personal matter; so far as we are concerned,