§ Luke’s source did not contain this clause, perhaps for the usual reason that it was too Jewish. The case is the same in Lk 1025-28 = Mt 2233-40-= Mk 1228-31, where Matthew’s clause, ‘On these two commandments hangeth the whole law and the pro- phets,’ is entirely absent from Luke’s account, and in Mark’s account is differently worded, ‘There is none other command- ment greater than these.’ It is not unlikely, therefore, that in this passage, as in many others, the more Jewish First Gospel
42 SERMON ON THE MOUNT
SERMON ON THE MOUNT
in this teaching is closely related to that of ‘loving one’s neighbour as one’s self’; this idea was al- ready formulated in the OT (Lv 19%), and was pronounced by Jesus to be one of the two great commandments comprehending all human duty (Mt 228-40). St. Paul also followed his Master in the same teaching (Gal 5"). Our verse has come to be known as the ‘Golden Rule,’ which marks the high place that it holds in the Gospel teaching. What it presents, however, is not a precept for literal application everywhere, but a principle for the determination of social conduct. It inculcates a spirit which men are to cultivate towards one another.* Jesus wishes by means of it to correct the mood of selfishness and contempt which ob- structs the realization of a true human brother- hood. Men are prone to use their fellow-men as tools for their own comfort, advancement, or plea- sure. Kant gave perfect expression to the higher idea when he wrote, ‘So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, in every case aS an end, never as a means only.’ It. is still the rule rather than the exception that those men who, by reason of their wealth, social rank, or public office, are in a position to command others, abuse them by ignoring their personality, disregarding their rights, appropriating the fruits of their labour, ‘withholding from them opportunities for attaining higher manhood, and in other ways _treating them like machines or slaves. This con- dition of present society is essentially un-Christian, and is to be counteracted and transformed by the Gospel. For this achievement the ‘Golden Rule’ can be exceedingly useful, when applied as a principle, with the aid of a well-trained judgment and a consecrated common-sense. Let each man respect the individuality and observe the rights of every other man, let him honour and treat every other man as he in their places would wish to be honoured and treated, let him give such sympathy and assistance to others as he would himself like to receive. In this manner the ‘Golden Rule’ will be fulfilled.+
has better preserved the original saying of Jesus. Of course it cannot be denied as a possibility that the clause in Mt 712 stands there as the product of an apologetic Judaistic retouching (as in Mt 518f), or by misplacement, or through liturgical usage. As for the meaning of Jesus’ words in this connexion, the Golden Rule ‘ is the law and the prophets’ in the sense that it states the principle on which the Law and the Prophets tried to build up a real human brotherhood (cf. Ro 139, Gal 514), This is true, even though the Law and the Prophets did not fully accomplish their purpose, or even perfectly grasp the ideal towards which they were working. Jesus would emphasize the fact of the continuity of revelation, showing how the Divine ideal had preceded Himself in the world, and that the OT history and teaching were inspired by the same God and with essentially the same truth as constituted His own revelation. It is thus with deliberate intention that He closes the body of His discourse with this statement, which connects significantly with the words used to introduce the main argument, ‘Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil’ (Mt 517),
* See esp. O. Holtzmann, Leben Jesu (1901), p. 189.
+ Sayings similar to this of Mt 712 are found in pre-Christian and post-Christian Jewish writings, and also among Greek, Roman, and Oriental peoples, showing that this principle of life was not first formulated, or exclusively formulated, by Jesus. This does not impugn Jesus’ originality or authority, but indi- cates that truth and the desire for goodness are innate in man (cf. Ac 1722-31), Jesus, however, so changed the wording of this principle as to give it a new force and sphere, for He stated it— not negatively, as it everywhere else appears—but positively, insisting upon that loving service to others which is peculiar to the Gospel. Legalism says, ‘Thou shalt not’ do this and that— a system of repression ; the Gospel of Life says, ‘Thou shalt’ do countless good and helpful things—a system of development. The difference is like that between the false and the true child- nurture : the false method says constantly, ‘Don’t do this, don’t do that’; the true method fills the child’s mind with lovely and useful things to do, so that the child will grow in goodness and service. Jewish forms of the Golden Rule may be seen in To 415 ‘That which thou hatest, do to no one’; also in the saying attributed to Hillel, ‘What thou hatest thyself, that do not thou to another : this is the whole of the law, all the rest is only comment upon it’ (Bab. Shab. f. 31.1). The non-Jewish forms are numerous; Isocrates wrote, “A réoxyovres Ug’ Erépmy Spy iCecbs, ratte rois wAAOIS 7 roeive; the Stoic maxim was,