Love Your Enemy? A Short Commentary on the Greek and Hebrew of Matthew 5:43
71
Who Is Your Enemy
Roy Blizzard III © 2011
As an ordained minister and a Hebrew, Greek etc student of the Bible as well as the son of a PhD in Hebrew studies and minister, I am well aware of many of the errors spread in the name of Christianity, especially the Old Testament ones the so called pacifist movement so loves to spread, "thou shall not kill" and Jesus' New Testament words "Love your enemies".
Even if one is familiar with Hebrew it can be difficult to trace the real roots behind these Words and if you only know Greek you are at a real disadvantage and will probably never know what the truth is unless someone like me were to tell you.
You may or may not be aware that the Old Testament passage of Exodos 20:13, "thou shall not kill" actually is translated as "thou shall not commit premeditated murder". There has been several good articles about this. However, I have never seen anyone write about what I am going to share with you now except for my father and I, as most Christians probably don't know enough to find where to look for it.
In Matthew 5, where Jesus is speaking on the mount, he is giving a perfectly good Jewish sermon, saying nothing new, but just commenting on Jewish law. But when you read it in Greek and then English, if you know Jewish Law, you are immediately thrown off when you come to the statement to "love your enemies" as this does not make good Jewish sense as they had a teaching that said that if a man were to come to kill you, you should rise up and kill him first as your righteous character and that of your family is worth more than the unrighteous character of the evil one coming to destroy you.
So then, why does Jesus say to "love your enemy"? Is he stating some new law that we were unaware of? No, for to do so would have been to make God out to be changeable.
When I was taking Classical Greek at the University of Texas in 1986, this perplexed me so I started researching it. It took me several days to find out the answer. In the Liddell and Scott Greek English Lexicon which is the authoritative lexical aid for Greek I found an unusual reference that finally led me to the truth. The Greek word in question here is Exthros which is generally translated as Enemy in EVERY NEW TESTAMENT LEXICAL AID.
However, in the Liddell and Scott there is a reference to a 1st century A.D. grammaticus, Ammonius - Grammaticus, which defined the word Exthros as someone who had been a Philos (a brother) but is alienated (out of enmity you had become estranged from them for a while). It was different than a Polamios, who you are at war with (who was a blood enemy who was out to kill you) and a Dusmenos is one who has long been alienated and refuses to reconcile.
Then it all made sense to me.
Jesus was quoting the Jewish Law.
In the Babylonian Talmud, in the Book called Sanhedrine, which dealt with trials and legal issues, # III 5, there is a reference to this subject, "If one had not spoken to his brother (a person of the community or a Philos) for 3 days due to "enmity" then you could not sit on a court of law either for that individual or against that individual.
What Jesus was saying then was that you brothers had better quit behaving badly towards one another or else you won't be able to support your community if such a need arises. A person may be falsely accused and if you haven't spoken to your brother for 3 days you won't be able to get him out of trouble or vice versa if you see your brother commiting a crime, you can't bring charges.
So there you have it. Too many Christians have needlessly gone to their deaths and others have let too many individuals take advantage of others due to misunderstanding this one passage. All men should be prepared to defend themselves and their families from thugs and criminals and even false teachers who are coming in as wolves to destroy them through teachings that are just flat out wrong because they haven't studied enough to know the truth.
I hope you can find this useful in your daily lives.
 | There has never been a book written that deals with this subject as Dusty does. I'm a Biblical Scholar and have read hundreds of religious books and this isn't your typical religious book. This book actually reveals truth to you that will enable you to live in peace in your spirit. There is no secret formula except the fact that one has to realize the real truth that has been carefully hidden by those with an agenda. Buy it and you'll read it again and again! Roy Amazon Price: $7.00 |
CommentsLoading...
Thank you for clearing up that statement...like you said, it has caused needless death, sorrow, and unhappiness.
To Love My Enemy, first I would have to see someone as my enemy. I do not necessarily have to like them, nor do I have to try and befriend them, just try to be civil to them if I see them. If they avoid me, so be it. I can still hold a portion of love in my heart for them.
Immediately after stating that we should not engage in gossip (i.e., lashon hara), the LORD commands: Lo ta'amod al dam re'ekha: "You must not stand idly by when your neighbor's life is at stake" (Lev. 19:16). Lo Ta'amod (?? ??????) means that we have a moral duty to speak the truth when others are victimized...
This is a comment From Hebrew For Christians. https://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Hebrew-for-Christians/56347292809
Great to know! This makes more sense since it is the same word as in Rom 5:10--the 'kind' of enemy we are to God without Christ. (I'm one of those unfortunate ones who have studied Greek but not Hebrew.)
Amen, nice work Roy, toda for the blessing and be encouraged to continue, may we all grow in the grace of our God/Elohim, coming to a better understanding of His word, will and ways.
Shalom Roy,
The Bible says there is "one" God. The Shema "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one"... So the Trinity is not correct in the since that there are "three" gods. What's your stance on that?
I will defend myself if necessary if one puts me in an untenable situation. I have done so but with legal, not other means. And, I think that it is not up to a man to do it but every individual. Methinks that each man and woman need to take care of self. Different with a minor but a women over 18 need to take care of herself!
Mr. Blizzard, I've enjoyed your posts, but I'm flummoxed by your comments on this point. Please elaborate because this is the most unique understanding of the "love your enemies" teaching I've ever seen. Your explanation has its roots in a very obscure source, and I don't get your point. (Please don't take that as criticism- it's just my observation.)
Also, do you have insight on the directive to "not return evil for evil"? Everyone else seems to think Jesus completely renounced violence with his Sermon on the Mount. I think it seems he renounced using violence or fighting to protect any principle, or oppose any assault, or oppression. Would Jesus have said fighting Germany in WWII wasn't worth it- that the Nazis should have been dealt with in a non-violent manner? What about contemporary issues like al Qaida terrorists, or responding to the North Korean leaders? Could Jesus' comments have their basis in his belief that the the end of the present world was near and that God was going to create the "new heaven and new earth" in the apocalypse very soon? If one sees Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher who believed the end of the physical, material world was just around the corner, his teachings make a lot more sense.
Dear Bluejaypoint733,
I’m never offended by criticism so fire away. You have recognized an important point that most Christians have overlooked and that is the apparent conflict of Jesus’ message in the King James and other so called translations and what the real world is really like. Are we supposed to roll over and play dead like a bunch of opossums when Hitlers come calling? The answer is no. You must remember that Jesus is speaking to “brothers” or fellow Jews here, not roman soldiers with their swords drawn about to cut everyone down. My point is this, what Jesus preached was all found somewhere within Judaism and unless we can find where it was he found his sources then we can’t fully understand what it was he was preaching. Only if one is unfamiliar with Judaism would my sources be obscure and that is one point you must be aware of, very few “Bible teachers” are educated enough to find these sources. We also have to remember that there are instances when we don’t return evil for evil. I don’t insult someone just because they insult me. That would be lowering myself to their level and forgo living in Jesus’ Kingdom here on earth to dwell in their earthly kingdom. Of course, when pure evil comes calling, ie Hitlers, then Judaism insists to rise up and protect oneself and ones family if at all possible due to the fact that the righteousness of you and your family is worth more than the unrighteousness of those trying to kill you. In those instances where it is not possible then all we can do is be the light and power of God here on this Earth to the extent that it is possible to do so. Jesus’ message is only conflicting if we don’t understand Jewish Theology and that is the problem. I would suggest you read my article on A Rethinking of the Tower of Babel Story as much of what I speak about in it has direct bearing on why one has to resist evil. Jesus’ comment only had to do with how to live in His Kingdom now, not anytime in the future. He was not an apocalyptic preacher, but a realist and knew the operations of man and the importance of unifying with God in purpose to overcome the daily evils we face.
I appreciate your insights Mr. Blizzard. Thank you very much.
I read your posts about Nimrod and Babel, but I still have a couple more questions Mr. Blizzard. I recall Jesus teaching, and I paraphrase a bit here, You have heard it said to treat others as you wish to be treated. But I call you to a higher law... Then we get the rest of the Sermon on the Mount.
You noted Lev. 19:16. You indicate Jesus isn't proposing a new law. However, it still seems to me and many others that Jesus IS in fact saying that people need to move beyond "do unto others"- to choose oppression and death, if necessary, rather than engaging in violence, including self-defense? After all, Jesus' ministry culminated in a passive acceptance of a horrible fate in order to fully bring about God's kingdom.
As God, doesn't Jesus have the right to set a new standard beyond the law of the OT? The Law and all its interpretations had not been successful in reconciling God and humankind over thousands of years up to that point, hence the need for Jesus' ministry, death, and resurrection. I'm not saying you are wrong. I just am perhaps having trouble seeing the Sermon on the Mount in a new light after decades of being fed a much different understanding of scripture.
I appreciate the fact that most of us let insults and challenges, some of them major, roll off us like water off a duck. Many have been inspired by Jesus' example to walk away from confrontations of all sorts. That's great, but that's not going to cut it when the Khmer Rouge or Taliban show up in your town. They will destroy your civilization and turn you and your family into slaves even if you are a kind and good person. If a person cannot return fire with fire when the local criminal syndicate, whatever form it takes, shows up to take over, then what is life really about? Many Christians seem to think that life is about bearing the burdens you've been given, acceptance of what befalls you, and that follows Jesus' example.
Also, one of your other posts mentioned that Jesus' instruction to the apostles that they must take up their cross and follow him to be a disciple has been mistranslated. Please elaborate on that point as well. Thank you, sir.
Dear bluejaypoint733,
Jesus never said anything about a “higher law”. What he did say was 5:17 “I came to fill the law full of meaning” which was a Hebrew way of saying that he felt that the law had been misinterpreted from the way it was supposed to be understood. He wasn’t proposing any new law, just properly giving us what it should have been.
While it may seem to indicate to you and others that Jesus is indicating a move away from the do unto others this isn’t right as Jesus specifically tell us to treat others as we ourselves would want to be treated specifically as we may be the only messenger of the kingdom that someone ever meets. Again you must remember that Jesus is specifically speaking of Believers here, fellow Jews, not pagans and evil doers. Jesus doesn’t tell us not to fight if necessary in a war or a fight where someone is seeking our death as this would go against all Jewish law. This is a problem of misunderstanding the message and the messenger. While many went out and were subject to any manner of cruel deaths, that doesn’t mean Jesus commanded us to do so. We are commanded to “take a stand” for Jesus, the real meaning of take up your cross, and if in the process of taking a stand we happen to suffer for what we have been called to do then we can accept that just as Jesus did. Jesus didn’t necessarily have a “passive” acceptance of his fate. I saw him struggle mightily in the garden over his fate. But again, his fight was a spiritual fight and this is where the kingdom is secured, not in a physical but spiritual context. So while it may look like Jesus was passive, he was leading an army to destroy the strong hold of HaSatan. This is not a passive act.
If the scripture is correct and God doesn’t lie then God or Jesus didn’t need to set any new standards as what was established was sufficient to enact all that God needed to enact. Maybe Jesus needed to make known the truth behind what man had misinterpreted, but Jesus said nothing new that some other Jew had not said before, except that he was God, and even that wasn’t a new concept as the old Testament says that God will come to seek and to save that which was lost, so Jesus Being God should have been expected. Most of the sermon on the mount is a restatement of the sayings of the fathers in Judaism, so it is no wonder that you don’t understand the sermon if you haven’t read the sayings. Also you have to remember, Judaism was given to the Jews out of rebellion at Sinai. It is not that Judaism is bad, it is just that it was to point to something that they missed at Sinai. Namely and intimate relationship with their creator. Several OT men experienced that namely Enoch and Elijah, even Job was filled with the Holy Spirit. It was just that some blood had to be shed sometime for permanent redemption to occur.
Again, the reason there are over 30,000 different denominations is due to a tragic misunderstanding of Jesus and his teachings. I can only help those who are willing to be open to the fact that the “church” as a whole manipulates men to death for their own evil purposes. The fact that many go to their deaths in shear acceptance of what befalls you is in my opinion wrong and a lie of the devil to destroy the righteous off the face of the earth. If you will read my “A Rethinking of the Tower of Babel Story” you will see at the end of the article what I’m talking about.
That was some profound stuff Mr. Blizzard. Things are starting to fit together for me a little better now. I really appreciate the time you spend on these responses. Thank you. And I hope you'll indulge me if I have any questions in the future. Hopefully there are others reading along who find our exchanges interesting and informative.
Clay Miller 13 months ago
I find this fascinating. I need to learn Hebrew. Good article, Roy.