Main news for 15 February 2020

The commandment to love one's neighbor, which many today perceive as exclusively New Testament, actually existed long before the Savior came into the world. The Book of Leviticus connects love of neighbor with renunciation of revenge, and thereby with the New Testament "rule of the other cheek": there too the issue is precisely revenge, that material or moral compensation that could be demanded for an insult. In this case, of course, the issue is not beating, but insult, a slap in the face.

Jesus connects the "rule of the other cheek" with the norm of the Torah that presupposes recompense according to the principle "eye for eye, tooth for tooth." Such a norm is indeed present in the Torah, and it presupposes precisely revenge. But in that case it turns out that not only in Jesus' words, but also in the Torah itself there are norms that contradict the principle "eye for eye, tooth for tooth." How is this possible? Much will become clearer if we remember the legal context in which this norm is given. It appears in the text of the Book of Exodus. It can also be found in the Book of Deuteronomy, but there it is only repeated.

The legislation of the Book of Exodus says much about material compensation in the case of intentional or unintentional injury inflicted on a neighbor: a whole system of fines developed for such a case is described there. And in addition to it the rule "eye for eye, tooth for tooth" is given. This is evidently a certain alternative way of resolving conflict. Alternative, and very archaic, going back to pre-biblical, pre-Yahwist customs and norms. As is clear, in the time when the legislation that entered the Book of Exodus was created, these had not yet been forgotten.

Blood vengeance and the principle of inflicting proportionate harm come from there, from pre-Yahwist antiquity. The Torah does not prescribe revenge; it only limits it as part of the practice existing at that moment. But the Book of Leviticus, a later book, already demands renunciation of revenge for the sake of love of neighbor. It is not surprising that the Savior demands the same: revenge is utterly incompatible with the life of the Kingdom. In this way He brings to completion the tendency that was clearly marked by the Torah already in its earliest versions. This is understandable: He Himself said that He came not to destroy the Torah, but to reveal it in fullness. In the fullness of the Kingdom.