GEBible — Godless Engineer's Bible App
But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause will be in danger of the judgment. Whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ will be in danger of the council. Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of Gehenna.
“If therefore you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Matthew 5:22-24 sits inside this longer paragraph.
“You have heard that it was said to the ancient ones, ‘You shall not murder;’ and ‘Whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause will be in danger of the judgment. Whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ will be in danger of the council. Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of Gehenna.
“If therefore you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are with him on the way; lest perhaps the prosecutor deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be cast into prison. Most certainly I tell you, you shall by no means get out of there, until you have paid the last penny.
But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause will be in danger of the judgment. Whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ will be in danger of the council. Whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of Gehenna.
“If therefore you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you,
leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
But I say vnto you, whosoever is angre with hys brother, shalbe in daunger of iudgement. Whosoeuer sayeth vnto his brother Racha shalbe in dauger of a consell. But whosoeuer sayeth thou fole shalbe in dauger of hell fyre.
Therfore when thou offrest thy gifte at the altare and their remembrest that thy brother hath ought agaynst the:
leue there thyne offrynge before the altre and go thy waye first and be reconcyled to thy brother and then come and offre thy gyfte.
But I say vnto you, whosoeuer is angry with his brother vnaduisedly, shalbe culpable of iudgment. And whosoeuer sayth vnto his brother, Raca, shalbe worthy to be punished by the Councill. And whosoeuer shall say, Foole, shalbe worthy to be punished with hell fire.
If then thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there remembrest that thy brother hath ought against thee,
Leaue there thine offring before the altar, and goe thy way: first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
Questions where the Bible appears to say two different things, with the passages on each side set together.
100 distinct cross-references across this passage (105 total citations).
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv22–23 By that judgment which stood of 23 Judges, who…
By that judgment which stood of 23 Judges, who had the hearing and deciding of weighty affairs and matters of life and death: as the highest Judges of all, were to the number of 71, which had the hearing of most weighty affairs, as the matter of a whole tribe or of an high Priest, or of a false prophet.
The Jews used four kinds of punishments, before their government was taken away by Herod, hanging, heading, stoning, and burning: this is it that Christ shot at, because burning was the greatest punishment, therefore in that he maketh mention of a judgment, a council, and a fire, he showeth that some sins are worse than other sins, but yet they are all such that we must give account for them, and will be punished for them.
Read full note →
Whereas we read here, Hell, it is in the text itself, Gehenna, which is an Hebrew word made of two, and is as much to say, as the Valley of Hinnom, which otherwise the Hebrews called Tophet: it was a place where the Israelites were wont most cruelly to sacrifice their children to false gods, whereupon it was taken for a place appointed to torment the reprobates in Jer. 7:31.
Of that judgment which was ruled by three men, who had the hearing and deciding of money matters, and such other small causes.
He speaketh of the judgment of God, and of the difference of sins, and therefore applieth his words to the form of civil judgments, which were then used.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv22–24 22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is…
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Ver. 22. But I say unto you] This is his teaching with authority, and not as the scribes. To their false glosses he opposeth his own sole and single authority. He delivers himself like a lawgiver: "but I say unto you," and you shall take it on my bare word, without any further pawn or pledge. He that is αυταυτος, is likewise αυτοπιστος. The Pharisees’ phylacteries were not so broad but their expositions of the law were as narrow; which therefore our Saviour letteth out and rectifieth, by taking away their viperine {a} glosses that did eat out the bowels of the text: and here observe with me, that Christ taketh not upon him to be a new lawgiver, but to be an interpreter of the old law by Moses. He maketh not new commands or counsels (as Popish expositors dream), but throws away all that earth that the Philistines had tumbled into that spring.
Read full note →
That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause] Rashly giving way to unruly passion, and not taking reason into counsel, as the word here signifieth. {b} This is a degree of murder that the Pharisees dreamt not of, and a mortal sin, though the Papists conclude it venial from this very text, because not threatened (as calling fool) with hell fire. But judgment, counsel, and Gehenna, note not here different punishments, but only various degrees of the damnation of hell, which is the just hire of the least sin. There is a lawful anger, as that of our Saviour, Mar 3:5; Mat 16:22. And we are bidden to "be angry, and sin not," Eph 4:26; Dan 3:19. Now he that would be angry and not sin must (for the matter) be angry at nothing but sin, and that not so much as it is an injury to us as an offence to God. Next, for the measure, he must not be so transported with anger, as to be unfitted and indisposed thereby either for prayer to God or pity to men. Moses was very angry at the sight of the golden calf, yet could pray, Exo 32:19; Exo 32:31. Our Saviour was heartily angry at the Pharisees, but also grieved at the hardness of their hearts (συλλυπουμενος), Mar 3:5. Jonah on the other side, through anger, thought to have prayed, but fell into a brawl with God, quarreled with him for his kindness; and had little pity on so many poor Ninevites; though afterwards he yielded to better reason, and showed his submission by laying his hand upon his mouth, and saying no more, Jon 4:1-11. Anger is a tender virtue (saith one), and such as, by reason of our unskilfulness, may be easily corrupted and made dangerous. The wrath of man (usually) worketh not the righteousness of God: nay, it lets in the devil, that old manslayer, and is the murder of the heart (as here), making way to the murder of the tongue and hand, Jas 1:20; Eph 4:26. It is the match to receive the fire of contention, and the bellows to blow it up, Pro 15:18. Now where strife is, there is confusion and every evil work, not murder excepted, Jas 3:16.
And whosoever shall say unto his brother, Raca] {c} Anger (as fire), if smothered, will languish; but let out, will flame into further mischief. Cease from anger, saith David, for else thou wilt fret thyself to do evil, Psa 37:8; Pro 20:22-23. (Mercer.) And if thou hast done evil (or played the fool, as others read it), saith Agur, in lifting up thyself, and puffing against thy brother, against whom in thine anger thou hast devised some mischief, if thou hast thought evil against him, yet lay thy hand upon thy mouth: say not so much as Raca, utter not any so much as an inarticulate voice, snuff not, snort not, spit not, as he, Deu 25:9; stamp not with clapping of the hands, as Balak, Num 24:10; say not so much as fie to thine offending brother, saith Theophylact; Thou him not, saith Chrysostom; call him not silly or shallow, one that wants brains, saith Irenaeus, qui expuit cerebrum, as the word signifieth, if it signify anything. {d} Surely (saith Agur, setting forth the reason of his former precept by a double similitude) the churning of milk bringeth forth butter, and the wringing of the nose bringeth forth blood: so the forcing of wrath (the giving it its forth and full scope, and not suppressing it when it first begins to boil in a man’s breast) bringeth forth strife. Let therefore the first heat of passion settle, and that darkness pass that hath clouded the mind. Ut fragilis glacies, occidat ira mora. Walk into the garden with Ahasuerus, into the field with Jonathan, 1Sa 20:11, when his father had provoked him to wrath, Eph 6:4; (against the apostle’s precept). Divert to some other company, place, business, about something thou canst be most earnest at. Give not place to wrath, no, not a little; set God before thy tumultuating passions, and so silence them, else worse will follow. Say not with the civilian, De minutis non curat lex: the law takes not notice of small faults. God’s law is spiritual, and reacheth to a raca, to a sirrah, &c. Rom 7:1-25.
But whosoever shall say, Thou fool, &c.] How much more, rogue, bastard, devil, and other such foul and opprobrious terms, not fit to be mentioned among saints, yet common with many such as would be counted so. What makest thou here, thou archdevil, troubling our city? said the Bishop of Geneva to Farellus, seeking to set up the reformed religion. {e} And a Spanish Jesuit disputing with us about the Eucharist (saith Beza) called us vulpes, serpentes, et simias, foxes, serpents, and jackanapes. Contrarily, it is observed of Archbishop Cranmer, that he never raged so far with any of his household servants, as once to call the meanest of them varlet or knave in anger, much less to reprove a stranger with any reproachful word; least of all did he deal blows among them, as Bishop Bonner: who in his visitation, because the bells rung not at his coming into Hadham, nor the church was dressed up as it should, called Dr Bricket knave and heretic; and therewithal, whether thrusting or striking at him, so it was, that he gave Sir Thomas Josselin, Knight (who then stood next to the Bishop), a good blow upon the upper part of the neck, even under his ear; whereat he was somewhat astonishied at the suddenness of the quarrel for that time. At last he spake and said, What meaneth your lordship? have you been trained up in Will Sommers’s school, to strike him who standeth next you? The Bishop, still in a rage, either heard not, or would not hear. When Mr Fecknam would have excused him by his long imprisonment in the Marshalsea, whereby he was grown testy, &c., he replied merrily, So it seems, Mr Fecknam; for now that he is come forth of the Marshalsea he is ready to go to Bedlam. Our Saviour here threateneth a worse place, tormenting Tophet, the Gehenna of fire, to that unruly evil, the tongue, that being set on fire of hell, fetcheth words as far as hell to set on fire the whole coarse of nature, Jas 3:6.
Shall be in danger of hell fire] Gehenna, or the valley of Hinnom, was reputed a contemptible place, without the city, in the which they burnt (by means of a fire continually kept there) the carcases, filth, and garbage of the city, so that by the fire of Gehenna here is intimated both the restless torments of hell (sc. by the bitter cries and ejaculations of poor infants there burnt to Moloch), and also the perpetuity and endlessness of them. The idol Moloch or Saturn was represented by a man-like brazen body, with the head of a calf. The children offered were inclosed within the arms of this idol; and as the fire increased about it, the sacrifice with the noise of drums and other instruments filled the air, that the pitiful cries of the children might not be heard.
{a} In allusion to the supposition that the female viper was killed by her young eating their way out at birth. ŒD
{b} εικη from εικω, cedo; qui cedit affectibus, adeo ut rationem in consilium non adhibeat. Piscat. in Rom 13:4.
{c} Vox convitii levioris.
{d} καταπτυστος. Chrysost. vit. Syros hoc nomine uti pro το κενος. Hesych.
{e} Quid tu, diabole nequissime, ad hanc civitatem perturbandam accessisti? dicit Episcopus Genevensis.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On v23 The Jews were to offer gifts and sacrifices, Heb…
The Jews were to offer gifts and sacrifices, Heb 5:1. Their gifts were their free will offerings, they were the most frequent oblations amongst the Jews, as may appear from Leviticus, and what the priests pressed with the greatest importunity, as may appear from Mar 7:11; therefore our Saviour instanceth in these, rather than in other parts of their worship. Bring unto God the best and most acceptable sacrifices (in your or, the teacher’s judgment) that you can, if there be found malice or rash anger in your hearts, God will not accept them. Therefore, how near soever you be come to a religious action, if you there remember that your brother hath a just reason to be offended with you, for any malice or rash anger showed or expressed by you, do not think this will discharge you of your obligation to pay your homage to God; but forbear a while,
leave your gift before the altar, and do what in you lies to be reconciled to your brother, to have a placable spirit to him, to purge your heart of wrath and malice, and any desire of revenge,
Read full note →
and then come and offer your gift, pay that homage which you owe, and it was in your heart to pay to God. It is a text usually applied with reference to communion with God in the Lord’s supper, but equally extensive to any other part of worship, hearing the word, Jam 1:21, and prayer, 1Ti 2:8. God accepteth no service, no homage, from an implacable, malicious heart.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On v23 For preventing the sin of rash anger, which in…
For preventing the sin of rash anger, which in our Savior’s account is a degree of murder, he exhorts all his disciples and followers to brotherly agreement, and to seek mutual reconciliation with each other. Agree with thine adversary, that is, thy offended or offending brother; agree with him, as becomes a man; quickly, as becomes a Christian; implying, that it is a necessary duty for every Christian to seek reconciliation sincerely and speedily with such as have offended him, or have been offended by him.
Observe, 2. The argument or motive with which Christ enforces his exhortation to brotherly reconciliation, drawn from the peril and danger of the neglect; and this is two-fold: The first respects our present duties and services, when we wait upon God at his altar, and attend upon him in holy offices. None of our performances will find malice and hatred, anger and ill-will, against our brother.
Read full note →
Learn, that no sacrifice we can offer will be acceptable to God, so long as we ourselves are implacable to men.
A second danger respects us, when we appear before God in judgement; then God will be our Adversary, Christ our Judge, Satan our accuser, hell our tormentor; If now from the heart we do not every one forgive our brother his trespasses.
Lord! how heinous then is this sin of inveterate anger, hatred, and malice, in our hearts, against any person! No gifts, though never so costly, no devotions, though never so specious, will prevail with God to pass it by, whilst we live: and if we die with hearts full of this rancour and bitterness, we can never expect to be encircled in the arms of Him who is all love, all mercy, all goodness and compassion: no reconciliation with God without an hearty good-will to all men.
Nay farther, the text here speaks of a prison, which is the dreadful dungeon of hell, into which the implacable and unreconciled person must be cast, and lie forever without mixture of pity; and it is not men’s scoffing at it that will secure them against the horror of it.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv22–24 But I say unto you,.... This is a Rabbinical…
But I say unto you,.... This is a Rabbinical way of speaking, used when a question is determined, and a false notion is refuted; it is a magisterial form of expression, and well suits with Christ, the great teacher and master in Israel; who spake as one having authority, opposing himself, not to the law of "Moses, thou shalt not kill"; but to the false gloss the ancient doctors had put upon it, with which their later ones agreed. You say, that if one man kills another himself, he is to be put to death by the sanhedrim; and if he does it by proxy, he is to be left to the judgment of God, so wholly restraining the law to actual murder; but I affirm, that
whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause, shall be in danger of judgment. By "brother" is meant, not in a religious sense, one that is of the same faith, or in the same church state; nor, in a strict natural sense, one that is so in the bonds of consanguinity; but in a large sense, any man, of whatsoever country or nation: for we are to be angry with no man; that is, as is rightly added,
Read full note →
without a cause: for otherwise there is an anger which is not sinful, is in God, in Christ, in the holy angels; and is commendable in the people of God, when it arises from a true zeal for religion, the glory of God, and the interest of Christ; and is kindled against sin, their own, or others, all manner of vice, false doctrine, and false worship: but it is causeless anger which is here condemned by Christ, as a breach of the law, "thou shalt not kill"; and such persons are
in danger of judgment; not of any of the courts of judicature among the Jews, as the sanhedrim of three, or of twenty three, or of seventy one, which took no notice of anger, as a passion in the mind, only of facts committed; but of the judgment of God, as in the preceding "verse", it being distinguished from the sanhedrim, or council, in the next clause.
And whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the council, or "sanhedrim". The word Raca is expressive of indignation and contempt; it was used as a term of reproach. Some derive it from to "spit upon"; as if the person that used it thought the man he spoke to deserved to be spit upon, and treated in the most contemptuous manner: but rather the word signifies "empty" and "vain", and denotes a worthless, empty headed man; a man of no brains; a foolish, witless, fellow: so it is often used in Jewish writings. Take a few instances, as follow:
"a certain person said to R. Jochanan (w), Rabbi, expound, for it becomes thee to expound; for as thou hast said, so have I seen: he replied to him, Reka, if thou hadst not seen, thou wouldst not have believed.''
Again (x), it happened to R. Simeon ben Eliezer of Migdal Edar, who went from the house of Rabbi; and he met with a certain man very much deformed; he says unto him, Reka, how many are the deformed sons of "Abraham our father?" Many more instances might be given (y). Now I do not find that the use of this reproachful word was cognizable by the Jewish sanhedrim, or great council; nor is it our Lord's meaning that it was, only that it ought to have been taken notice of in a proper manner, as well as actual murder. He adds,
but whosoever shall say thou fool, shall be danger of hell fire. The word "fool" does not signify a man of weak parts, one that is very ignorant in things natural; this the word Raca imports; but a wicked reprobate man; in which sense Solomon often uses the word. The Persic version renders it here "wicked". There is a manifest gradation in the text from causeless anger in the breast, or reproachful words; and from thence to a censorious judging of a man's spiritual and eternal estate, which is what is here condemned. "Thou fool", is, thou wicked man, thou ungodly wretch, thou graceless creature, whose portion will be eternal damnation. Calling a man by such names was not allowed of by the Jews themselves, whose rules are:
"he that calls his neighbour a servant, let him be excommunicated; a bastard, let him be beaten with forty stripes; "a wicked man", let him descend with him into his life or livelihood (z).''
The gloss upon it is,
"as if he should say, to this the sanhedrim is not obliged, but it is lawful to hate him, yea to lessen his sustenance, and exercise his trade,''
which was done to bring him to poverty and distress. So, it seems, the sanhedrim were not obliged to take notice of him. Again, they say,
"it is forbidden a man to call his neighbour by a name of reproach (a) everyone that calls his neighbour "a wicked man", shall be brought down to hell;''
which is pretty much what Christ here says,
shall be in danger of hell fire; or deserving of hell fire; or liable to, and in danger of punishment, even "unto hell fire". An expression much like this may be observed in Jarchi, on Isa 24:23 where he speaks of some persons , "who are guilty", deserving, or in danger of "hell unto hell". The word here used, and which is often used in the New Testament for "hell", is but the Hebrew , "Ge-Hinnom", the valley of Hinnom, where the children were caused to pass through the fire to Mo. This place, the Jewish writers (b) say,
"Was a place well known, near to Jerusalem, a valley, whose fire was never quenched; and in which they burned the bones of anything that was unclean, and dead carcasses, and other pollutions.''
Hence the word came to be used among them, as might be shown in innumerable instances, to express the place and state of the damned; and very fitly describes it.
(w) T. Bab. Sanhedrim, fol. 100. 1. T. Bava Bathra, fol. 75. 1. (x) Massechet Derach Eretz, c. 4. fol. 18. 1. (y) Vid. T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 32. 2. Zohar in Exod. fol. 50. 2. (z) T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 28. 1. Bava Metzia, fol. 71. 1. (a) Zohar in Exod. fol. 50. 3. (b) Sepher Cosri, fol. 57. 2. Vid. Kimchi in Psal. xxvii. 13.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv22–24 But I say unto you - Which of the…
But I say unto you - Which of the prophets ever spake thus? Their language is, Thus saith the Lord. Who hath authority to use this language, but the one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. Whosoever is angry with his brother - Some copies add, without a cause - But this is utterly foreign to the whole scope and tenor of our Lord's discourse. If he had only forbidden the being angry without a cause, there was no manner of need of that solemn declaration, I say unto you; for the scribes and Pharisees themselves said as much as this. Even they taught, men ought not to be angry without a cause. So that this righteousness does not exceed theirs. But Christ teaches, that we ought not, for any cause, to be so angry as to call any man Raca, or fool. We ought not, for any cause, to be angry at the person of the sinner, but at his sins only. Happy world, were this plain and necessary distinction thoroughly understood, remembered, practiced! Raca means, a silly man, a trifler. Whosoever shall say, Thou fool - Shall revile, or seriously reproach any man. Our Lord specified three degrees of murder, each liable to a sorer punishment than the other: not indeed from men, but from God. Hell fire - In the valley of Hinnom (whence the word in the original is taken) the children were used to be burnt alive to Moloch. It was afterward made a receptacle for the filth of the city, where continual fires were kept to consume it. And it is probable, if any criminals were burnt alive, it was in this accursed and horrible place. Therefore both as to its former and latter state, it was a fit emblem of hell. It must here signify a degree of future punishment, as much more dreadful than those incurred in the two former cases, as burning alive is more dreadful than either strangling or stoning.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv22–24 Verse 22. Whosoever is angry with his brother without…
Verse 22. Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause] ο οργιζομενος - εικη, who is vainly incensed. "This translation is literal; and the very objectionable phrase, without a cause, is left out, εικη being more properly translated by that above." What our Lord seems here to prohibit, is not merely that miserable facility which some have of being angry at every trifle, continually taking offence against their best friends; but that anger which leads a man to commit outrages against another, thereby subjecting himself to that punishment which was to be inflicted on those who break the peace. εικη, vainly, or, as in the common translation, without a cause, is wanting in the famous Vatican MS. and two others, the Ethiopic, latter Arabic, Saxon, Vulgate, two copies of the old Itala, J. Martyr, Ptolomeus, Origen, Tertullian, and by all the ancient copies quoted by St. Jerome. It was probably a marginal gloss originally, which in process of time crept into the text.
Shall be in danger of the judgment] ενοχος εσται, shall be liable to the judgment. That is, to have the matter brought before a senate, composed of twenty-three magistrates, whose business it was to judge in cases of murder and other capital crimes. It punished criminals by strangling or beheading; but Dr. Lightfoot supposes the judgment of God to be intended. See at the end of this chapter.
Read full note →
Raca] ריקה from the Hebrew רק rak, to be empty. It signifies a vain, empty, worthless fellow, shallow brains, a term of great contempt. Such expressions were punished among the Gentoos by a heavy fine. See all the cases, Code of Gentoo Laws, chap. 15: sec. 2.
The council] συνεδριον, the famous council, known among the Jews by the name of Sanhedrin. It was composed of seventy-two elders, six chosen out of each tribe. This grand Sanhedrin not only received appeals from the inferior Sanhedrins, or court of twenty-three mentioned above; but could alone take cognizance, in the first instance, of the highest crimes, and alone inflict the punishment of stoning.
Thou fool] Moreh, probably from מרה marah, to rebel, a rebel against God, apostate from all good. This term implied, among the Jews, the highest enormity, and most aggravated guilt. Among the Gentoos, such an expression was punished by cutting out the tongue, and thrusting a hot iron, of ten fingers breadth, into the mouth of the person who used it. Code of Gentoo Laws, chap. 15: sec. 2. p. 212.
Shall be in danger of hell fire.] ενοχος εϚται εις την γεενναν του πυρος, shall be liable to the hell of fire. Our Lord here alludes to the valley of the son of Hinnom, גי הנם Ghi hinom. This place was near Jerusalem, and had been formerly used for those abominable sacrifices, in which the idolatrous Jews had caused their children to pass through the fire to Molech. A particular place in this valley was called Tophet, from תפת tophet, the fire stove, in which some supposed they burnt their children alive to the above idol. See 2Kg 23:10; 2Ch 28:3; Jer 7:31-32. From the circumstances of this valley having been the scene of those infernal sacrifices, the Jews, in our Saviour's time, used the word for hell, the place of the damned. See the word applied in this sense by the Targum, on Ru 2:12; Ps 140:12; Ge 3:24; Ge 15:17. It is very probable that our Lord means no more here than this: if a man charge another with apostasy from the Jewish religion, or rebellion against God, and cannot prove his charge, then he is exposed to that punishment (burning alive) which the other must have suffered, if the charge had been substantiated. There are three kinds of offences here, which exceed each other in their degrees of guilt.
1st. Anger against a man, accompanied with some injurious act.
2dly. Contempt, expressed by the opprobrious epithet raka, or shallow brains.
3dly. Hatred and mortal enmity, expressed by the term moreh, or apostate, where such apostasy could not be proved.
Now, proportioned to these three offences were three different degrees of punishment, each exceeding the other in its severity, as the offenses exceeded each other in their different degrees of guilt.
1st. The judgment, the council of twenty-three, which could inflict the punishment of strangling.
2dly. The Sanhedrin, or great council, which could inflict the punishment of stoning. And
3dly. The being burnt alive in the valley of the son of Hinnom. This appears to be the meaning of our Lord.
Now, if the above offences were to be so severely punished, which did not immediately affect the life of another, how much sorer must the punishment of murder be! Mt 5:21. And as there could not be a greater punishment inflicted than death, in the above terrific forms, and this was to be inflicted for minor crimes; then the punishment of murder must not only have death here, but a hell of fire in the eternal world, attached to it. It seems that these different degrees of guilt, and the punishment attached to each, had not been properly distinguished among the Jews. Our Lord here calls their attention back to them, and gives then to understand, that in the coming world there are different degrees of punishment prepared for different degrees of vice; and that not only the outward act of iniquity should be judged and punished by the Lord, but that injurious words, and evil passions, should all meet their just recompense and reward. Murder is the most punishable of all crimes, according to the written law, in respect both of our neighbours and civil society. But he who sees the heart, and judges it by the eternal law, punishes as much a word or a desire, if the hatred whence they proceed be complete and perfected. Dr. Lightfoot has some curious observations on this passage in the preface to his Harmony of the Evangelists. See his works, vol. ii., and the conclusion of this chapter.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v23 Mat 5:23. Therefore, &c. — “Because men are very…
Mat 5:23. Therefore, &c. — “Because men are very apt to fall into rash anger, and to express their anger by contemptuous speeches and abusive names, fancying that there is no sin in these things, or but little, and that the compensation may easily be made for them by acts of devotion, Jesus declares that atonement is not to be made for these offences by any offerings, how costly soever, and therefore prescribes immediate repentance and reparation as the only remedies of them. He insisted particularly on reparation, assuring us that, unless it be made, God will not accept the worship of such offenders, being infinitely better pleased with repentance than with sacrifices, or external worship of any kind, how specious soever those duties may appear in the eye of vulgar understandings. Vain, therefore, is their presumption, who fancy they can make amends for yet more gross acts of injustice, by acts of devotion.” — Macknight. If thou bring thy gift to the altar — However costly and free; and there rememberest — What thou didst not recollect before; that thy brother hath aught against thee — On any of the preceding accounts, for any reproachful or unkind word, or injurious action: do not content thyself with a secret, and, it may be, a deceitful purpose that thou wilt hereafter accommodate the affair, but bring it to an immediate issue. Leave there thy gift before the altar — In the hands of those that are ministering there: for neither thy gift nor thy prayer will atone for thy want of love and injurious conduct, but these will make thy devotions and oblations an abomination before God. Go thy way — Do not lay aside thoughts of worshipping God, because thou art not in a proper state, but prepare thyself for his worship without delay. Be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift — Which thou mayest then cheerfully hope God will accept at thy hand. Philo, (de Sacrif., p. 844,) explaining the law of the trespass- offering, tells us, “That when a man had injured his brother, and, repenting of his fault, voluntarily acknowledged it, (in which case, both restitution and sacrifice were required,) he was first to make restitution, and then to come into the temple, presenting his sacrifice, and asking pardon.” This greatly illustrates the text, especially considering that our Lord supposes, in this case, not a trespass-offering, but a voluntary gift, presented before the altar; and yet declares that this will not be accepted while there is a consciousness of having wronged a brother, and not made him reparation.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv22–23 But I say unto you - Jesus being God…
But I say unto you - Jesus being God as well as man Joh 1:1, Joh 1:14, and therefore, being the original giver of the law, had a right to expound it or change it as he pleased. Compare Mat 12:6, Mat 12:8. He therefore spoke here and elsewhere as having authority, and not as the scribes. It may be added here that no mere man ever spake as Jesus did, when explaining or enforcing the law. He did it as having a right to do it; and he that has a right to ordain and change laws in the government of God must be himself divine.
Is angry with His brother without a cause - Anger, or that feeling which we have when we are injured, and which prompts us to defend ourselves when in danger, is a natural feeling, given to us:
Read full note →
As a proper expression of our disapprobation of a course of evil conduct; and That we may defend ourselves when suddenly attacked.
When excited against sin, it is lawful. God is angry with the wicked, Psa 7:11. Jesus looked on the hypocritical Pharisees with anger, Mar 3:5. So it is said, “Be ye angry, and sin not, Eph 4:26. This anger, or indignation against sin, is not what our Saviour speaks of here. What he condemns here is anger without a cause; that is, unjustly, rashly, hastily, where no offence has been given or intended. In that case it is evil; and it is a violation of the sixth commandment, because “he that hateth his brother, is a murderer,” 1Jo 3:15. He has a feeling which would lead him to commit murder, if it were fully acted out. The word “brother” here refers not merely to one to whom we are nearly related, having the same parent or parents, as the word is commonly used, but includes also a neighbor, or perhaps anyone with whom we may be associated. As all people are descended from one Father and are all the creatures of the same God, so they are all brethren: and so every man should be regarded and treated as a brother, Heb 11:16.
Raca - This is a Syriac word, expressive of great contempt. It comes from a verb signifying to be empty, vain; and hence, as a word of contempt, denotes senseless, stupid, shallow-brains. Jesus teaches here that to use such words is a violation of the spirit of the sixth commandment, and if indulged, may lead to a more open and dreadful infraction of that law. Children should learn that to use such words is highly offensive to God, for we must give an account for every idle word which we speak in the day of judgment, Mat 12:36.
In danger of the council - The word translated “council” is in the original Sanhedrin, and there can be no doubt that the Saviour refers to the Jewish tribunal of that name. This was instituted in the time of the Maccabees, probably about 200 years before Christ. It was composed of 72 judges: the high priest was the president of this tribunal. The 72 members were made up of the chief priests and elders of the people and the scribes. The chief priests were such as had discharged the office of the high priest, and those who were the heads of the twenty-four classes of priests, who were called in an honorary way high or chief priests. See Mat 2:4. The elders were the princes of the tribes or heads of the family associations. It is not to be supposed that all the elders had a right to a seat here, but such only as were elected to the office. The scribes were learned people of the nation elected to this tribunal, being neither of the rank of priests or elders. This tribunal had cognizance of the great affairs of the nation. Until the time when Judea was subjected to the Romans, it had the power of life and death. It still retained the power of passing sentence, though the Roman magistrate held the right of execution. It usually sat in Jerusalem, in a room near the temple. It was before this tribunal that our Saviour was tried. It was then assembled in the palace of the high priest, Mat. 26:3-57; Joh 18:24.
Thou fool - This term expressed more than want of wisdom. It was expressive of the highest guilt. It had been commonly used to denote those who were idolaters Deu 22:21, and also one who is guilty of great crimes, Jos 7:15; Psa 14:1.
Hell fire - The original of this is “the gehennah of fire.” The word gehenna, γέεννα geenna, commonly translated “hell,” is made up of two Hebrew words, and signifies the valley of Hinnom. This was formerly a pleasant valley near to Jerusalem, on the south. A small brook or torrent usually ran through it and partly encompassed the city. This valley the idolatrous Israelites devoted formerly to the horrid worship of Moloch, 2Ki 16:3; 2Ch 28:3. In that worship, the ancient Jewish writers inform us, the idol of Moloch was of brass, adorned with a royal crown, having the head of a calf, and his arms extended as if to embrace anyone. When they offered children to him they heated the statue within by a great fire, and when it was burning hot they put the miserable child into his arms, where it was soon consumed by the heat; and, in order that the cries of the child might not be heard, they made a great noise with drums and other instruments about the idol. These drums were called תּף toph, and hence a common name of the place was Tophet, תּפת Tophet, Jer 7:31-32.
After the return of the Jews from captivity, this place was held in such abhorrence that, by the example of Josiah 2Ki 23:10, it was made the place where to throw all the dead carcasses and filth of the city, and was not unfrequently the place of public executions. It became, therefore, extremely offensive; the sight was terrific; the air was polluted and pestilential; and to preserve it in any manner pure, it was necessary to keep fires continually burning there. The extreme loathsomeness of the place; the filth and putrefaction; the corruption of the atmosphere, and the lurid fires blazing by day and night, made it one of the most appalling and terrific objects with which a Jew was acquainted. It was called the gehenna of fire, and was the image which our Saviour often employed to denote the future punishment of the wicked.
In this verse it denotes a degree of suffering higher than the punishment inflicted by the “court of seventy,” or the Sanhedrin, and the whole verse may therefore mean, “He that hates his brother without a cause is guilty of a violation of the sixth commandment, and shall be punished with a severity similar to that inflicted by the court of judgment. He that shall suffer his passions to transport him still further, so that he shall make his brother an object of derision and contempt, shall be exposed to severer punishment, corresponding to that which the Sanhedrin (council) inflicts. But he who shall load his brother with odious appellations and abusive language shall incur the severest degree of punishment, represented by being burned alive in the horrid and awful valley of Hinnom.”
The amount, then, of this difficult and important verse is this: The Jews considered but one crime a violation of the sixth commandment, namely, actual murder, or willful, unlawful taking life. Jesus says that the commandment is much broader. It relates not only to the external act, but to the feelings and words. He specifies three forms of such violation:
Unjust anger. Anger accompanied with an expression of contempt. Anger, with an expression not only of contempt, but wickedness.
Among the Jews there were three degrees of condemnation: that by the “judgment,” the “council,” and the “fire of Hinnom.” Jesus says likewise there shall be grades of condemnation for the different ways of violating the sixth commandment. Not only murder shall be punished by God, but anger and contempt shall be regarded by him as a violation of the law, and punished according to the offence. As these offences were not actually cognizable before the Jewish tribunals, he must mean that they will be punished hereafter, and all these expressions therefore relate to degrees of punishment proportionate to crime in the future world - the world of justice and of woe.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv22–24 Whosoever is angry[2] with his brother. In almost all…
Whosoever is angry[2] with his brother. In almost all Greek copies and manuscripts we now read angry without a cause: yet St. Jerome, who corrected the Latin of the New Testament from the best copies in his time, tells us that these words, without a cause, were only found in some Greek copies, and not in the true ones. It seems at fist to have been placed in the margin for an interpretation only, and by some transcribers afterwards taken into the text. This as well as many other places may convince us, that the Latin Vulgate is many times to be preferred to our present Greek copies. --- Roca.[3] St. Augustine thinks this was no significant word, but only a kind of interjection expression a motion of anger. Others take it for a Syro-Chaldaic word, signifying a light, foolish man, though not so injurious as to call another a fool. --- Shall be guilty of the council:[4] that is, shall deserve to be punished by the highest court of judicature, called the council, or sanhedrim, consisting of seventy-two persons, where the highest causes were tried and judged, and which was at Jerusalem. --- Thou fool; this was a most provoking injury, when uttered with contempt, spite, or malice. --- Shall be in danger of hell fire.[5] Gehennom was the valley of Hinnom, near to Jerusalem, where the worshippers of the idol Moloch used to burn their children, sacrificed to that idol. In that place was a perpetual fire, on which account it is made use of by our Saviour (as it hath been ever since), to express the fire and punishments of hell. (Witham) --- Here is a plain difference between sin and sin; some mortal, that lead to hell; some venial, and less punished. (Bristow)
===============================
Read full note →
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Greek: eike, sine causa, is in most Greek copies at present, as also in St. John Chrysostom; and so it is in the Protestant translation. But St. Jerome, who examined this reading, says positively that Greek: eike was wanting in the true copies. In quibusdam Codicibus additur sine causa, Cæterum in veris definita sententia est, et ira penitus tollitur.
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Raca. St. Augustine (Serm. Domini in Monte. p. 174) affirms it to be, non vocem significantem aliquid, sed indignantis animi motum, &c.
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
reus erit Concilii, Greek: to sunedrio.
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
gehennæ ignis, Greek: enochos estai eis ten geennan tou puros.
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv22–24 But I say unto you--Mark the authoritative tone in…
But I say unto you--Mark the authoritative tone in which--as Himself the Lawgiver and Judge--Christ now gives the true sense, and explains the deep reach, of the commandment.
That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca! shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool! shall be in danger of hell-fire--It is unreasonable to deny, as ALEXANDER does, that three degrees of punishment are here meant to be expressed, and to say that it is but a threefold expression of one and the same thing. But Romish expositors greatly err in taking the first two--"the judgment" and "the council"--to refer to degrees of temporal punishment with which lesser sins were to be visited under the Gospel, and only the last--"hell-fire"--to refer to the future life. All three clearly refer to divine retribution, and that alone, for breaches of this commandment; though this is expressed by an allusion to Jewish tribunals. The "judgment," as already explained, was the lowest of these; the "council," or "Sanhedrim,"which sat at Jerusalem--was the highest; while the word used for "hell-fire" contains an allusion to the "valley of the son of Hinnom" (Jos 18:16). In this valley the Jews, when steeped in idolatry, went the length of burning their children to Molech "on the high places of Tophet"--in consequence of which good Josiah defiled it, to prevent the repetition of such abominations (Kg2 23:10); and from that time forward, if we may believe the Jewish writers, a fire was kept burning in it to consume the carrion and all kinds of impurities that collected about the capital. Certain it is, that while the final punishment of the wicked is described in the Old Testament by allusions to this valley of Tophet or Hinnom (Isa 30:33; Isa 66:24), our Lord Himself describes the same by merely quoting these terrific descriptions of the evangelical prophet (Mar 9:43-48). What precise degrees of unholy feeling towards our brothers are indicated by the words "Raca" and "fool" it would be as useless as it is vain to inquire. Every age and every country has its modes of expressing such things; and no doubt our Lord seized on the then current phraseology of unholy disrespect and contempt, merely to express and condemn the different degrees of such feeling when brought out in words, as He had immediately before condemned the feeling itself. In fact, so little are we to make of mere words, apart from the feeling which they express, that as anger is expressly said to have been borne by our Lord towards His enemies though mixed with "grief for the hardness of their hearts" (Mar 3:5), and as the apostle teaches us that there is an anger which is not sinful (Eph 4:26); so in the Epistle of James (Jam 2:20) we find the words, "O vain (or, empty) man"; and our Lord Himself applies the very word "fools" twice in one breath to the blind guides of the people (Mat 23:17, Mat 23:19) --although, in both cases, it is to false reasoners rather than persons that such words are applied. The spirit, then, of the whole statement may be thus given: "For ages ye have been taught that the sixth commandment, for example, is broken only by the murderer, to pass sentence upon whom is the proper business of the recognized tribunals. But I say unto you that it is broken even by causeless anger, which is but hatred in the bud, as hatred is incipient murder (Jo1 3:15); and if by the feelings, much more by those words in which all ill feeling, from the slightest to the most envenomed, are wont to be cast upon a brother: and just as there are gradations in human courts of judicature, and in the sentences which they pronounce according to the degrees of criminality, so will the judicial treatment of all the breakers of this commandment at the divine tribunal be according to their real criminality before the heart-searching Judge." Oh, what holy teaching is this!
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv22–24 22. But I say unto you — Our Lord…
22. But I say unto you — Our Lord here uses the Ego, I, with great emphasis. All the traditions of the whole generation of rabbies are to be as nothing before the declarations of this majestic I. Angry with — Since all murder is rooted in the angry passion, all unholy anger is incipient murder. His brother — That is, any one. The term does not signify a blood relative, but is used in conformity with the custom of calling all Israelites brethren. Without a cause — Rashly or vainly. It implies all feeling inconsistent with love, or a desire to bring about mild justice and reformation. Some have indeed supposed, without good grounds, that the words without a cause are spurious. But, first, there is such a thing as a righteous anger, (Mar_3:5; Eph_4:25; Jas_1:19,) which is not only not forbidden, but commanded. 1Sa_3:13. And, second, there is the anger for just cause, which in its due measure is just. It is the feeling implanted in our nature which requires our right when wronged; which seeks the reformation of our injurer, and the reparation of our wrong. In default of these it justly demands the infliction of penalty. Raca — A Syriac word signifying blockhead. Our Lord here does not refer to the mere pronunciation of the word; but to its utterance as the outward symbol of an inner malignant purpose to destroy a man’s just reputation for intellect. Fool — In Scripture the fool is an impious fellow, a stupid atheist, a man defective intellectually, because depraved morally. It stands here as the symbol for a malignant purpose in the heart to destroy the just moral reputation of a man. Here, then, are three sins of the heart: 1. Wrath; 2. A hostility to one’s intellectual rights; and 3. A destructiveness toward one’s moral character, (the two last indicated by symbols,) rising in grades above each other. For these three grades of sin our Lord pronounces three grades of punishment. He indicates the grades symbolically; and, as before remarked, the meaning is obtained by translating the symbol into its literal. The judicature of the earth stands as an emblem of the judicature of heaven. And the adjustment of the degree of penalty by man to the degree of crime, is paralleled by the adjustment by God to the degree of wickedness, of the penalties of a future world. The symbolical terms here used are, 1. Judgment; 2. Council; and 3. Gehenna of fire; that is, death, 1. by sword; 2. by stoning; and 3. by burning. This will appear by the following explanation: 1. The judgment was the penalty of civil crimes, passed by the lower courts, liable to appeal, and it could amount in capital cases to execution by sword. 2. The council was the Sanhedrim, or court, or senate of seventy-two, (established under the Maccabees,) which decided questions of war and peace, as well as the higher crimes of false prophets, etc. These were cases of spiritual treason, and the severer capital penalty of stoning to death was inflicted. 3. Last was the giving over the dead body to the horrible valley of Hinnom. Upon this see note on Mat_10:28.
The amount of the entire verse, then, is this: Not merely bodily killing, but the mental impulse and purpose, which are the root of all murder — whether it be mental murder of the body, of the intellectual reputation, or of the moral honour — are to be punished according to their aggravations in the high Court of Heaven. Our Lord here conceptually frames a code of divine retribution above, as parallel to the codes of earthly criminal law.
Read full note →
That our Lord did not here lay down rules for human courts is plain. For, first, he was no legislator for human jurisprudence; second, anger cannot be proved or tried by human law; and third, no human court ever hurt a person for saying Thou fool.
It follows, therefore, here, 1. Our Lord here does, in opposition to Universalism, threaten a penalty for sin in a future world. 2. That penalty is strictly judicial, and not a mere natural consequence of sin. It is a positive infliction by the hand of divine justice. 3. The degree of intensity (not the duration) of that punishment is adjusted to the grade of the sin.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv22–24 22. I say] A most emphatic formula, which implies…
22. I say] A most emphatic formula, which implies the authority of a lawgiver.
without a cause] The Greek word is omitted in the oldest MSS., and has probably been inserted by a copyist desirous of softening the expression.
Read full note →
the judgment] = the local court: see next note.
Raca] A word of contempt, said to be from a root meaning to “spit.” The distinction between Raca and Thou fool is lost, and naturally, for they belong to that class of words, the meaning of which depends entirely on the usage of the day. An expression innocent and unmeaning in one age becomes the watchword of a revolution in another. There is, however, clearly a climax. (1) Feeling of anger without words. (2) Anger venting itself in words. (3) Insulting anger. The gradation of punishment corresponds; liable (1) to the local court; (2) to the Sanhedrin; (3) to Gehenna.
council] i. e. the Sanhedrin. See note ch. Mat_26:3.
hell fire] Lit. Gehenna of fire, i. e. “burning Gehenna.” Gehenna is the Greek form of the Hebrew Ge-Hinnom or “Valley of Hinnom,” sometimes called “Valley of the son of Hinnom,” also “Tophet” (Jer_7:31). It was a deep narrow glen S. W. of Jerusalem, once the scene of the cruel worship of Moloch; but Josiah, in the course of his reformation, “defiled Tophet, that no man might make his son or his daughter to pass through the fire to Moloch” (2Ki_23:10). Cp. Milton, Paradise Lost i.:
“First Moloch, horrid king, besmeared with blood
Of human sacrifice and parents’ tears;
Though, for the noise of drums and timbrels loud,
Their children’s cries unheard that passed through fire
To his grim idol.”
After that time pollutions of every kind, among them the bodies of criminals who had been executed, were thrown into the valley. From this defilement and from its former desecration Gehenna was used to express the abode of the wicked after death. The words “of fire” are added, either because of the ancient rites of Moloch, or, if a Rabbinical tradition is to be credited, because fires were always burning in the valley, or, further, as a symbol of everlasting punishment.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv22–24 (22) I say unto you.—The I is emphasized in…
(22) I say unto you.—The I is emphasized in the Greek. It was this probably that, more than anything else, led to the feeling of wonder expressed in Mat_7:28-29. The scribe in his teaching invariably referred to this Rabbi and that; the new Teacher spoke as one having a higher authority of His own.
Angry . . . without a cause.—The last three words are wanting in many of the best MSS. They may have been inserted to soften down the apparent harshness of the teaching; but if so, it must have been at an early date—before the fourth century. They may, on the other hand, have been in the text originally, and struck out, as giving too wide a margin to vain and vague excuses. Ethically, the teaching is not that the emotion of anger, with or without a cause, stands on the same level of guilt with murder, but that the former so soon expands and explodes into the latter, that it will be brought to trial and sentenced according to the merits of each case, the occasion of the anger, the degree in which it has been checked or cherished, and the like. As no earthly tribunal can take cognisance of emotions as such, the “judgment” here is clearly that of the Unseen Judge dealing with offences which in His eyes are of the same character as those which come before the human judges. “Hates any man the thing he would not kill?”
Read full note →
Raca.—As far as the dictionary sense of the word goes, it is the same as that of the “vain fellows” of Jdg_9:4; Jdg_11:3; Pro_12:11; but all words of abuse depend for their full force on popular association, and raca, like words of kindred meaning among ourselves, was in common use as expressing not anger only but insolent contempt. The temper condemned is that in which anger has so far gained the mastery that we no longer recognise a “brother” in the man who has offended us, but look on him with malignant scorn.
The council.—Offences of this kind are placed by our Lord on the same level as those which came before the great court of the Sanhedrim. That word, though it looks like Hebrew, is really only a transliterated form of the Greek word for council. The court consisted of seventy or seventy-two members, with a president and vice-president, and was made up of the heads of the twenty-four courses of the priests, with forty-six or forty-eight (how chosen it is not known) from the “elders” and “scribes.” Like the Areopagus at Athens, it took cognisance—as in the case of our Lord (Mat_26:65) and Stephen (Act_6:13)—of blasphemy and other like offences, and its peculiar prerogative was that it could order death by stoning. The point of our Lord’s teaching was, therefore, that to scorn God’s image in man is to do dishonour to God Himself. We cannot truly “fear God” unless we also “honour all men” (1Pe_2:17). The reverence for humanity as such must extend even to the man who has most provoked us. In the unseen eternal world the want of that reverence has its own appropriate punishment.
Thou fool.—The Greek word so rendered agrees accidentally in its consonants with the Hebrew word translated “rebel” (m’re) in Num_20:10, and hence it has been thought by some that we have here, as with raca, a common Hebrew term of opprobrium. There is no evidence, however, that the word was thus used, and it is more probable that the Greek is a translation of some word which, like the “fool” of the Old Testament, implied, as in Psa_14:1, utter godlessness as well as lack of intellectual wisdom. With that meaning it embodied the temper, not, like that represented by raca, of petulant contempt, but of fixed and settled hatred. That it was the temper and not the utterance of the mere syllables which our Lord condemned is seen in that He Himself used the word of the scribes and Pharisees (Mat_23:17; Mat_23:19), and St. Paul of the sceptical Greek materialist (1Co_15:36). The self-same word might spring from a righteous indignation or from malignant hatred.
Of hell fire.—Literally, of the Gehenna of fire. Great confusion has arisen here and elsewhere from the use of the same English word for two Greek words of very different meanings: (1) Hades, answering to the Sheol (also for the most part translated “hell”) of the Old Testament, the unseen world, the region or state of the dead, without any reference to their blessedness or misery; (2) Gehenna, which had come to represent among the later Jews (not in the time of any Old Testament writer) the place of future punishment. The history of the word is worth studying. Originally, it was the Greek form of Ge-hinnom (the Valley of Hinnom, sometimes of the “son” or the “children” of Hinnom), and was applied to a narrow gorge on the south of Jerusalem (Jos_15:8). There Solomon erected a high place for Molech (1Ki_11:7). There the fires of that god had received their bloody offerings of infant sacrifice under Ahaz and Manasseh (2Ki_16:3; 2Ch_28:3; 2Ch_33:6). Josiah, in his great work of reformation, defiled it, probably by casting the bones of the dead and other filth upon it (2Ki_23:10-14); and the Jews on their return from captivity showed their abhorrence of the idolatry of their fathers by making it, as it were, the place where they cast out all the refuse of the city. Outwardly, it must have been foul to sight and smell, and thus it became, before our Lord’s time, a parable of the final state of those in whom all has become vile and refuse. The thought first appears in the Targum or Paraphrase of Isa_33:14 (“Gehenna is the eternal fire”). It is often said that fires which were kept burning to consume the solid refuse added to the horror of the scene; but of this, though it is suggested by this passage and Mar_9:48. there is no adequate evidence. Here the analogy of the previous clauses suggests also the thought that the bodies of great criminals were sometimes deprived of burial rites, and cast out into the Valley of Hinnom; but of this, too, there is no evidence, though it is in itself probable enough. In any case, the meaning of the clause is obvious. Our passing words, expressing states of feeling, and not the overt act of murder only, are subject to the judgment of the Eternal Judge, and may bring us into a guilt and a penalty like that of the vilest criminals.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv22–24 But I say unto you. "I" emphatic (as also…
But I say unto you. "I" emphatic (as also in vers. 28, 32, 34, 39, 44), in contrast to God, as God"s utterance was then conditioned; i.e. in contrast to God"s voice to and through Moses. (cf. Joh_1:17 Joh_7:23 Heb_10:28, Heb_10:29) Christ claims for his words the same authority, and more than the same authority, as for those spoken once by God. The circumstances had altered; the message for toiv arcaioiv was insufficient now. Christ brings his own Personality forward, and claims to give a more perfect and far-reaching statement of the sixth commandment than the current form of its teaching, notwithstanding the fact that this current form represented truly the original thought underlying its promulgation. In the following words our Lord speaks of three grades of auger, and, as answering to them, of three grades of punishment. The former will be examined under the several terms employed. Upon the latter it is necessary to make a few remarks here. They have been very variously understood.
(1) (a) "The judgment" means the judgment of God alone, for he alone can take cognizance of mere anger;
Read full note →
(b) "the council" means the judgment of the Sanhedrin, "a publick tryal;
(c) "the Gehenna of fire" means the judgment of hell (Lightfoot, "Hor. Hebr.," in loc.).
(2) (a) "The judgment" means the local court;
(b) "the council" means the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem;
(c) "the Gehenna of fire" means hell (apparently Nosgen, and many other, especially Romish, expositors).
It will be noticed that both the above interpretations are inconsistent. They make our Lord pass from literal to figurative language in the same sentence. Besides, in the second it is inexplicable how mere anger could be brought under the cognizance of a human court. For these reasons it is probable that
(3) all three stages express metaphorically grades of Divine judgment under the form of the Jewish processes of law.
(a) "The judgment" primarily means the local court;
(b) "the council "primarily means the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem;
(c) "the Gehenna of fire" primarily means the Valley of Hinnom, where the last processes of judgment seem to have taken place (vide infra). Christ does not say that the sins spoken of render a man liable to any of these earthly processes of law; he says that they render him liable to processes of Divine law which are fittingly symbolized by these expressions. (So Alford, Mansel, and especially Trench, "Sermon on the Mount," p. 190). Whosoever is angry ; Revised Version, more precisely, every one who (pav o orgizomenov). This form of expression is specially frequent in 1 John, e.g. 3:3, where Bishop Westcott says, "In each case where this characteristic form of language occurs there is apparently a reference to some who had questioned the application of a general principle in particular cases," (For the thought of this clause, cf. 1Jn_3:15) With his brother. The term "brother" was applied in both Greek and Hebrew, by way of metaphor, to things that possessed merely such fellowship as arises from juxtaposition or from similarity of purpose. (cf. of the cherubim, Exo_25:20, "with their faces one to another," literally, "each (man) to his brother It is thus possible that here the thought is of any person with whom one is brought into temporary relation, quite apart from any question of a common source. Yet as this could have been represented by "neighbour", (cf. Mat_19:19) it seems reasonable to see something more in "brother," and to view it with reference to its implied meaning, "fellowship of life based on identity of origin" (Cremer). To Jews as such the term would doubtless only suggest identity of origin nationally, i.e. a fellow-Jew; (cf. especially Lev_19:17a with 16, 17b, 18; so even Mal_2:10) but to Christians of the time when the Gospel was written rather identity of spiritual origin, i.e. a fellow-Christian. Probably when the expression fell from Christ"s lips not one of those who heard him imagined that it could have any wider meaning than fellow-Jew or fellow-believer on Jesus, and probably most of them limited it to the former. In fact, Christ seems to have used it as a means whereby to lead up his hearers from the idea of a national to that of a spiritual relation (cf. vers. 47, 48). We are therefore hardly warranted (far-reaching as the word on Christ"s lips is) in seeing here any reference to the thought of the universal brotherhood of man, based on the fact of all being children of one common Father (cf. further Bishop Westcott, on 1Jn_2:9). Without a cause. Omitted by the Revised Version; Revised Version margin, "many ancient authorities insert without cause. " The eikh , though found in the Old Latin and Old Syriac, is certainly to be omitted, with R, B, and Vulgate, notwithstanding Dean Burgon ("Revision," p. 358); cf. especially Westcott and Hurt, "App." It is redundant, because the two following expressions show that the anger itself is unloving and hostile (cf. further Meyer). There is a holy anger, but that is with a brother"s sin, not with the brother himself (cf. Augustine, in Trench, "Sermon on the Mount"). Shall be in danger of the judgment; i.e. of God"s wrath as symbolized by the lowest degree of Jewish trial (vide supra). And whosoever (ov d an). For in this case there was no need for the emphasizing inclusiveness of pav . Raca.
(1) Augustine"s explanation (in los.; vide Trench; cf. also "In Joann. Evang.," "De Doctr. Christ.," 2:11), which he got "a quodam Hebraeo," that Raca is in itself meaningless, and is only an interjection expressing indignation, as "Heu!" sorrow, or "Hem!" anger, or "Hosanna"(!) joy, will hardly commend itself to us to-day.
(2) Nor will Chrysostom"s (in loc.; vide Chase"s admirable monograph on Chrysostom (1887), p. 133), "As we in giving orders to a servant or to some one of mean rank, say, Go you; take you this message ( apelye su eipe tw deini su), so those who use the Syrian language used Raca, an equivalent to our you (su);" seem much better, whether we take him as considering it as meaningless, or as in some way confusing its ending with the Shemitic suffix for "thee" (ka).
(3) Ewald explains it by aqr, "rascal" (vide Meyer); but
(4) it is more probably the Aramaic aqyr reka "empty;" cf. Hebrew plural rekim, "vain fellows," in Jud_1:9:4 11:3. St. James uses its equivalent (w anrywpe kene , Jam_2:20) in solemn warning; but it was not infrequently used as a mere term of angry abuse (cf. Lightfoot, "Hor. Hebr.," in loc. , and Levy, s.v.). Buxtorf, s.v., compares a favourite expression of Aben Ezra"s, hwm yqyr, "empty-heads," for those who raise senseless objections, etc.; but the simple expression in our text refers rather to moral deficiency thorn to deficiency of brain. The council (vide supra). But; Revised Version, and. The Authorized Version interpolates an emphasis on the climax. Thou fool (Mwre).
(1) This is probably the Greek word for "fool," equivalent to the Hebrew nabal (lbn), which was often used in the Old Testament of the folly of wickedness. (Psa_14:1; cf. 1Sa_25:25) In this sense mwrov is used by our Lord himself. (Mat_23:17)
(2) It may be the transliteration (cf. kv, skhnoun) of the Hebrew moreh (hrwm), "rebel". (cf. Num_20:10) (So Revised Version margin, Weiss. Nosgen.) In favour of this is the parallelism of. language with Raca.
The sense, too, is excellent, "Thou rebel against God!" It is almost equivalent to "Apostate!" But the absence of any evidence that the Jews used moreh as a term of abuse prevents our accepting this interpretation. Field ("Otium Norv.," 3) points out that if this interpretation were true, moreh would be "the only pure Hebrew word in the Greek Testament (allhlouia, amhn , and sabawy , as being taken from the LXX, belong to a different class), all other foreign words being indisputably Aramaic, as raca, talitha kumi, maranatha, etc., which, as might have been expected, are retained by the authors of the Syriac versions without alteration. Not so mwre ?, for which both the Peschito and Philoxenian versions have lelo (i>ARABIC>)... a plain proof that these learned Syrians look it for an exotic, and not like raka , a native word." In either case. the term expresses the absolute godlessness of him who is so addressed. Of the two terms, Raca is more negative, implying the absence of all good, Mwre more positive, implying decided wickedness. Shall be in danger of; enocov estai eiv . The change from the usual dative to the unique construction with eiv , indicated by the Revised Version margin, "Greek, unto or into," is doubtless because our Lord no longer refers to the tribunal at which the punishment is ordered, but to the punishment itself into which the condemned man comes (cf. Wirier, Hell fire; Revised Version, the hell of fire; Revised Version margin, "Greek, Gehenna of fire" (thn geennan tou purov). Gehenna is properly "the Valley of Hinnom", (Jos_18:16 Neh_11:30) or "of the son of Hinnom". (Jos_15:8 Jos_16:1-8 2Ch_28:3) It is probably the valley on the south-west of Jerusalem (see, however, W. F. Birch), in Palestine Exploration Fund Report, January, 1889, pp. 39, 42, who places it between the two parts of Jerusalem, identifying it with the Tyropoeon Valley of Josephus, neglecting, however, to explain how so central a position is consistent with the "fire." In it was the spot where human sacrifices were offered to Moloch, (cf. 2Ch_28:3; and Rawlinson, on 2Ki_23:10) called the Topheth, "the place of horror"; (vide especially Payne Smith, on Jer_7:31) and in it, presumably on the same place, were burnt, according to Jewish tradition, (vide especially Kimchi, on Psa_27:13) the carcases of animals and other offal. There is no direct evidence that the bodies of criminals (as is often stated) were burnt there. But it seems probable that it was in this place that death by "burning," whether it was the later method of "burning" by a red-hot wire, or the earlier (Mishna, "San-hedr.," 7:2) of lighting faggots of wood round the condemned person, would be carried into effect. Thus both from the old associations of the valley, and from the then use made of it, the epithet "of fire" would be very naturally added. It seems probable that our Lord here referred primarily to "Gehenna" in this local sense (vide supra), but it is fair to notice that there is no other instance in the New Testament of this literal usage of the word. Elsewhere it is always in the metaphorical sense common in rabbinic writings of the place of final punishment which we usually call "hell.
Vers. 22, 23. The Christian idea of brotherhood.
Our Lord illustrated the application of the new Christian principles to various spheres and relations. Or to state more precisely his point, he showed how the regenerate character would put a new tone on all the life-associations. In a general way, the Christian light is to shine freely all abroad. In a particular way, the Christian influence is to affect a man"s first sphere, the sphere of human relationships, represented by the term "brotherhood." From the Christian point of view, our human brother is our second self, and we are to "love our neighbour as ourself.
I THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BROTHERHOOD IS ESSENTIAL TO PIETY. This is illustrated in vers. 23, 24. Worship cannot be acceptable to God, when offered by men who are out of brotherly relations. The offering to God is not acceptable as offering, but as the expression of the man, the declaration of his mind and heart, which God accepts in the offering. He must put his mind and heart right towards his brother, or God will never accept it as right towards him. The unforgiving never worship God aright. "If we love not our brother whom we have seen, how can we love God whom we have not seen;" "He who loveth God should love his brother also.
II THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BROTHERHOOD RESTS WITH THE CHRISTIAN. That is Christ"s point. It is his mission to culture and ennoble his disciples by putting them under the pressure of serious responsibilities. And this is one of them. However aggravating our brother may be, we, as Christians, are bound to keep up the brotherhood.. It there are yieldings to be done, we must do them. The Christian can never excuse himself by saying, "My brother will not be reconciled to me." He must be; and the Christian must not rest until he is. The burden of right relations rests on him.
III THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BROTHERHOOD MAY INVOLVE SELF-RESTRAINTS AND DISABILITIES. This is one of the great spheres of Christian self-denial and self-sacrifice. Every true Christian will be willing to suffer rather than break the brotherhood. R.T.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v23 Be reconciled to thy brother.
Mat_5:23-24
Be reconciled to thy brother.
Read full note →
Mutual conciliation
I. That a worshipper of God may be in a state of discord in reference to his brother.
II. That public worship rightly used is one of the means to detect and remove this wrong affection. It leads to reflection.
III. Conciliation is of superior value even to public worship.
IV. That it is the duty of brethren to be immediately conciliated. (Caleb Morris.)
I. In order to worship God acceptably, we must do justice to our fellow-men. Our worship will not be acceptable, unless we do all we can to live peaceably with others.
II. It is our duty to seek reconciliation with others when we have injured them.
III. This should be done before we attempt to worship God. This is often the reason why God does not accept our offerings, and we go empty away from our devotions. We do not do what we ought to do to others; we cherish improper feelings, or refuse to make proper acknowledgments, and God will not accept such attempts to worship Him. (Dr. A. Barnes.)
I. Observe the word brother.
1. So God teaches thee to call every one.
2. Think with what tenderness and love thou oughtest, and perhaps wouldst behave to him, if he really were such.
II. Does not Christ Himself call the Scribes and Pharisees fools? Truly; but with Divine compassion, to rouse them to a consideration of their state.
(1) The sin is in the anger, the scorn,
(2) the pride of heart in one sinner towards another.
III. Nothing will be accepted from thee in this disposition.
1. Agree with thy brother.
2. The loss of an hour may be the loss of thy soul. (Thomas Adam.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain On vv22–23 22. But I say unto you. Jehovah had spoken…
22. But I say unto you. Jehovah had spoken the Decalogue to Israel. Christ assumes the right to amend it. Such a claim is based on a claim of divinity. Whosoever is angry with his brother. Jesus goes back of the murderous act, and forbids the anger and the reproachful words that precede it and are likely to lead it. He places the murderous heart on the level of actual murder. Raca. An epithet of contempt; “empty head,” or “spit out,” that is, a heretic. The council. The Sanhedrim, the highest court of Israel. It corresponded to our Supreme Court, and had seventy members. Thou fool. The original implies a stupid, wicked fool. Of hell fire. The Greek is “the Gehenna of fire.” The term Gehenna arose from the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, where the Canaanites burned human sacrifices to Moloch. After the return of the Jews from the Captivity they made it a place of defilement, where the refuse of the city was thrown and burned. The name was applied to the place of future punishment by the Jews. The word is often used in the New Testament (Matt. 23:33; 5:29; 10:28; 18:9; Mark 9:43), and always denotes a place of future punishment.
B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On v22 hell fire
hell fire
Gr. "Geenna" = Gehenna, the place in the valley of Hinnom where, anciently, human sacrifices were offered. 2Ch 33:6; Jer 7:31 The word occurs,; Mat 5:22; Mat 5:29; Mat 5:30; Mat 10:28; Mat 18:9; Mat 23:15; Mat 23:33; Mar 9:43; Mar 9:45; Mar 9:47; Luk 12:5; Jas 3:6. In every instance except the last the word comes from the lips of Jesus Christ in most solemn warning of the consequences of sin. He describes it as the place where "their" worm never dies and of fire never to be quenched. The expression is identical in meaning with "lake of fire".; Rev 19:20; Rev 20:10; Rev 20:14; Rev 20:15.
Read full note →
See "Death, the second" (Joh 8:24; Rev 21:8); also (See Scofield "Rev 21:8") See Scofield "Luk 16:23".
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv22–23 Christ’s exposition is not so narrow:
Christ’s exposition is not so narrow:
v. 22. But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire.
Read full note →
The statement of the Lord is very general: Every one, none excepted; it is a universal prohibition of angry passion. He that gives way to such wrath is guilty of judgment, of condemnation. Anger against a brother, any member of the human family, is a deadly sin. It should properly come under the jurisdiction of the council or court, Deu 16:18; 2Ch 19:5. This is speaking relatively. The person that gives way to anger is as great an offender in God’s sight as the one that slays his brother in cold blood, Gal 5:20; Col 3:8; Jas 1:19-20. The same condemnation, but with greater emphasis, falls upon him that cannot control his anger, permitting it to burst forth in maledictions. Raca is an Aramaic word meaning an empty head, a stupid. The one using angry epithets of this nature is guilty of the Sanhedrin, the supreme council of the Jews that tried the worst offenses and inflicted the severest penalties. Anger that is not quickly controlled will become hatred combined with contempt, and freely indulge in railing, 1Pe 3:9. A still greater insult lies in the epithet, "Thou fool," which was used to denote a good-for-nothing, hopeless, helpless, morally worthless fool, and expressed contempt for a man’s heart and character. This expression of utter disregard of the fellow-man’s position in the eyes of God is an offense equal to that of murder, it is a damnable sin, 1Jn 3:15; Rev 21:8. It is punishable by the fire of Hinnom, the valley where the refuse of Jerusalem was burned—a figure often used by Jesus in speaking of the punishment of hell-fire.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v23 Jesus is talking to a group of people about…
you
Jesus is talking to a group of people about what they as individuals should or should not do. All occurrences of "you" and "your" are singular, but in some languages they may need to be plural. (See: Forms of You)
Read full note →
offering your gift
"giving your gift" or "bringing your gift"
at the altar
It is implied that this is God's altar at the temple in Jerusalem. AT: "to God at the altar in the temple" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)
there remember
"while you are standing at the altar you remember"
your brother has anything against you
"another person is angry with you because of something you did"
First be reconciled with your brother
This can be stated in active form. AT: "First make peace with the person" (See: Active or Passive)
translationWords
sacrifice
gift
altar
brother
reconcile
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv22–23 5:22 judgment . . . the court . .…
5:22 judgment . . . the court . . . hell: The second and third punishments are more severe than would have been typical in Jesus’ day, emphasizing the surpassing righteousness of Jesus and his followers (see 5:20). They did not tolerate unreconciled relationships or any devaluation of others. • If you call someone an idiot: The Aramaic term reqa’ (transliterated as raca) means something like “empty head,” and the clause probably means the same as if you curse someone (literally if you say, ‘You fool’; cp. Jas 2:20). Devaluation of people is a sin that manifests itself in various ways.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.