“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery;’
Parallel Translations
-
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery;’
-
ye haue hearde howe it was sayde to the of olde tyme: Thou shalt not committ advoutrie.
-
Ye haue heard that it was sayd to them of olde time, Thou shalt not commit adulterie.
Cross-references (6)
Passages linked to Matthew 5:27 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Deuteronomy 5:18 “You shall not commit adultery.
- Proverbs 6:32 He who commits adultery with a woman is void of understanding. He who does it destroys his own soul.
- Exodus 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery.
- Leviticus 20:10 “ ‘The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, even he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
- Deuteronomy 22:22-24 If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both die, the man who lay with the woman and the woman. So you shall remove the evil from Israel. If there is a young lady who is a virgin pledged to be married to a husband, and a man finds her in the city, and lies with her, then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones; the lady, because she didn’t cry, being in the city; and the man, because he has humbled his neighbor’s wife. So you shall remove the evil from among you.
- Matthew 5:21 “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.’
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (21 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain He is taken for an adulterer before God, whatsoever…
He is taken for an adulterer before God, whatsoever he be, that coveteth a woman: and therefore we must keep our eyes chaste, and all the members we have, yea, and we must eschew all occasions which might move us to evil, how dear soever it cost us.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain 27 Ye have heard that it was said by…
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
Ver. 27. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old, Thou shalt not commit adultery] This they corruptly restrained to the gross act, and made nothing of contemplative filthiness, hearts full of harlotry, hot as an oven with scalding lusts, Hos 7:6, very stews and brothel houses, cages of unclean birds; besides eyes full of adultery, hands defiled with dalliance, tongues taught to talk obscenities and ribaldries. Spurcitias Veneris eliminantes. But Seneca could say, Incesta est, et sine stupro, quae stuprum cupit: she is a whore that would be so had she but opportunity; and the Romans put to death a vestal virgin for singing this verse only.
Read full note →
" Faelices nuptae! moriar ni nubere dulce est."
St Paul’s virgin is holy, not in body only, but in spirit also, 1Co 7:34. Quae quia non licuit non facit, illa facit. {a} And for the avoiding of fornications, δια τας πορνειας, 1Co 7:2; (in the plural number, inward burnings as well as outward pollutions), let every man have his own wife, &c. Fecit quisque quantam voluit, saith Seneca. Every one doeth as he desireth to do. And Polybius attributeth the death of Antiochus to sacrilege only in his purpose and will. Josephus indeed derideth Polybius for so saying; but with as little reason, as his countryman Kimchi (soured with the leaven of the Pharisees) sets this strange sense upon Psa 66:18: If I regard iniquity only in my heart, so that it break not forth into outward act, the Lord will not hear me, that is (saith he) so as to impute it, or account it a sin.
{a} Has patitur poenas peccandi sola voluntas. Juv. Sat. 13.
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 The scope of our Saviour in these verses is…
The scope of our Saviour in these verses is the very same as in the verses immediately preceding, viz. to correct the jejune interpretation which the Pharisees had put upon the Divine law, and to show that he, instead of coming to destroy the law, came to fulfil it, as other ways, so by giving a more strict and true interpretation of it; and whereas they interpreted it only as to overt acts, which disturb human society and break civil order, he showeth that it reacheth to the inward thoughts, and unlawful desires of the heart, and any means that have a tendency to such prohibited acts. It was said by God to those fathers of the Jews,
Thou shalt not commit adultery, Exo 20:14. This law (saith our Saviour) your doctors expound, You shall not carnally lie with a woman that is not your wife; but there is a great deal more in it than so, for he that but secretly in his heart desireth such a thing, or taketh pleasure in such thoughts, and casts his eyes upon a woman in order to such a thing, is in the sight of God an adulterer. Hence we read of eyes full of adultery, to avoid which Job made a covenant with his eyes, Job 31:1, and would not suffer his heart to walk after his eyes, Job 31:7. We must so interpret the commandments of God, as not to extend them only to forbid or command those acts which are plainly mentioned in them, but the inward pleasing of our hearts with such things as are forbidden, the desires of our hearts after them, or whatsoever is a probable means to give us that sinful pleasure of our thoughts, or further inflame such unlawful desires in our souls.
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 Our Savior next proceeds to explain the seventh commandment,…
Our Savior next proceeds to explain the seventh commandment, which forbids adultery; by which the Pharisees understood only the gross act of uncleanness, and carnal lying with a woman. But, says our Savior, Whosoever secretly in his heart desires such a thing, and casts his eyes upon a woman in order to such an act, entertaining only a thought of it with pleasure and delight, he is an adulterer in God’s account.
Learn, That such is the purity and spirituality of the law of God, that it condemns speculative wantonness, no less than practical uncleanness; and forbids not only the outward action, but the secret purpose and intention, and first out-goings of the soul after unlawful objects.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain We have here an exposition of the seventh commandment,…
We have here an exposition of the seventh commandment, given us by the same hand that made the law, and therefore was fittest to be the interpreter of it: it is the law against uncleanness, which fitly follows upon the former; that laid a restraint upon sinful passions, this upon sinful appetites, both which ought always to be under the government of reason and conscience, and if indulged, are equally pernicious.
I. The command is here laid down (Mat 5:27), Thou shalt not commit adultery; which includes a prohibition of all other acts of uncleanness, and the desire of them: but the Pharisees, in their expositions of this command, made it to extend no further than the act of adultery, suggesting, that if the iniquity was only regarded in the heart, and went no further, God could not hear it, would not regard it (Psa 66:18), and therefore they thought it enough to be able to say that they were no adulterers, Luk 18:11.
Read full note →
II. It is here explained in the strictness of it, in three things, which would seem new and strange to those who had been always governed by the tradition of the elders, and took all for oracular that they taught.
1. We are here taught, that there is such a thing as heart-adultery, adulterous thoughts and dispositions, which never proceed to the act of adultery or fornication; and perhaps the defilement which these give to the soul, that is here so clearly asserted, was not only included in the seventh commandment, but was signified and intended in many of those ceremonial pollutions under the law, for which they were to wash their clothes, and bathe their flesh in water. Whosoever looketh on a woman (not only another man's wife, as some would have it, but any woman), to lust after her, has committed adultery with her in his heart, Mat 5:28. This command forbids not only the acts of fornication and adultery, but, (1.) All appetites to them, all lusting after the forbidden object; this is the beginning of the sin, lust conceiving (Jam 1:15); it is a bad step towards the sin; and where the lust is dwelt upon and approved, and the wanton desire is rolled under the tongue as a sweet morsel, it is the commission of sin, as far as the heart can do it; there wants nothing but convenient opportunity for the sin itself. Adultera mens est - The mind is debauched. Ovid. Lust is conscience baffled or biassed: biassed, if it say nothing against the sin; baffled, if it prevail not in what is says. (2.) All approaches toward them; feeding the eye with the sight of the forbidden fruit; not only looking for that end, that I may lust; but looking till I do lust, or looking to gratify the lust, where further satisfaction cannot be obtained. The eye is both the inlet and outlet of a great deal of wickedness of this kind, witness Joseph's mistress (Gen 39:7), Samson (Jdg 16:1), David, Sa2 11:2. We read the eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin, Pe2 2:14. What need have we, therefore, with holy Job, to make a covenant with our eyes, to make this bargain with them that they should have the pleasure of beholding the light of the sun and the works of God, provided they would never fasten or dwell upon any thing that might occasion impure imaginations or desires; and under this penalty, that if they did, they must smart for it in penitential tears! Job 31:1. What have we the covering of the eyes for, but to restrain corrupt glances, and to keep out of their defiling impressions? This forbids also the using of any other of our senses to stir up lust. If ensnaring looks are forbidden fruit, much more unclean discourses, and wanton dalliances, the fuel and bellows of this hellish fire. These precepts are hedges about the law of heart-purity, Mat 5:8. And if looking be lust, they who dress and deck, and expose themselves, with design to be looked at and lusted after (like Jezebel, that painted her face and tired her head, and looked out at the window) are no less guilty. Men sin, but devils tempt to sin.
2. That such looks and such dalliances are so very dangerous and destructive to the soul, that it is better to lose the eye and the hand that thus offend then to give way to the sin, and perish eternally in it. This lesson is here taught us, Mat 5:29, Mat 5:30. Corrupt nature would soon object against the prohibition of heart-adultery, that it is impossible to governed by it; "It is a hard saying, who can bear it? Flesh and blood cannot but look with pleasure upon a beautiful woman; and it is impossible to forbear lusting after and dallying with such an object." Such pretences as these will scarcely be overcome by reason, and therefore must be argued against with the terrors of the Lord, and so they are here argued against.
(1.) It is a severe operation that is here prescribed for the preventing of these fleshly lusts. If thy right eye offend thee, or cause thee to offend, by wanton glances, or wanton gazings, upon forbidden objects; if thy right hand offend thee, or cause thee to offend, by wanton dalliances; and if it were indeed impossible, as is pretended, to govern the eye and the hand, and they have been so accustomed to these wicked practices, that they will not be withheld from them; if there be no other way to restrain them (which, blessed be God, through his grace, there is), it were better for us to pluck out the eye, and cut off the hand, though the right eye, and right hand, the more honourable and useful, than to indulge them in sin to the ruin of the soul. And if this must be submitted to, at the thought of which nature startles, much more must we resolve to keep under the body, and to bring it into subjection; to live a life of mortification and self-denial; to keep a constant watch over our own hearts, and to suppress the first rising of lust and corruption there; to avoid the occasions of sin, to resist the beginnings of it, and to decline the company of those who will be a snare to us, though ever so pleasing; to keep out of harm's way, and abridge ourselves in the use of lawful things, when we find them temptations to us; and to seek unto God for his grace, and depend upon that grace daily, and so to walk in the Spirit, as that we may not fulfil the lusts of the flesh; and this will be as effectual as cutting off a right hand or pulling out a right eye; and perhaps as much against the grain to flesh and blood; it is the destruction of the old man.
(2.) It is a startling argument that is made use of to enforce this prescription (Mat 5:29), and it is repeated in the same words (Mat 5:30), because we are loth to hear such rough things; Isa 30:10. It is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, though it be an eye or a hand, which can be worse spared, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Note, [1.] It is not unbecoming a minister of the gospel to preach of hell and damnation; nay, he must do it, for Christ himself did it; and we are unfaithful to our trust, if we give not warning of the wrath to come. [2.] There are some sins from which we need to be saved with fear, particularly fleshly lusts, which are such natural brute beasts as cannot be checked, but by being frightened; cannot be kept from a forbidden tree, but by cherubim, with a flaming sword. [3.] When we are tempted to think it hard to deny ourselves, and to crucify fleshly lusts, we ought to consider how much harder it will be to lie for ever in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone; those do not know or do not believe what hell is, that will rather venture their eternal ruin in those flames, than deny themselves the gratification of a base and brutish lust. [4.] In hell there will be torments for the body; the whole body will be cast into hell, and there will be torment in every part of it; so that if we have a care of our own bodies, we shall possess them in sanctification and honour, and not in the lusts of uncleanness. [5.] Even those duties that are most unpleasant to flesh and blood, are profitable for us; and our Master requires nothing from us but what he knows to be for our advantage.
3. That men's divorcing of their wives upon dislike, or for any other cause except adultery, however tolerated and practised among the Jews, was a violation of the seventh commandment, as it opened a door to adultery, Mat 5:31, Mat 5:32. Here observe,
(1.) How the matter now stood with reference to divorce. It hath been said (he does not say as before, It hath been said by them of old time, because this was not a precept, as those were, though the Pharisees were willing so to understand it, Mat 19:7, but only a permission), "Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce; let him not think to do it by word of mouth, when he is in a passion; but let him do it deliberately, by a legal instrument in writing, attested by witnesses; if he will dissolve the matrimonial bond, let him do it solemnly." Thus the law had prevented rash and hasty divorces; and perhaps at first, when writing was not so common among the Jews, that made divorces rare things; but in process of time it became very common, and this direction of how to do it, when there was just cause for it, was construed into a permission of it for any cause, Mat 19:3.
(2.) How this matter was rectified and amended by our Saviour. He reduced the ordinance of marriage to its primitive institution: They two shall be one flesh, not to be easily separated, and therefore divorce is not to be allowed, except in case of adultery, which breaks the marriage covenant; but he that puts away his wife upon any other pretence, causeth her to commit adultery, and him also that shall marry her when she is thus divorced. Note, Those who lead others into temptation to sin, or leave them in it, or expose them to it, make themselves guilty of their sin, and will be accountable for it. This is one way of being partaker with adulterers Psa 50:18.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain Ye have heard that it was said,.... These forms…
Ye have heard that it was said,.... These forms of speech, as well as what follows,
by them of old time, have been explained, in ver. 21. The law here mentioned,
Read full note →
thou shalt not commit adultery, is recorded in Exo 20:14 and the meaning of our Lord is, not that the then present Jews had heard that such a law had been delivered "to the ancients", their fathers, at Mount Sinai; for that they could read in their Bibles: but they had received it by tradition, that the sense of it, which had been given to their ancestors, by the ancient doctors of the church, was, that this law is to be taken strictly, as it lies, and only regards the sin of uncleanness in married persons; or, what was strictly adultery, and that actual; so that it had no respect to fornication, or unchaste thoughts, words, or actions, but that single act only.
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 Thou shalt not commit adultery - And this, as…
Thou shalt not commit adultery - And this, as well as the sixth commandment, the scribes and Pharisees interpreted barely of the outward act. Exod. xx, 14.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 27. Ye have heard that it was said…
Verse 27. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old] By the ancients, τοις αρχαιοις, is omitted by nearly a hundred MSS., and some of them of the very greatest antiquity and authority; also by the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Gothic, and Sclavonian versions; by four copies of the old Itala; and by Origen, Cyril, Theophylact, Euthymius, and Hilary. On this authority Wetstein and Griesbach have left it out of the text.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain Mat 5:27-28. Ye have heard, &c. — Jesus now…
Mat 5:27-28. Ye have heard, &c. — Jesus now proceeds in his sermon to the seventh commandment, the true interpretation of which he gives us. Thou shalt not commit adultery — This, as well as the sixth commandment, the scribes and Pharisees interpreted barely of the outward act. But I say unto you, &c. — The command extends not only to unchaste actions and words, but even to looks, and the very thoughts of the heart: for whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her — Whosoever cherishes or indulges unchaste imaginations, desires, and intentions, hath committed adultery with her, &c. — Hath been guilty of a violation of this commandment, which was intended to forbid the corrupt inclinations of the heart, and all irregular desires, as well as the pollution of the body.
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 Ye have heard that it was said by them…
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery - See the notes at Mat 5:21. Our Saviour in these verses explains the seventh commandment. It is probable that the Pharisees had explained this commandment, as they had the sixth, as extending only to the external act; and that they regarded evil thoughts and a wanton imagination as of little consequence, or as not forbidden by the law. Our Saviour assures them that the commandment did not regard the external act merely, but the secrets of the heart, and the movements of the eye. He declares that they who indulge a wanton desire, that they who look on a woman to increase their lust, have already, in the sight of God, violated the commandment, and committed adultery in the heart. Such was the guilt of David, whose deep and awful crime fully shows the danger of indulging in evil desires, and in the rovings of a wanton eye. See 2 Sam. 11; Ps. 51. See also 2Pe 2:14. So exceeding strict and broad is the law of God! And so heinous in his sight axe thoughts and feelings which may be forever concealed from the world!
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 Jesus Christ here perfects the old law, which makes…
Jesus Christ here perfects the old law, which makes no mention of the acts of the mind and will. (Menochius)
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 Ye have heard that it was said--The words "by,"…
Ye have heard that it was said--The words "by," or "to them of old time," in this verse are insufficiently supported, and probably were not in the original text.
Thou shall not commit adultery--Interpreting this seventh, as they did the sixth commandment, the traditional perverters of the law restricted the breach of it to acts of criminal intercourse between, or with, married persons exclusively. Our Lord now dissipates such delusions.
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 (2.) Christian law of sexual purity.
(2.) Christian law of sexual purity.
27. Not commit adultery — The same principles are applied to the seventh commandment as are used in the preceding paragraph to elucidate and disencumber the sixth. Actual adultery is traced to the lust in the heart. The hidden crime is viewed as the essential crime of which the external act is the manifestation.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain (27) By them of old time.—Omitted in the best…
(27) By them of old time.—Omitted in the best MSS. If retained, translate as before, to them of old time. It was probably inserted for the sake of conformity with Mat_5:21. Here the words are simply those of the divine commandment, but it is given as it was taught in the Rabbinic schools, simply in the narrowness of the letter, without any perception that here too the commandment was “exceeding broad.” It is with that teaching, as before, that our Lord contrasts His own.
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 Vers. 27-30. The seventh commandment. The verses occur in…
Vers. 27-30. The seventh commandment. The verses occur in this form only here, but vers. 29 and 30 are found in Mat_18:8, Mat_18:9, (parallel passage, Mar_9:43-47) as illustrations of another subject ( vide infra).
By them of old time. Omit, with the Revised Version (cf. ver. 21, note). Thou shalt not. (Exo_20:14 Deu_5:18)
Read full note →
Vers. 27-32. Christ"s second and third illustration of the Christian type of a true fulfilling of the Law.
After the illustration based on the letter of the sixth commandment, Christ takes the letter of the seventh as the basis of further illustration. Both of these commandments lend themselves so well for the instruction of the individual in the matter of the wide difference between the outer commandment and the spirit of it, that whoever will may learn that difference, and, learning it, become a true learner a learner in the school of Christ. In this illustration individual feeling, impulse, character, are so sensitively and so subtilly touched, that perhaps none could penetrate more effectually or have better opportunity of far-reaching and lasting lessons. Notice that Christ teaches how, to the true conception of God"s Law, it is necessary to remember that
I NOT ONLY BEFORE ALL AND EVERY ACTION OF SIN HE MAKES COUNT OF THE THOUGHT-SEED THAT GREW TO IT, AND NOT ONLY BEHIND ALL AND EVERY ACTION OF SIN HE MAKES COUNT OF MOTIVE, AND THE THOUGHT THAT WORKS AS MOTIVE THERETO, BUT ALSO THAT WITHOUT ANY ACTION WHATSOEVER, HE TAKES MOST SURE ACCOUNT OF THOUGHT, AS ITSELF MATTER AND SUBJECT OF SIN, WITH ITS QUALITIES AND ATTRIBUTES.
II THE BODILY SENSE THAT MAY BE THE INLET, THE AWAKENER, AND FEEDER TO THOUGHT AND HEART, OF SIN OR OCCASION OF SIN, MUST BE DENIED, CLOSED, AND DESTROYED, RATHER THAN LEFT TO BE AN "OFFENCE" TO THE KEEPING OF THE LAW. THIS IS TO HONOUR GOD"S LAW.
III THE BODILY POWER WHICH MAY HAVE THE SKILL AND CUNNING, AND ALL THAT MAY BE THE BEST TALENT OF THE PERSON GATHERED INTO IT, MUST IN LIKE MANNER BE DENIED, SUPPRESSED, DESTROYED, IF ANY PERVERSE BIAS POSSESSING IT MAKE IT PROVE AN "OFFENCE." THE SOVEREIGN VOICE OF THE COMMANDMENT IS THEN AGAINST IT.
IV THE COURSE WHICH FAILS OF HONOURING THE LAW OF GOD TO ITS TRUE INTENTION, IS ONLY TOO SURE TO BETRAY ITS OWN FAULTINESS, IN INVOLVING MANIFOLD OTHER VIOLATION OF IT, AND THIS, TOO, ON THE PART OF OTHERS AS OF THE WRONG-DOER HIMSELF. B.
Vers. 27-32. Purity.
In the preceding paragraph Jesus expounded the spirituality of the Law in ruling the passions; here he pursues the subject in respect to the appetites. The case of adultery is typical or representative of the series. Learn
I THAT THE LAW IS KEPT OR BROKEN IN THE HEART.
1. Acts are good or evil as expressions of the heart.
(1) This was the reverse of the teaching of the elders. Especially so in the school of Hillel. Hence the Pharisees took the technical observance of the letter to be the fulfilling of the Law. (see Luk_18:11)
(2) But an act apart from the will would be automatic and mechanical. It would cease to be moral. (see Mat_15:19)
(3) The spirit, therefore, is the essence of the Law. So David. (see Psa_66:18) The ordinances respecting ceremonial uncleanness and their washings and bathings were designed to teach this.
2. The senses are the instruments of the heart.
(1) The eye is an inlet to its wickedness. The appetite of Potiphar"s wife was stirred by the comeliness of Joseph. (see Gen_39:6) Samson was overcome by the vision of Delilah. (Jud_1:16:1; see also 2Sa_11:2)
(2) The eye is an outlet to its wickedness. Bad men look that they may lust. They lust in the look where further satisfaction cannot be attained. "Eyes full of adultery," etc. (2Pe_2:14) Were time, place, and opportunity in their favour, the look would ripen into the deed.
(3) The true sentinel will keep the gate of the citadel. So Job made a covenant with his eyes. (Job_31:1) He will be vigilant in prayer. (see Psa_119:37)
(4) What applies to the eyes applies also to the other senses. There is adultery in unclean discourse. In wanton dalliances. In immodest dressing. "Jezebel painted her face and tired her head," etc. (2Ki_9:30) Sex is the spirit of the modern dance. Men sin; but devils tempt to sin" (Henry).
3. The Pharisee, ignoring the spirit, transgresses the letter of the Law.
(1) The original law of marriage admitted of divorce for the one offence of infidelity to the specific marriage covenant. (Gen_2:24 Mat_19:3-8) Other causes there might be to justify separation , but not divorce.
(2) Moses permitted divorce under other conditions. (Deu_24:1) But this permission was hateful to God. (see Mal_2:16) It was suffered by Moses because of the hardness of the people"s hearts. (Mat_19:7, Mat_19:8) Between laws of command and laws of permission there is an important distinction.
(3) Taking advantage of the concession, divorces became common on account of dislikes and caprices. Rabbi Akiba said, "If any man saw a woman handsomer than his own wife, he might put his wife away; because it is said in the Law, If she find not favour in his eyes. " Josephus, not being pleased with his wife"s manners, put her away.
(4) Our Lord showed how this conduct operated against the Law. It made an adulteress of the divorced wife; for it treated her as though she had been such. It exposed her to the temptation to commit adultery. Bound by the law of her husband during his natural life, even did she marry another she would be an adulteress. (see Rom_7:1-8) By parity of reasoning, whoever married her would be an adulterer. The proper husband is responsible as the cause of all these consequences. (ver. 32; see also Psa_50:18 1Co_7:10, 1Co_7:11)
II THAT THE HEART MUST BE PURIFIED AT ANY COST.
1. Because the unclean heart is fit only for perdition.
(1) It can have no place in heaven. It would be there a monstrosity in the midst of symmetry. It would mar the harmony of purity, it would be out of sympathy with saints and angels. It would be an intolerable offence to the holy God.
(2) Gehenna is prepared for the devil and his agents. A man goes to "his own place." His hell is in his heart.
(3) In Gehenna there are also torments for the body. "Both soul and body." The body will be tormented in every part. The "eye." The "hand." The "whole body.
2. Terror is the argument for the brutish.
(1) Fine sentiments have little influence with the lustful. The debauchee flings overboard all such when he tramples upon the sanctities of wife, family, home, and Church. Upon the principle that the garotter will respect the cat.
(2) To the adulterer, therefore, our Lord preaches damnation. The true minister will follow this example. He can only keep a clean conscience by declaring the whole counsel of God. (see Jud_1:22, 23)
3. Resolute dealing is needful here.
(1) The offending eye and hand must go. No matter how dear the "eye the idol. No matter how useful the "hand the acquisition. (cf. Gal_5:24 Col_3:5)
(2) Men, under surgical advice, will part with a limb or an organ to save life. So the sinner who hazards his soul for his idol must sacrifice his idol to save his soul.
(3) To neglect the mortifying of a single member may prove the destruction of all the members. When one member sins, all the members sin with it and suffer the penalty. Better one perish in repentance than all perish in Gehenna.
(4) Those duties which are most unpleasant are often most "profitable." God requires nothing from us that will not be to our advantage. J.A.M.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
John A. Broadus 1886 · Public Domain Mat 5:27-32.
Mat 5:27-32.
The Law Concerning Adultery And Divorce
Read full note →
By this second example (see on "Mat 5:21") our Lord further illustrates and applies the statement of Mat 5:17-20 that he does not propose to relax the requirements of the law, but enjoins a still stricter and more spiritual morality.
Mat 5:27. Ye have heard that it was said. See on Mat 5:21. By—to—them of old time, is here a spurious addition from Mat 5:21.[1] It may be noticed (Stier) that a certain variety is observed in introducing this series of examples; the full phrase of Mat 5:21 is shortened in Mat 5:27 and still further in Mat 5:31; and then in Mat 5:33 the full phrase is resumed, to be again shortened in Mat 5:38 and Mat 5:43. Thou shalt not commit adultery. (Exo 20:14 Deu 5:18) This prohibition of a particular species of unchastity may be regarded as carrying with it in principle-like others of the ten commandments—the prohibition of unchastity in general. No addition to this commandment is said to have been made in the traditional teaching, as was done in the former case; (Mat 5:21) but we know that the Jewish teachers were disposed to limit the commandment to actual adultery. Jesus extends it so as to forbid dallying with the corresponding desires. He thus ’completes’ the law. (Mat 5:17)
[1] It is wanting in most of the early authorities, and is manifestly an addition by way of assimilation to Mat 5:21, etc. Its presence in some Old Latin codices (with the Vulgate.) and in the Old Syriac, shows that the addition was made early, by the middle of the second century, like many other corruptions of the text.
Mat 5:28. But I say, The ’I’ is emphatic; see on Mat 5:22. To lust after her, i. e., with a view to lust after her, an intentional looking for the purpose of stimulating, and delighting in, impure desire. This, ’with a view to,’ is the proper force of the Greek phrase, the same that is used in Mat 6:1, Mat 13:30, Mat 23:5. The English word ’lust’ originally signified desire of any kind, good or bad (as in German now). In the Scriptures it is used only for evil desires, and at the present day is confined to one particular class of evil desires. The Greek word here used signifies ’desire’ in general, and is used in a good sense in Mat 13:17 Luk 22:15, and some other passages. More frequently it has a bad sense, as in Mar 4:19, etc., denoting evil desires in general (human desires being so often evil). The specific sense of sexual desire is found (in the New Testament) only here and in Rom 1:24, though of course included, along with other desires, in most cases of the bad sense. Hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. The distinction between our Lord’s teachings and what they were accustomed to, is essentially the same as in Rom 1:21 f. Jesus condemns, not merely the outward act of sin, but the cherishing of sinful desire. Stier: "He who experiences at a first glance this desire, and then instead of turning away and withdrawing from sin, (2Pe 2:14) throws a second glance with lustful intent and in order to retain and increase that impulse, commits the sin." As in 1Jn 3:15, ’whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer,’ so here, every one that cherishes lust by a look is an adulterer. Compare Job 31:1; Pro 6:25; 2Sa 11:2, 2Sa 11:4; and 2Pe 2:14, ’eyes full of adultery.’ The Greek and Roman and the Jewish writers have also many sayings (see in Wet., Gill), as to the sinfulness of a lustful look.
Mat 5:29 f. The vigorous self-restraint which is requisite in order to avoid the sin just forbidden, suggests the idea that all our propensities must be controlled, and that the greatest possible self-denial would be far better than that suffering in hell, which must be the reward of sinful gratifications. This corresponds to the application made in Mat 5:23, and here again the address is to an individual, ’thou.’
Thy right eye, literally, thy eye, the right (eye); even an eye, even the best eye, must in such a case be given up. Compare Exo 29:20; 1Sa 11:2; Zec 11:17. The ’eye’ is doubtless selected because suggested by the preceding sentence, (Mat 5:28) and also because of its general importance. Offend thee, or, causes thee to stumble, or ’to sin.’ The Greek word is found in Sept., and quite often in N. T., though not found in profane Greek writers, and involves such difficulties as to justify a detailed explanation. Compare Conant. (1) The noun (skandalon), from which this verb is derived, denotes primarily the trapstick or trigger of a net or trap, against which the game strikes and causes the trap to fall; and derivatively, anything against which one strikes, whether a stumbling-block, as in Lev 19:14: ’Thou shalt not put a stumbling block before the blind,’ or more rarely, an obstacle set to hinder the progress of any one, as in the apocryphal book of Judith (Jdt 5:1) it is said the Israelites had put walls on the mountain-tops, and ’obstacles’ (or ’obstructions’) in the plains, to resist the progress of the invaders. From these derivative senses come several figurative uses, as to moral and religious objects: (a) A stumbling-block, as causing one to fall into sin. (Mat 13:41; Mat 18:7; Luk 17:1; Rom 14:13, 1Jn 2:10 Rev 2:14) (b) An obstacle which men strike against and stop, an occasion of disbelief. (Rom 9:32 f..; Rom 16:17, 1Co 1:23, 1Pe 2:8) (c) An object which one strikes against and is hurt or repelled, so as to be displeased with it, an "offence" in the present English sense of that word. (Mat 16:23 Gal 5:11) (By further derivation comes our English use of scandal, which word is borrowed from the Greek, but conveys a meaning no where found in Greek use.) In some cases two of these senses may be united, as the second and third in 1Co 1:23. (In Rom 11:9, the reference is probably not to a stumbling-block, but to the primary sense of a trap-stick or trigger, as a figure for a means of destruction) (2) In like manner the verb (skandalizo) is used figuratively in three corresponding senses: (a) To make one stumble and fall, to cause to sin. (Mat 5:29 f,; Mat 18:6-9 Luk 17:2; Rom 14:21; 1Co 8:13; 1Co 11:29) (b) To obstruct one’s path or make him stop, to cause one to disbelieve and reject or forsake. (Mat 11:6, Mat 13:21, Mat 13:57, Mat 15:12, Mat 24:10, Mat 26:31, Mat 26:33 Joh 16:1) (c) To pain or displease, to offend in our modern sense of the word, (Mat 17:27; Joh 6:61) (And from this by further derivation comes our peculiar English use of the borrowed word "scandalize.") Here also, as with the noun, two or three senses may sometimes be found combined.[1]
[1] It has always been found difficult to translate the words into English. Tyndale introduced the Latin ’offend,’ which might have been developed into all the senses of the Biblical Greek term, but has not been. The Great Bible’s’ hynder’ was a failure. The Geneva took ’cause to offend,’ and so Bible Un., Noyes, and Davidson. King James put this sometimes in the margin, and in the text imitated Tyndale, But this rendering has long been a stumbling-block to the general reader, and an offence to scholars. The Rev. Ver. has given perhaps the best available renderings, but various senses above described require to be carefully distinguished by the reader. The Syriac uses the same root as one which in Hebrew signifies to cause to totter, stumble, fall. The Coptic and the Latin versions here transferred the Greek word scandalizo, and following the Vulgate the Rheims version says ’scandalize,’ which to a modern English reader is even more misleading than ’offend.’ Wyclif’s ’slander’ is but another derivative (through the French) from the same scandalizo.
Thus the idea is, if thy right eye causes thee to sin. The expression is obviously designed to teach a general lesson by "assuming an extreme case," a method quite "characteristic of our Lord’s teachings," (see Alexander, and compare on Mat 5:24 and Mat 5:39). He is not presenting this as an actual case, or one likely to occur; but "if it should occur, if the only alternative presented to a man were habitual transgression or the loss of his most valuable members," then he ought to "choose mutilation rather than a life of sin; and that choice includes all minor cases, as the whole includes the part, and as the greater comprehends the less."
For it is profitable for thee. The appeal is to a man’s own higher interest, which is really promoted by all the self-sacrifice and self-denial required by the word of God. That one of thy members should perish, or simply ’that one of thy members perish,’ the old English subjunctive.[2] Be cast, same term as in the preceding clause. Hell, Gehenna, the place of torment. See on "Mat 5:22".
[2] This use of hina, and the subjunctive, which is common in the Septuagint and extremely so in N. T., though very rare in classic Greek, should not be called subfinal or hypotelic, for it is not at all a weakening of the telie or final sense, but is entirely independent. The clause introduced by hina is here really nominative to the verb ’is profitable’ (the Greek having no equivalent for our ’it’ in such expressions). So in Mat 10:28; Mat 18:6; Mat 18:14. Sometimes it is accusative, either of the direct object, (Mat 14:36; Mat 26:63) or of general reference, ’as to’; (Mat 8:5) in fact the final use really belongs under this last head. And sometimes it is appositional, whether to a nominative, (Luk 1:43) an accusative, (Joh 6:29) or a locative. (Joh 15:8) Whatever special idea may arise is due to the natural relations between the matters spoken of in each case, or to the connection of the statement. Abundant examples may be found in Grimm, but wrongly classified; nor are these uses at all satisfactorily treated by Winer, or Buttmann, or Jelf. (In the similar statement of Mat 18:8 f. we find not hina and subject the usual classical construction, the infinitive).
Mat 5:30. Another and entirely similar illustration of the principle in question. The repetition and reiteration of a thought, with only slight change of figure or phrase, is characteristic of the Scriptures; and it is not merely to be noted as a literary peculiarity, for the inspired writers, and the Great Teacher, employ this means of impressing upon men truths which are important and which they are unwilling to receive. So preachers are often compelled to do now; and though the fastidious may complain, as in the days of Isaiah, that they are treated too much like children, (Isa 28:10) yet others, and perhaps the complainers themselves, often need amplification and repetition—while of course these should not be used as an expedient to disguise poverty of thought, by hammering a very little gold into a very large surface. There is some. thing exceedingly solemn and stately in the repetition here; and in Mat 18:8 f., where our Lord presents the same idea in a different connection, we find the foot also introduced, as a still further amplification (compare on Mat 7:9-11); it may also be noticed that there the eye is mentioned last, (compare Mar 9:43 ff.) while here it comes first, because of Mat 5:28. Be cast into hell, literally go off—or away into hell. This reading is required by the best authorities for the Greek text; it was changed so as to be like Mat 5:29.
Mat 5:31 f. The extreme facility of divorce which existed among the Jews of our Saviour’s time, was the occasion, on a large scale, of the sin of adultery; (Mat 5:32) and thus the transition is very natural from the topic of the preceding verses to this, which is not to be considered a new and distinct example (see on "Mat 5:21"), but another department of the same subject. Accordingly it is introduced by a simpler form of expression than in the other cases; not ’Ye have heard that it was said,’ but simply, ’And it hath been said.’
The law of Moses (Deu 24:1) required that if a man determined to put away his wife, he should give her a formal document to that effect. The Jews in the time of Christ were greatly at variance as to the proper cause of divorce, but most of them held that it was lawful for a man to dismiss his wife ’for every cause’ (see on "Mat 19:3"), and that there was no restriction at all except that he must give her the document. Accordingly, in this case also our Lord is not setting aside the law, (Mat 5:17) nor at all conflicting with its true design. The Israelites, like other Oriental nations, had no doubt been inclined to great laxity in the matter of divorce, and Moses was not encouraging this, but to some extent restricting it (so also Henry, Achelis, Rüitschi in Herzog), by appointing that a man should not send off his wife with a mere oral dismissal, which he might do in a fit of passion, but should give her a regular writing. (Maimonides gives a form in use in his day, twelfth century, see in Lightfoot or Gill.) This, especially in the earliest period, when few could write, would require a Levite to prepare it, and thus give opportunity for reflection and advice, and would besides place the rejected wife in a better position for the future, by showing that she had been a lawful wife. The document, according to the intention of the law, implied that she was innocent of adultery; for if a wife was guilty of that crime the law required that she should be put to death, and there would in that case be no need of a divorce at all. Still, it was not considered obligatory to inflict this penalty. (Compare on Mat 1:19) A further restriction upon the facility of divorce was made by the provision (Deu 24:2-4) that after the termination, by divorce or death, of another marriage on the part of the woman, the man who formerly divorced her could not then take her back, as this would shock the instinctive sense of propriety.—It thus appears that Jesus is here carrying out the design of the Mosaic enactment by a still further restriction in the same direction; is not abrogating the law, but completing it.—According (Mat 5:17) to the terms of the law, and the common usage of the Jews, only the husband could divorce; and so our Lord speaks here only of what the husband may do. But on a later occasion, (Mar 10:12) he mentions also the case of a woman’s putting away her husband. It is natural that Mark rather than Matthew should record this, as it was a case much more likely to occur among Gentiles than among Jews.
Mat 5:32. In this verse, instead of whosoever, the correct text gives the slightly stronger expression, every one who, as in Rev. Ver., every single one, as in Mat 5:28 (compare on Mat 5:22).—But I say unto you. ’I’ emphatic, see on "Mat 5:22".—Jesus recognizes only one sufficient ground of divorce.[1] It is a part of the mystery of human nature that the connection between husband and wife produces a strange feeling of oneness. (Gen 2:23 f.; Eph 5:28; especially 1Co 6:15 f.) And it is only when the sacred tie which thus bound them has been broken, that either of them may lawfully form a marriage union with another person. It is not said that in such a case the husband must put away the offending wife, but in saying that he must not except in that case, it is implied that then he may. Hovey: "This crime is one which inflicts so deep a wound on the innocent party, and violates so utterly and completely the substance of conjugal duty, that it is recognized by God as a valid ground for divorce, whenever this is sought by the unoffending husband or wife." But "there are many passages of the Old Testament in which God addresses his people as an adulterous wife, whom, however, he still recognizes as his own, and strives to recover from idolatry"; and the wronged husband or wife is at liberty to exercise like forbearance.—The same rule as here is laid down at greater length in Mat 19:3-9 (see on "Mat 19:3"), and repeated on a third occasion, Luk 16:18.—The directions given by Paul in 1Co 7:10-16 refer to a peculiar state of things, but are in accordance with our Lord’s teachings, to which Paul expressly refers. Where only one of a heathen couple had become a Christian, the apostle says it was best for them to continue together, since that might result in the salvation of the one not yet converted; (1Co 7:10, 1Co 7:16) but if the unbeliever insists on a separation, the believer is not ’under bondage,’ ’enslaved’ in such cases (1Co 7:15), not compelled to live with the unbeliever, whether or no. (The word is not simply ’bound,’ but ’enslaved,’ and quite different from that rendered ’bound’ in Rom 7:2 f., which refers to the bond of marriage.) Yet the parties thus separated, the apostle says, must remain unmarried, and the believer must seek reconciliation.—Putting (1Co 7:11) together that passage and our Lord’s teachings, we learn that a husband and wife may for sufficient cause separate and live apart, but may not marry again unless the tie between them has been severed through the commission, by one or the other, of the crime our Lord mentions. If a man divorced his wife for any other cause, Jesus declares that he would be causing her to commit adultery, i.e., if she should be married to another; and whosoever should marry her when divorced (or, ’marry a divorced woman’; it may mean either, and there is no important difference)—unless, of course, the divorce were for the sufficient cause here mentioned—would be committing adultery, as she would still be, in the view of the divine law, the first husband’s wife. (Compare Hovey on The Scriptural Law of Divorce, Am. Bapt. Pub. Soc.) It has been well remarked that as the only ground of divorce which our Lord admits is one pertaining to the essential nature of the marriage relation, no changes in the form of the outward union, or of the outward divorce, can make any difference in this respect.—It follows that all legislation which allows of divorce "from the bond of marriage," except for the cause here named, is contrary to Christ’s teaching. It may be very well to legalize separation, with reference to questions of property, support, the control of children, etc., as is done in the so-called divorce "from bed and board"; and in cases where the civil law does not provide for this, but permits a complete legal divorce, it may be allowable to seek such divorce as an arrangement for separation; but still neither party has a moral right to re-marry, unless the religious union has been violated by the unchastity of one of them. In that case the innocent party has a right to full divorce and re-marriage; our Lord has said nothing as to the question whether the guilty party has a moral right to marry again. This could be true only after unquestionable repentance. Compare the case of a man who has killed his wife. But for civil government to refuse a legal divorce in cases where the Lord distinctly admits it, may be a grievous wrong to the innocent party, who is now absolved from all moral obligation to the other, and yet is not permitted by the civil enactments to marry again, if desired. The Greek and other Oriental Churches, and most Protestant Churches, have always held that in such a case re-marriage is allowable. The Church of Rome forbids it (save by special dispensation), maintaining the perpetual obligation of what it calls the "sacrament" of marriage. The German Protestant Churches are extremely lax as to divorce-starting from a wrong interpretation of Paul’s teaching, so as to make "desertion" (1Co 7:15) a ground of divorce—and that fact has embarrassed many of the ablest German commentaries upon the present passage. In some of the United States there has also been a grievous facility of divorce, against which a healthy reaction is now in several quarters arising. The new law of England allows legalized separation for various causes, and divorce proper for adultery. The State of South Carolina has no provision for legal divorce. (On the history of divorce in ancient and modern times, see Woolsey on "Divorce," New York.)
[1] The Greek term employed, porneia (which primarily signifies ’harlotry,’ the primary signification of fornication also) is not always confined to unchastity in unmarried persons, but applied to the married also, as in 1Co 5:1 ff.; Amo 7:17. The corresponding Hebrew word is the one always employed figuratively to denote Israel’s unfaithfulness to Jehovah, her husband. Thus in Eze 23:5, Aholah (Samaria), after "bearing sons and daughters" to Jehovah, (Eze 23:6) "played the harlot When she was mine," compare Num 5:19 f. See Hos 3:3, and Gesenius on senah. Dion Cass. says of the Empress Messalina, kai emoicheueto kai eporneuto, ’she both committed adultery and played the harlot.’ Chrys. says here: "Do you see how this agrees with what precedes? For he that does not look at another man’s wife with unchastened eyes, will not commit; and not committing porneia, he will not afford the husband occasion to cast out his wife." Chrys. certainly knew Greek, and he distinctly applies this term to the case of a married woman. So Theophyl. and Euthym. expressly, and so Origen on Mat 19:9. Apolinarius (in Cramer,) says, "Christ allows one to put away her that has committed fornication, because she dissolved the physical union." Jerome speaks of the wife as having " separated herself from her husband by fornication." The Peshito Syriac translates by ’adultery’ in Mat 19:9, though not in Mat 5:32, and though distinguishing the two terms in Mat 15:19 and elsewhere. Almost all expositors have understood the word in this passage as signifying unchastity in general. See Grot., Meyer, Weiss. As the general term it would include the case of adultery, and also that in which a wife was found to have been unchaste before marriage, which latter ease the law treated as having the same guilt and requiring the same punishment as adultery. (Deu 22:21 f.)Dollinger urges that this last is in Matthew the sole meaning, but unsuccessfully. Yet if the term ’adultery’ had been here used, it would have excluded this case. We thus see a reason for employing the general term, here and in Mat 19:9.—’Maketh her an adulteress,’, (Mat 5:32) represents the correct Greek text. It means that if she is taken as wife by another man, her first husband has caused her to be now an adulteress, by putting her away without proper ground; and the second husband becomes an adulterer, for she is still properly the wife of the other man. The woman appears as passive.
Homiletical And Practical
Mat 5:28. Licentious looks. How much of grievous sin is committed in this respect before him who perfectly sees the heart, and to whom impurity in the heart is as real a sin as gross acts of unchastity. Many a one would boast, like the Pharisee in the parable, of being no adulterer (Luk 18:11), who yet has often committed adultery in the heart; and God has seen it. The principle of our Lord’s teaching alike forbids anything else by which men encourage lustful feeling, as looking for that purpose at works of art, indecent dances, reading, speaking, or hearing obscene stories or obscene jests, filthy imaginations, etc.—Luther: "You can’t prevent the devil from shooting arrows of evil thoughts into your heart; but take care that you do not let such arrows stick fast and grow there. Do as a good old man of past times has said: ’I can’t prevent a bird from flying over my head, but I can prevent him from making a nest in my hair.’ " —Remember that the great means of keeping improper thoughts out of our minds, is to keep them filled with good thoughts. (Gal 5:16)
Mat 5:29. Sins of the eye. How many forms of sin are indicated or excited by looking. The lustful eye, the jealous eye, the envious eye, the revengeful eye, the suspicious eye—the gambler’s eye, the robber’s eye, the flatterer’s eye. Chrys: "For this were not to act as one hating tile eye, but as one loving the rest of the body."—Philo (in Griffith): "It seems to me that all who are not entirely uninstructed will rather blind themselves than gaze on things which are unseemly, and make themselves deaf than listen to hurtful words, and cut out their tongues than speak what ought not to be spoken."—Profitable for thee. Man has a complex nature, and the Bible, which is divinely adapted to human nature, appeals not only to conscience, the felt obligation to do right because it is right, but also to our interest in the true and high sense, our hopes and fears for time and for eternity. Scriptural self-denial is real self-interest.
Mat 5:30. Seneca (in Griffith): "Whatever vices rend your heart, cast them from you; and if they could in no other way be extracted, the heart itself ought to be plucked out with them." Dykes: "The battle of conscience and reason and modesty against appetite, is to be fought within the heart of the tempted man, and for it help is to be found nowhere but on his knees."
John A. Broadus, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (American Baptist Publication Society, 1886) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain In his heart.
Mat_5:27-28
In his heart.
Read full note →
The heart or will is, in man, the seat of virtue or vice.
I. Actions must be our invariable touchstone of truth whilst we sojourn in this state of imperfect knowledge and comparative obscurity, where expression is the only avenue to sentiment, and action the only publisher of intention.
II. Actions are the only public representatives of our private sentiments.
1. So many channels through which the heart discharges its flow of various passions.
2. So many mirrors by the reflection of which the internal dispositions of the soul become externally visible.
III. Actions viewed in a moral light are to the soul what
(1) streams are to the fountain;
(2) branches are to the root.
Branches have no existence but what they derive from the root. Streams have no existence but what they derive from the fountain. Actions have no moral existence but that which they derive from the heart.
When God judges man, the heart is the rule of judgment.
1. The heart, the source of these actions, is to Him uncovered
2. The heart, having the principle of religion so strong as to prevent an unlawful enjoyment, will likewise be sufficiently strong to prevent an unlawful resolution.
3. The depraved heart is before God of the same criminality as the depraved life, and exposes us to the same punishment from God. Let us therefore eternally renounce every inclination inconsistent with religion and reproachful to humanity. Let us cultivate purity of heart. (David Lamont, D. D.)
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 27, 28. Thou shalt not commit adultery. The Jewish…
27, 28. Thou shalt not commit adultery. The Jewish rabbins held that a man was guiltless who did not commit the act. Christ, as he always did, lays the laws upon the heart. If it is impure, full of unholy desires, one is guilty. It is our duty to keep the heart pure.
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.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain A lesson from the Sixth Commandment:
A lesson from the Sixth Commandment:
v. 27. Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Read full note →
v. 28. But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
The Sixth Commandment had indeed been given to "them of old time," Exo 20:14; Deu 5:18. But it was understood by the Jewish teachers of the sin in deed only, of the deliberate unfaithfulness of those joined in wedlock, or the carnal intercourse of the unmarried. Many rabbis expressly stated that the evil thought should not be regarded on a level with the sinful act. Christ’s explanation opens the deeper meaning of the commandment. He finds the beginning of adultery in the deliberate nourishing of the awakening lust of the heart. A woman may be seen, come within the range of vision of a man, and there is no wrong in the act. Ordinary human intercourse would be impossible without it. But when the look turned upon any woman, married or unmarried, is deliberate and intentional, conscious and persistent, as on a person of the opposite sex, and this is followed by an impure desire of coveting her for immoral purposes, then adultery has in fact been committed, although the sin is hidden deeply in the heart.
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 Connecting Statement:
Connecting Statement:
Jesus continues to teach about how he has come to fulfill the Old Testament law. Here he begins to speak about adultery and lust.
Read full note →
General Information:
Jesus is talking to a group of people about what they as individuals should and should not do. The "you" is plural in "you have heard" and "I say to you." The understood "you" is singular in "Do not commit adultery," but in some languages it may need to be plural. (See: Forms of You)
that it was said
This can be stated in active form. AT: "that God said" or "that Moses said" (See: Active or Passive)
commit
This word means to act out or do something.
But I say
Jesus agrees with God and his word, but he does not agree with the way the religious leaders have applied God's word. The "I" is emphatic. This indicates that what Jesus says is equally important to the original commands from God. Try to translate this phrase in a way that shows that emphasis. See how you translated this in Matthew 5:22.
everyone who looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart
This metaphor indicates that a man who lusts after a woman is as guilty of adultery as a man who actually commits the act of adultery. (See: Metaphor)
to lust after her
"and lusts after her" or "and desires to sleep with her"
in his heart
Here "heart" is a metonym for a person's thoughts. AT: "in his mind" or "in his thoughts" (See: Metonymy)
translationWords
commit
adultery
lust
heart
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 5:27-30 Jesus’ righteousness uncovers sin at a deeper level…
5:27-30 Jesus’ righteousness uncovers sin at a deeper level than the external; he reveals the true intent of the law.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.