The Last Penny
Jesus and Lawsuits
Be benevolent to your accuser quickly, while you are with him on the road, so that the accuser does not deliver you to the judge and the judge to the bailiff and you are thrown into prison. Truly I say to you, you will not leave from there until you have paid back the last penny. Matthew 5:25-26
Recap
In Matthew 5:21-22, Jesus pushed the command not to murder to a deeper level: anger and insults function as virtual murder.
Any action or word that dehumanizes another can leads to situations that may, and often do, result in violence.
Murder by definition is an act of the will, not an accident (accidental killing is considered manslaughter). Actions such as continued anger and insults are also willful; they are merely non-physical forms of murder and lead to the back and forth actions and reactions that often grow into what philosopher René Girard termed “mimetic conflict.”
I call it the world’s game. The world thrives on conflict; rage is the name of the game.
Without the life-changing Spirit of God, we are all prone to the destructive increase of back and forth anger and insults. Even with God’s Spirit, we are affected by the daily drama of such reciprocation.
In Plain Sight is a subscriber supported publication. If you appreciate the content and insights of this Substack, please consider a paid subscription. Subscribers receive additional material at the end of most posts with more subscriber only material to come.
The solution that Jesus proposed in 5:23-24 was to act the opposite of the world.
Instead of reacting with like anger and insult, Jesus implored his listeners to search out the aggrieved person for forgiveness and reconciliation.
Jesus’s way was the path to deescalation. Such a tactic defuses conflict rather that making it worse. So too it is the path to a free and open relationship to God (“then go and bear your offering”).
The implied dispute in Jesus’s example was informal, though.
No court case was involved.
With that illustration, Jesus gave the true antidote to personal reconciliation—take care of things before the dispute intensifies to further anger.
What that reconciliation looked like was between the parties.
The willing confession of fault, the laying down of arms so to speak, was what Jesus called for, with the hope that the other party would be gracious and forgiving. If not, it would be to the other party’s shame.
Reconciliation was the anticipated or at least hoped for result—apart from the court system. This type of action was what Paul called for in 1 Corinthians 6 between individual believers, or if they could not work out the problem he proposed they find a believer to mediate the dispute.
Would that all disagreements be resolved in this way.
Legal Issues
Yet Jesus did not stop in this passage with his injunction to leave your gift and reconcile with your brother.
In Matthew 5:25–26, Jesus seemingly changed topics.
He started talking about legal issues: “Be benevolent to your accuser quickly, while you are with him on the road, so that the accuser does not deliver you to the judge and the judge to the bailiff and you are thrown into prison.”
His picture was of two individuals going to court, one the accuser, one the accused.
Jesus’s basic admonition appears purely practical: it is better to settle a dispute than face conviction, prison, and a fine.
Jesus began with “be benevolent to your accuser.” The Greek term eunoeō—only used here in the entire New Testament—had the sense of “think well” or “be kind” or “be benevolent.”
All of the translations of these two verses attempt reasonable renderings from the context: “come to terms,” “reconcile,” “make peace,” “become friends,” “settle matters,” “agree,” “make things right.”
But that is not what Jesus says; none of the translations get the exact equivalent of the first words, literally “Be benevolent with your accuser quickly.”
Instead, all of these translations turn the verb to an action intended to bring resolution.
But the verb compound actually encoded an attitude.
Jesus said be benevolent to your accuser.
This attitude of being benevolent is the opposite of anger toward your accuser, or calling your accuser despicable (“Raka”) or calling your accuser stupid or foolish or a moron.
It is an attitude of love.
Questions
So my followup questions are:
How does this picture logically follow what Jesus said about anger and insults then reconciliation in 5:21–24?
Further, what are the implications of Jesus’s words for lawsuits in our own day?
The Logic of the Lawsuit illustration
First we need to understand that in 5:25-26, Jesus referred to an actual lawsuit.
The logic with what preceded is that Jesus connected “your accuser” in 5:25 with “if you remember that your brother has something against you” in 5:23. In 5:23, whether or not the “something against you” might be accurate or true, an accusation of some sort was implied, but informal.
In these verses, a formal charge was at issue: the term accuser (Greek antidikos) was a technical term when other court terms were in the immediate context (in this case, terms for the judge, the bailiff, a prison cell and a fine, as well as the verbs for hand over and pay back).
One party charged another party using the legal system (whether the religious law of the Jews or Roman law—the principle was the same).
With this illustration, Jesus acknowledged the reality of lawsuits. There were (and are) disputes—legitimate ones—that the parties could not resolve on their own, or, more likely, one or both parties refused to resolve on their own. Despite the validity of the accusation (if true), the accused party refused to admit any culpability.
And in fact, in legal systems of the past and legal systems of the present, “not guilty” is the typical plea, even if the accused knows he is guilty. A legal fight looms—a dispute, a conflict—that only leads to enmity and often bitterness.
With his words, Jesus upended legal disputes as worldly exercises of power or self-justification.
If there was a charge—true or false— Jesus called on the accused party to make the first move to resolve the dispute by being kind and benevolent.
The first step is not to dispute the charge, but to love your enemy/accuser. Go to your accuser prior to the trial, show them that no matter their accusation, true or not, that you love them. No matter what comes, do not respond to the accuser with the normal anger, but with abnormal love.
Next come two possible roads:
If you are actually guilty, admit it, and pay what you owe before you go to trial.
If you are not guilty, be kind and willing to work to resolve the issue, while holding to the truth. If the accusing party refuses to accept your love and kindness and truthfulness, then God is their judge.
Guilty
If a charge is true (for example, if you actually murdered someone, or whatever the crime), tell the truth. Take responsibility. Confess it. Accept your punishment. Make restitution. And all the while show love, kindness and benevolence to your accuser.
Your actual judge is God. God knows the truth and God is the only one a follower of Jesus is answerable to.
So who cares if a large fine or even jail or prison may be involved? God is able to work all things together for good.
Perhaps your truthful response and kind demeanor even will result in others turning to God in repentance. And maybe your sentence will be forgiven or reduced.
In any case, going to trial will make the potential consequences worse. If you are acquitted while guilty, you must live with yourself the rest of your life and ultimately stand before God.
Innocent
But what if you are innocent?
Jesus does not take up the idea explicitly here, but the principle of showing kindness to your accuser is the same. Beyond that we must tease out material from Jesus’s other teachings and his responses to false accusations.
There are many situations where a plea offer is made for a reduced sentence (or in corrupt situations an ask for a bribe) and the accused party accepts the offer even though he or she may be innocent. When we translate eunoeō as “come to terms” or any of the other translations, the implication is for the accused to compromise.
“I’ll accept some responsibility just to keep the peace, even though I am innocent.”
Or, “If I don’t accept this plea bargain, I may go to prison even though I am innocent.”
But if the accused person is innocent, what is being compromised is the truth.
False Accusation
A scenario of innocence was exactly what Jesus experienced. He was accused of inciting revolution, blasphemy, and whatever else they could throw at him.
But he only responded with the truth and with benevolent words or no words at all.
In so doing, his accusers were exposed to their own evil; they unwittingly became the accused before the judgment seat of God. Yet they doubled down on their false accusations to rid themselves of the truth-teller. Instead of taking responsibility for their evil, they multiplied it.
Jesus became a scapegoat because he would not compromise the truth for false conciliation.
Yet Jesus the innocent lamb of God was (and is) always willing to forgive his accusers: “Father forgive them for they do not know what they are doing.”
The dilemma for the false accusers is that their duplicity might be exposed in the earthly legal system to their punishment and shame. Yet even if they are not exposed now they will ultimately stand before THE Judge and if they do not repent (of “be well-disposed) to their accuser (God) then they will pay the last penny (the last judgment).
Two Legal Systems
Jesus’s teaching in the Sermon and his example in both word and deed are the polar opposite of the world’s win-no-matter-what approach to disputes.
In the world system, neither guilt nor innocence nor honesty is of any account, only what can be argued or “proven” through the manipulation of the law. I have witnessed these first hand as a jury member or as a trial witness (who attempted to tell the whole truth—a daunting task under a withering cross-examination full of trick questions).
In Jesus’s system only the Ten Commandments and the Great Commandment (Love God and love your neighbor) count.
In Jesus’s system, there is only one judge, God, no matter any earthly judgments. Before God only truth and love mean anything.
Observations on the Greek Text
Ἴσθι εὐνοῶν τῷ ἀντιδίκῳ σου ταχύ, ἕως ὅτου εἶ μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, μήποτέ σε παραδῷ ὁ ἀντίδικος τῷ κριτῇ καὶ ὁ κριτὴς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ καὶ εἰς φυλακὴν βληθήσῃ· 26 ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν, ἕως ἂν ἀποδῷς τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην.
Ἴσθι is the imperative of εἰμί “Be …” and commands a state of being. In this case ἴσθι is combined with εὐνοῶν, a participle use as a predicate adjective (kind, benevolent, of a good mind).
εὐνοῶν As stated in the main post this word εὐνοέω is only used here in the New Testament. Words such as these are often difficult to translate; we must rely on usage elsewhere. But here is the important thing to note: a translation “to sense” or “to context” is illegitimate if it is not found anywhere else, no matter how tempting.
ἕως ὅτου is a quite rare construction that encodes time, often “until which” but in this case “while.” ὅτου is the neuter genitive singular of ὅστις, but the form is a corruption of οὗτινος.