Matt 5:39, etc.

Several points have come up:

My mention of the code of Hammurabi was anent the fact that if a peasant simply
strikes a "lord" he can be put to death, but if a "lord" kills a peasant it is
a small fine.  Eye for an eye is an equalizer.  But admittedly two things must
be recognized, first the OT itself makes provision for substitutive payment,
and second there is the problem of inequal punishment in the case of harming a
slave.  At least it seems that way to us.

Regarding the metaphoricality of the "turn the other cheek" why the hubbub.  Of
course its "metaphorical" if we simply mean that it is illustrative of a larger
principle.  But if someone claims that "Do not react to aggression directed
against you with counter-aggression" doesn't really mean "Do not react to
aggression directed against you with counter-aggression" then we've left the 
realm of metaphor and moved to allegory and Free-for-all interpretation.

No one seems yet to have pointed out that "striking on the right cheek" would
(assuming the attacker is right handed) be a backhand blow -- i.e. a calculated
insult.  Since people have drawn the connection to the 'ebed YHWH it might be
worth noting that probably 1 Peter's application of Isa 53:7 to Jesus in 2:23
(when reviled he did not revile in return) is apropos.

**  Dan G. McCartney                   |        I'net: DMCCARTNEY@HSLC.ORG  **
**  Assoc. Prof. of NT                 |          WTS: 215 887 5511         **
**  Westminster Theol Seminary         |       Office: 215 572 3818         **
**  Box 27009, Chestnut Hill           |          Fax: 215 887 5404         **
**  Philadelphia, PA  19090            |         Home: 215 659 7854         **