1. 1
Point & Counterpoint:
Creating a Christian Counter-Culture
Jeff Gissing
Introduction
Over the last several weeks you all have been looking at tough words of Jesus
dealing with several difficult topics like: the poor, heaven, and hell. Today we’re going to
be looking at Jesus’ words regarding enemies and war.
I recently saw a movie that was powerful in the way it dealt with some of these
issues. Steven Spielberg’s Munich is a retelling of the events of the 1972 Olympic Games
held in Munich, Germany. It was during these games that members of Black September,
a Palestinian terrorist organization, took hostage members of the Jewish Olympic team.
One or two were killed during the initial hostage-taking when they resisted the
terrorists.
Within 24 hours all of the hostages and all save three of the terrorists would be
dead. Long story short, the German police attempted a rescue, which went badly wrong
largely because it was poorly planned. When the hijackers realized the trap, they killed
the hostages.
Within a month, the remaining captured terrorists were released after other
members of Black September hijacked a Lufthansa airliner and demanded their release.
They were released to Libya where they were treated like celebrities.
The movie itself deals with the Israeli response to the attacks. Golda Meir, the
Israeli Prime Minister decided that the response ought to be swift and large enough in
scope to serve as a deterrent to future attacks. Over the next several years Israeli
assassination units killed dozens of high profile Palestinians and Arabs across Europe.
The movie follows the leader of one of these squads. It chronicles the toll that
on-going vengeance took on one person. One man who killed to avenge the deaths of
his fellow Israelis. By the end of the movie he is barely functioning in normal life as a
result of the on-going stress and pressure of functioning covertly in a high stakes games
of assassinations.
Interestingly, one scene frames the underlying conflict. The Mossad bomb-maker
finally gives expression to his feeling that all of this killing is somehow in conflic with the
values of Judaism. He notes that Jews are called to be holy and righteous. “We are not

2. 2
like the other nations.” Their actions as warriors seem to be in stark contrast with their
values of Torah. A couple of scenes later, he is killed presumably by Palestinian terrorists
who are now seeking the Israeli assassins. As Jesus said, “Those who live by the sword
shall die by the sword.”
The role of the Christian church in the world is to be a counter-culture, a new
society that is based on the values of the kingdom and shaped by the teaching of
Scripture and headed by Christ himself, a new Israel.
Nowhere is the vision of this new counter-culture more compellingly
communicated than in the Sermon on the Mount.
This is especially true when it comes to enemies and war. I’d like for us to
explore these topics by looking at two passages of scripture from The Sermon on the
Mount.
In Matthew 5:38-42 Jesus talks about retribution. Since Jesus doesn’t talk that
much about war and since our enemies are mostly enemies since they’ve done
something to us that we think is unjust, we’ll use this passage to think a little about how
we respond to people who wrong us.
We will also look at Matthew 5:43-48 where Jesus talks about how we relate to
our enemies.
War and Violence: When to resist
Matthew 5:38-42
38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But
I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right
cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you
and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to
go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and
do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. (TNIV)
1. Jesus offers a response to the culture of the day (part 1):
a. Point: “Eye for eye, tooth for tooth” (v. 38) – limiting retribution to what
is a just amount (the punishment must fit the crime).

3. 3
i. The purpose was to avoid the sort of blood feud that could
embroil multiple communities in generations of senseless
violence.1
ii. By the time Jesus spoke these words, it was common practice to
impose financial sanctions rather than physical punishment.2
b. Counterpoint:
Jesus is speaking to Jews who have come to view him as Messiah.
It seems that his words are aimed at reforming and renewing Jewish
society through this new movement of Christ-followers. They are a grass-
roots source of influence that will bring change about outside of the
normal structures of power and influence.
Jesus was not opposing brutality or physical retribution since these
weren’t the common responses to injustices in the ancient world of Jesus’
time.
Instead, it seems that He is opposing the principle of insisting on
legitimate retribution, specifically using legal means to settle a score with
another individual.3
i. Jesus says, “do not resist…” (v. 39)
1. This is wider, however, than simply insisting on not getting
even.
2. It is really, in the affirmative, a willingness to accept ill
treatment and even to participate in it (by turning the
other cheek, or giving your coat away, or walking a second
mile).
3. And it is not limited to simply physical nonviolence.
Instead, what is said here also refers to the use of legal
means to “resist” an unjust action.4
1
R. T. France. Matthew. TNTC. 125
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid, 126.

4. 4
ii. The cases in point are all cases in which an individual comes into
contact with another individual who does something wrong or
unjust.
1. Jesus is not outlining responses to evil in the abstract.
These are concrete responses to concrete examples of
wrongdoing.
2. As a result, they’re not really verses that are meant to be
applied to society as a collective.
a. Many Christians have traditionally made a
distinction between the actions of individuals and
the actions of the state.
b. Elsewhere in the NT we are told that the state has
the power of the sword. That power, however, is
never vested in individuals.
3. Jesus was not attempting to reform the legal code, but is
suggesting an attitude that is loose on rights and
entitlements. As I mentioned before, it is an attempt at
changing attitudes and subverting the dominant values of
a society.
4. Concrete examples:
a. “…turn the other cheek” (v. 39b)
i. Backhanded slap to the face was an
expression of contempt and extreme
abuse…punishable by a fine.5
ii. Jesus’ disciples are asked to accept the
contempt and abuse without recourse to
their legal rights in the situation.
4
Ibid.
5
Jonas, NTT, 239.

5. 5
b. “…hand over your coat as well” (v. 40)
i. The OT Law forbade the confiscation of the
coat on humanitarian grounds (Ex 22:25-7).
ii. If it was taken as collateral, it had to be
returned by sundown so its owner could
sleep in it.
c. “…go two miles” (v. 41)
i. Reference is specifically to the practice of
Roman soldiers commandeering local
citizens to serve as porters to carry cargo,
etc.
ii. Instead of telling his disciples to resist
members of an occupying force, he tells
them to do more than required. This would
have been very controversial and set Jesus
apart from the Zealots who attempted to
drive Rome out of Israel.
d. “…give to those who ask…” (v. 42)
i. Matthew’s retelling has in mind a specific
instance. The verb he uses refers to a
single act. The principle is that we ought to
place the needs of others before our own
convenience or our own rights.
iii. Conclusion: “A willingness to forgo ones personal rights, and to
allow oneself to be insulted and imposed upon, is not incompatible
with a firm stand for matters of principle and for the rights of
others. Indeed the principle of just retribution is not so much

6. 6
abrogated here as bypassed, in favor of an attitude which refuses
to insist on one’s rights, however legitimate.”6
Application:
There will be times when we as followers of Christ are entitled to use legal means to
compel someone else to stop doing something to us that is wrong. However, Christ here
suggests that we shouldn’t consider our entitlements and our legal rights as supreme.
There will be times when we are called on essentially give up our rights in an instance
and give to the other person something they don’t deserve.
Enemies: How to Respond
Matthew 5:43-48
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor [a] and hate your
enemy.' 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who
persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He
causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the
righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what
reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you
greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not
even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is
perfect. (TNIV)
1. Jesus again offers a response to the culture of the day (part 2):
a. Point: “Love your neighbor, hate your enemy” was the teaching of the
Rabbis in the Midrash (commentary on the OT) (v.43). This was the
Jewish way of saying, essentially, that “blood is thicker than water” (you
are faithful to other Jews, other members of the Covenant community,
before any other people).
i. The first half of the sentence comes from Leviticus 19:18, “Do not
seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your
people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.”
1. Neighbor here refers to a fellow-Israelite.
6
Ibid.

7. 7
2. Different attitude towards hostile communities or peoples.
The OT is clear that the Jews were not to make covenants
or pacts with these foreign communities. They were alien
and apart.
3. The Jews were to be hospitable to slaves and aliens, but in
Jewish culture the non-Jew could never fully be part of
society, he would always be something of an outsider.
ii. The second half, “hate your enemy,” comes from the teaching of
the Rabbis in the Midrash (commentaries on the Hebrew
Scriptures).
1. Emphasized the “differences” between the OT covenant
people of God and those outside the covenant (i.e.,
gentiles).
2. Took this difference and extrapolated into the sentiment
that those outside of God’s covenant with Israel were
enemies of God and foreign/hostile to God and should not
be loved (i.e., should be hated).
3. Hate here = “not love.” It
b. Counter-point: “love your enemy…” was the teaching of Jesus, which is
a return to the teaching of the OT in relationship to other Israelites…”If
you see the donkey of someone who hate you fallen down under its load,
do not leave it there; be sure to help your enemy with it.” (Ex 23:25)
i. He expands it to apply to all people, a wider love.
ii. Enemy here means “someone outside of who opposes the
community of God’s people.”7
iii. The disciples’ attitude towards those who persecute him must go
beyond retaliation to positive love.
iv. The principle underlying Jesus’ teaching is that we are to love
(i.e., pray for, seek the good of) those who oppose us or treat us
unjustly.
7
Ibid, 128.

8. 8
v. Jesus is remarkable in the breadth of his command to love. There
is no parallel to this in any Jewish source.8
2. Our love of enemy is an evidence of our being Sons of God (v.45)
a. “that” – doesn’t refer to our earning our relationship with God but rather
expressing our relationship with God.
3. God’s common grace serves to bless both the righteous and the wicked:
a. “He causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good”
b. “He sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous”
4. Our favored standard of comparison: we often choose a standard that we
can reach (vv.46-47). The terms “tax collectors” and “pagans” are here used in a
pejorative sense to suggest their status as people undesirable and apart from the
Israelite religion.
a. The tax collectors: loving those who love them (v. 46)
i. An ostracized minority who formed a close-knit group because of
their marginal status.
b. The gentiles/pagans: greeting their own people (v. 47)
i. Those outside of the Jewish tradition and strangers living in the
midst of a people and culture not their own.
c. The Disciples are called to love, care for, seek the best for those within
their own community and those who were outside of it and even opposed
to it.
5. The standard: “be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly father is perfect.” (v.
48)
a. “Perfect” here goes beyond legal conformity to suggest “completeness,”
or “wholeness.”
8
Banks, Jesus and the Law in the Synoptic Tradition. 200-201.

9. 9
i. Paul uses the same word to refer to the spiritually mature believer
in 1 Cor 2:6… a life totally intergrated with the will of God and
reflecting God’s character.
ii. This is an ideal set before all disciples rather than a status to be
achieved.
b. This summarizes God’s Law and shows us our need for the Gospel
i. James 2:10 – “For whoever keeps the whole law, but stumbles at
just one point is guilty of breaking it all.”
Application:
Christ is asking us to expand our love to those beyond our own community of
faith. It is hard enough to love other members of First Presbyterian Church, if we’re
honest with ourselves. It can be even more overwhelming for us to consider that Christ
asks us to love those who are not part of our community, even those who are not part
of the faith, even those who are opposed to Christ and to our community.
Beyond that He is asking us to love all people who oppose us. And this means
praying for them, looking for chances to bless them, wishing the best for them. It isn’t
an abstract sense of happy thoughts about people who wish we were dead. It is much
more radical than that.