"BUT I SAY UNTO YOU, THAT YE RESIST NOT EVIL."
By Adolphus Smith
THE above is the language of our Lord in his memorable sermon on the mount. Dr. Clarke is of the opinion that the Greek words τῷ πονηρῷ, from which "evil" is translated should be rendered "the evil person," and this from the context appears to be correct. Certain specifications follow which we will notice in their order; the first of these is found in the latter part of the 29th verse. "But whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." The meaning no doubt is, that rather than resist such persecutions we should suffer them to be repeated. And especially would this be true when we are persecuted for righteousness' sake. When we are thus abused we should not offer to submit to a repetition of the wrong in a daring manner, or one to excite hatred, or contempt, but meekly, and in the fear of God. To humbly suffer the repetition of a wrong rather than resent it, is frequently the duty of the Christian; but to offer or volunteer thus to suffer would not only be generally unnecessary, but wrong, as tending to excite the contempt and hatred of our persecutor. The example of our Saviour when on mock trial before the Jewish Sanhedrim, is worthy of imitation by all his followers to the end of time. When blindfolded and spit upon, when mocked, when buffeted and scourged he answered not, nor resisted; thus fulfilling the pathetic prophecy of Isaiah: "He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." Isa. liii, 7. And all this, and more, he suffered, because of our transgressions. O, heart of stone, relent! It is thy sin that hath crucified the son of God. But he lives again to wash away thy sin, if thou accept the terms of mercy. But can man, in patience, and suffering affliction, follow in the footsteps of his Lord? A case to the point is before me. "You are a younger man than I am," said Jerrie Lee, a venerable preacher of the gospel, in the early days of Methodism, to a young man who had threatened to whip him. "You are strong and active, and I am old and feeble. I have no doubt but, if I were disposed to fight, you could whip me very easily; and it would be useless for me to resist; but as a man of God I must not strive. So as you are determined to whip me, if you will just wait, I will get out of my gig, and get down on my knees, and you may whip me as long as you please." As the result his persecutor was convicted of sin, and sought and found peace in Christ. Having noticed the first specification I pass to the second, which is found in the 40th verse: "And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." It is generally wrong for the Christian to go to law at all. It were generally better to suffer considerable loss than to do so. From instances of which I have read, and others that have come under my own observation, I conclude that it is not only of moral and social, but of pecuniary advantage, to keep the faith of Jesus. One example I will here give as illustrating this point: A minister to whom a farmer owed a debt which he agreed to pay in wheat, sent a note requesting the payment of the debt, as his family was in19want. The farmer sent a note to the minister in reply, saying he would never pay the debt unless sued at law on it. Whereupon the minister wrote a receipt in full for the debt, and sent it to the farmer, who, on receiving it, immediately paid the debt in wheat as he had agreed. "But," says one, "suppose my neighbor, knowing my faith and practice, should seek by law to defraud me of all my property, should I never resist him?" I reply, Our property is the gift of God, and we are only stewards; we should defend it on all proper occasions; but in every case involving a suit at law we should move cautiously, and by advice of our brethren, and in the fear of God. Perhaps in nearly every case it were a saving of cost to yield the point your opponent claims, and to pay his demands, unjust though they may be, rather than contend with him at law. And if you perceive that it will be for the glory of God, pay him more than he demands. Whatever loss you thus suffer for Christ's sake will be set to your account in Heaven, and at the resurrection of the just will be returned to you with usury. The third specification is contained in the forty-first verse, and is of the same nature as that contained in the fortieth verse. The meaning no doubt is that when unjust demands are made upon us, and especially for Christ's sake, we should yield more than is claimed. What we are compelled to do, cannot of choice be avoided; but what we do more than is demanded is a free gift on our part, and the good thus returned for the evil we have suffered, may be as coals of fire upon our persecutor's head. The last specification is found in the forty-second verse. "Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away." I believe that this command of Christ should in every point harmonize with the second great commandment, upon which, with the first, he declared, "hung all the law and the prophets," namely, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." It is not said that we are to love our neighbor more than ourself. The idea of asking alms supposes the existence of a necessity. Where no necessity exists no alms should be given. "But," says one, "suppose necessity exists as the result of slothfulness, should I give in such a case?" Perhaps not, except to relieve present distress; for St. Paul says, "If any will not work neither shall he eat." If we would have the blessing of God we must deal our bread to the hungry, bring the poor that are cast out to our houses, and cover the naked. There are objects enough of real distress to absorb all our means that it is proper to spare, and if we were to deal a share of our bounty to those who are too indolent to procure a subsistence for themselves it would be detrimental to those who are really in need, and hence wrong. "Him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away." "But," says one, "my neighbor wishes to borrow my plow which I want to use myself, should I unhitch my team and let him take it?" No; unless you can properly postpone your plowing. If you can, accomodate your neighbor, especially if he be a poor brother in Christ. "Says another, I am a mechanic, and one unskilled in the use of tools wishes to borrow of me." If you have no tools that you can safely trust him with, go, if possible, and do the work for him yourself, free of charge, or let him do some work for you in return. If the borrower has rights, so has also the lender. As a general rule no one has a right to borrow of another for the sake of saving expense to himself. And yet it is the duty of the Christian to lend, even though he be at times discommoded by so doing; and though he may never expect that his benevolence will be reciprocated. The Psalmist says of the righteous, "He is ever merciful, and lendeth;" "A good man showeth favor, and lendeth." Our Saviour's language in Luke vi, 34, 35, is to the point: "And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest." There is a difference between borrowing and hiring, or exchanging articles. A farmer may have a team and no wagon; his neighbor may have a wagon and no team; they can agree together to use both team and wagon for their mutual benefit. Examples of such exchange might be greatly multiplied. The Christian, however, in all such cases, should carefully heed St. Paul's admonition in 2 Cor. vi, 14, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers." The practice of habitual borrowing is a pernicious one, and should be avoided as much as possible by every Christian. The borrower often discommodes the lender; and few habitual borrowers are as careful of borrowed articles as of their own. The borrower, perhaps, cracks a spoke in a wheel of his neighbor's wagon, or loses a small bolt from some part of it; bends or cracks a hoe or spade; or does some other trifling damage. When the article is returned the damage is covered up as much as possible (the spoke perhaps is well covered with mud), and an "I'm much obliged to you" (?) is seemingly considered a full compensation for all damages. The lender is considered a very small man if he takes any notice of so slight damages, yet when these are often repeated by A B and C, the sum of such damages is an item of no small expense. Perhaps the first time he uses his wagon the wheel is crushed for want of the strength of the broken spoke. To lend without hope of reward is thus far to keep the faith of Jesus; but to borrow without intending to pay, is to break the law of God, "Thou shalt not steal." Let us who are striving to keep "the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus," see to it, that we fail not of the grace of God in this particular, that he may not be ashamed of us "when he shall come to be glorified in his saints." ADOLPHUS SMITH. Lamont, Ottawa Co., Mich.