The Wayside Pulpit No.32
"In danger of hell fire"
Matthew
5:21-22 (A.V.) "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time,
'Thou shalt not kill, and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgement;
but I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause
shall be in danger of the judgement; and whosoever shall say to his brother
'Raca', shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say 'Thou fool',
shall be in danger of hell fire."
Our
immediate reaction to the Master's words could well be, "Ugh! Let's read
something else, something more palatable and positive." This
attitude is borne of two things, first and foremost a lack of proper
translation of the Greek, and secondly, a lack of understanding of the words
used. If, after a little digging, the true sense is obtained, the spirit is
enlightened, and one doesn't need to recoil from our Lord's spoken word, which
contained the best of wisdom. For the sake of those who do not possess the
necessary apparatus to unlock the passage, we shall try to offer some
assistance.
First
of all, the translation. The word "kill" should read
"murder."
The
word Raca. Vine's Dictionary says, "Raca is an Aramaic word . . .
. . of utter contempt, intellectually rather than morally, empty-headed."
In modern idiom, one occasionally hears a person refer to another as a "
"Thou fool". The Greek here is MOROS. Whereas Raca was addressed to the (lack of)
intellect, Moros, according to Vine, attacks the moral character of an
individual as being worthless, reprobate. This is the reason why the Lord
considered Moros to be more reprehensible than Raca. Of which, more later.
[MOROS is the root of our word moron, but over the millennia the USE of that
word has changed. A moron in today's society is one who is mentally degenerate,
according to the dictionary. In Jesus' day, MOROS referred to character, rather
than intellect.]
Hell fire.
The Greek is Gehenna, which comes from two Hebrew words, Ge + Hinnom, meaning
"The Valley of Hinnom." This valley was situated to the south east of
So
much for the translation, now for the meaning of the passage. Suppose we start
by supplying a more literal translation, employing what has just been
learned, and adding a few expository notes.
"Whosoever
is angry with his brother [defined by the Talmud as a fellow Israelite] without
cause, shall be in danger of the Judgement, [the Council of Three in the local
Synagogue]; whosoever shall say to his brother "You moron!" shall be
in danger of the Council, [the supreme Council of the 71 members of the
Sanhedrin]; but whosoever shall say "You worthless reprobate" shall
be in danger of [being disposed of down there at] the Valley of Hinnom."
The
Lord frequently used hyperbolic language to refurbish the dying appreciation of
His Father's laws. Notice that He was classifying three wrongs, in ascending
order of ugliness. 1. Unjustified anger; 2. Contempt for a man's lack of
intelligence; and 3. Utter scorn for a man's moral depravity.
The
Lord's hearers were faced with the seriousness of these issues, because in each
case they could lead to MURDER, which was the subject of the sixth commandment
that He had just quoted. Whereas a man might say in his heart, listening to the
Lord that day, "I would never be guilty of murdering anyone," he
could at the same time inwardly smoulder with unjustified anger at anyone who
crossed him, curl up his lips with contempt at the idiots around him, or spit
at someone he loathed, like a loose woman, and not appreciate that in his heart
he was as bad as one who murdered literally. Hence the Lord's lesson.
Unjustified
anger, the Lord said, called for the Judgement of the Council of Three in the
local Synagogue. These Elders had authority to pass judgement on a man
equivalent to a fine or a brief prison sentence in terms of today's Courts of
Justice. Contempt, according to the Lord, would call for a man to
be arraigned before the Supreme Council of the Sanhedrin, who had the authority
to inflict the death sentence by stoning. But to pour loathsome scorn on
a man's moral character would put a man in danger, not just of the death
penalty by the Sanhedrin, but also the unspeakable disgrace of being declined a
proper burial. Instead, his dead body would be consigned to the Council Tip,
there to be consumed by the ever-burning fires, amongst all the offal, the
bones, and excrement from the
It
is considered by the expositors, and I think quite correctly, that the Lord
never intended these words to be taken in an absolutely literal way. Indeed, it
would seem to be impossible to apply such legislation literally. Rather did He
want His hearers to understand the nature of His Father's heart, and how the
Godhead loathed the way in which men spoke of their fellow-men. It was
as if Jesus was saying, "Each individual is created by God. Each
individual is cared for by God. Each individual will eventually, no matter how
dull, moronic, or morally reprobate, be called home by God as His child, and
will ultimately realise the need for repentance."
Then,
and only then, will he be granted new life by virtue of Jesus' sacrifice at
Did
you notice that there has been no mention of "hell fire"? Not
the traditional concept of hell fire. It doesn't enter into this passage
at all. Traditional hell fire conjures up, in the minds of many, the most awful
thoughts of everlasting punishment, whereas the Lord was not even thinking that
way at all. To be denied a proper burial in
To
conclude this brief sketch, our readers might be interested to know, if they
have not already found it out for themselves, that the ancient rubbish-tip in
the