The Command to “Go” and “Be Reconciled” — Part 1, The “If”

In Matthew 5:23-24, Jesus gives what appears to be a simple command, though one that is almost never obeyed: before I may offer worship to God before other people, I must see that any offenses which I am aware that others hold against me are being reconciled and have been reconciled at least to some degree. This post covers Jesus’ extreme example of this—the need to interrupt even a Temple sacrifice ritual to go and be reconciled.

Jesus gave this very plain-looking command in his Sermon on the Mount:

[Source Link: Matthew 5:23-24 (WEB) ].

In verse 24, starting with “leave,” all of the inflected verbs–“leave,” “go,” “be reconciled,” and “offer,” are in the Greek imperative. So verse 24 is plainly a command. The only serious question that can be raised about it is whether verse 23 strictly limits its application to people in Jesus’ day who worshipped at the Temple in Jerusalem. So–are the two verses together limited only to the Temple context, or did Jesus use giving a sacrifice at the Temple as an extreme example of some larger category–such as collective worship in general or even all outward devotional practices?

The next several installments will tear apart this passage word by word, then look at commentaries, to attempt to clarify its meaning. The series will then go through the context of the passage to show what question Jesus was addressing.

Jesus’ command appears quite simple.

Before I may offer worship to God before other people, I must see that any offenses which I am aware that others hold against me are being reconciled and have been reconciled at least to some degree. So, in Jesus’ example, even if I am standing right in front of the altar, with everyone watching me, about to offer a sacrifice, and there remember an offense that has not been reconciled, I must stop what I’m doing, leave the sacrifice unoffered, and go to the person I’ve offended and seek to reconcile with them. I must not return to complete my worship until reconciliation has begun.

Although this will be explained in much more detail in part 2, to reconcile an offense in this context does not mean exactly what we often think it means. It does not necessarily mean that the offended person with whom I am reconciling must instantly become my best friend, or that our relationship must return to exactly the same state it was in before the offense. And it does not mean that either party must leave themselves vulnerable to being hurt again in the same way. Instead. Webster’s defines “reconcile” in this way:

[Source link: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reconcile]

What is in view is a restoration of harmony, of the ability to live peacefully and without animosity as fellow members of the Body of Christ, not necessarily the restoration of an active friendship–although this remains the ideal. And the restoration of harmony between offender and offended, of the ability of each of us to recognize that Jesus is a friend of the other equally with us, is usually not completed instantly. It is progressive. It grows with time, just as our individual ability to trust Jesus grows with time.

Verse 23 begins with these words:

[Source Links: Matthew 5:23a (WEB) & Matthew 5:23a (SBL Greek New Testament) ]

Verses 23 and 24 form a single sentence, both in Greek and in English. The word “if” at the beginning of that sentence, and its structure. show that it is a conditional sentence–a sentence which asserts that the truth of the second part of the sentence can be inferred if the first part is true. Here is some terminology needed for the rest of this discussion:

The specific conditional word used in this sentence shows that Jesus was asserting that the protasis was possible, and not extremely unlikely, but was also unknown–either uncertain or contingent on something else:

The second word, usually translated “therefore,” then connects verses 23 and 24 to the preceding two verses. Verses 21 and 22 deal with the harboring of anger in the heart. In them, Jesus quoted two of the expletives that people of his day used to express anger and contempt to illustrate the natural growth of harbored anger into contempt, which then grows into disregard of the life of its object. At that point, the anger has become the equivalent of murder, because the hated person is as good as dead in the heart of the angry one, even if the opportunity for an actual murder never presents itself. This explains why Jesus is so insistent that offenses, and the resulting anger, between members of his Body must be reconciled promptly, even if this requires interrupting collective worship or service to him.

Here is the first clause of verse 23 again:

[Source links: Matthew 5:23a (WEB) & Matthew 5:23a (SBL Greek New Testament) ]

This clause states the first part of the hypothetical situation Jesus used to explain the application of the command he gives in verse 24. The command applies if–even if–I am standing at the altar in the Temple in Jerusalem about to make a gift to God.

As noted here, the word translated “gift” is the most general word for a gift in Greek. It could describe my birthday present to you, except that the verse specifies God as the recipient. And it can apply to any gift I offer to God on his altar. That is important, as I will show later.

The verb translated “to offer” by itself would simply mean “to bring” or “to carry forward” to give or offer to someone. That God is the recipient, and that the thing offered is a gift to be made on his altar, come from the context. This verb is in the present tense, subjunctive mood and active voice. So, for purposes of this passage, making my gift is something I am doing right now, and I am actively doing it, is is not being done to or for me by someone else.

The subjunctive mood here indicates contingency and identifies the whole sentence as a “third class” conditional sentence of the present general condition type. This type of conditional sentence either speaks either a generic (common) situation or states a universal truth at the present time (what the “present” time is being determined from the context). Either reading could fit this verse.

Offering a gift to God is a generic situation, something very familiar to Jesus’ Jewish audience, and remembering that someone has a grudge against me is also a common occurrence. So positing that they might happen at the same time also describes what was likely a fairly common, generic, event.

On the other hand, the verse also appears to be a part of the statement of a universal truth, given that all of the inflected verbs in the apodosis are imperatives.

The words on this graphic specify where the would-be worshipper and their gift are located at the time they remember the grudge. The worshipper’s gift is on the altar already!

Therefore, the worshipper must be standing right in front of the altar, waiting for the priest to accept it.

This is, of course, hyperbole, as most commentators point out. It is an exaggeration to make a point. Jesus’ commands in verse 24 apply if–even if–I am already at the altar with my gift laying on it. It would also apply at all times before Igo to the altar, to all times when I am contemplating making a gift to God and remember that another believer holds an offense against me.

The word translated “altar” refers specifically to a place where a ritual sacrifice is made to a deity, and, in its First century Jewish context, applied specifically to the altar at the Temple in Jerusalem. It is a compound word–literally, the place where a sacrifice (thusia) is secured before it is sacrificed.

Some commentators think that, by placing the activity in his hypothetical at the altar in Jerusalem, Jesus also limited his commands in verse 24 to the Jerusalem Temple context. But it is more natural to read verse 23 as stating a hypothetical that demonstrates how very broad the commands are–EVEN IF I am in the temple and my gift is already on the altar, I must interrupt the ritual, leave the gift there, and go reconcile the offense. The hypothetical does not limit the scope of the command. It broadens it.

I also recall that, in Romans 12:1, Paul exhorts me to present my body to God as a living sacrifice, using the same word for “sacrifice” (thusia) that is incorporated into the word for “altar” in Matthew 5:23. This appears to me to show that Jesus’ command about reconciliation and the offering of a sacrifice also applies to my life today. Can I truly give my body to God as a living sacrifice while I am aware that someone else holds a wholly unresolved offense against me?

The verse continues:

[Source links: Matthew 5:23b (WEB) & Matthew 5:23b (SBL Greek New Testament) ]

This clause describes the event which interrupts the offering of the sacrifice that was already on the altar.

Jesus first reiterates that this interruption happens “there,” right there, at the altar:

[Source Link: Strong’s Lexicon, Greek No. 2546 & No. 3403 , on Biblehub.com.]

The event which interrupts the offering is remembering, or simply being mindful, of something. As noted in the definition above, the act or state of remembering does not necessarily imply that I had totally forgotten the situation that created the grudge. I may have forgotten it and now suddenly remember it, or I may have been actively contemplating the situation but have now suddenly brought to mind or acknowledged the fact that it probably created a grudge.

In either case, what I now, standing before the altar, have on my mind is the fact that another believer has or holds some offense against me:

Note here the shift from the subjunctive to the indicative mood. It is as if Jesus is saying that it is certain that some brother or sister actually, presently, holds (indicative mood) some offense against me. What is uncertain (subjunctive mood) in this hypothetical is whether I will remember that they hold this grudge. The command applies only to grudges of which I am presently aware. It does not apply to grudges of which I do not know, or about which I have truly forgotten, until I become aware of them. But mere awareness triggers the commands of verse 24.

Does this duty apply only to major, justified grievances, or also to grievances I consider trivial or unjustified as well? Again, the language of the hypothetical seems to answer this question:

[Source link: Strong’s Lexicon, Greek No. 5100, on Biblehub.com.]

It does not matter how I view an offense my brother or sister holds against me. It does not even matter how an “objective” third party would view it. I may think the offense is trivial. I may think it is wholly unjustified. The offense may even be, in fact, objectively trivial and unjustified. On the other extreme, it may arise from an offense so serious that others will tell me it is hopeless, and I must never try to do anything to resolve the offense. My opinion and the opinions of people other than the one who holds the grudge do not matter in determining whether verse 24 applies. All that matters is that a fellow believer is holding a grudge–for some offense, any offense, “anything“–against me, leading to harbored anger and bitterness that corrupts our relationship with each other in Christ, has the potential to spread and corrupt other believers (as shown in previous installments), and threatens the visible unity of the Church. If I am contemplating offering anything to God, and am aware of such a grudge, verse 24 applies to me. I have a duty to act.

What that duty is will be covered in the next installment.

In conclusion, recall that the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant in Matthew 18:23-35 (discussed in several previous installments) left both servants–both the one who would not forgive and the one whose debt was not forgiven–in a metaphorical debtor’s prison until such time as the unforgiving one would decide to forgive and so to release his fellow servant from prison. Applying this observation to Matthew 5:23 and 24, I now raise the following questions, which I will leave unanswered, for now:

There are also parallel questions involving the people I refuse to forgive: How does my refusal to forgive affect their lives? How does it affect their ability to worship? Does it matter if they have tried, and failed, to reconcile with me? I’ll leave these questions also unanswered for now.

Next: The Command to “Go” and “Be Reconciled”—Part 2, the “Then”

Email me: Ian Johnson.