If that makes sense?"
Absolutely. And, I must say I rarely find someone as willing to engage in a good dialogue over nuances/subtleties as you have been. Thank you.
Now, to the point. Yes, you are correct. It is possible someone might respond, "Can't you count?" Thinking that such an act would not really solve the problem when two are available. They may even think, as you astutely noted, "And, that still wouldn't solve the problem!" These responses are perhaps more developed that the basic, "Wait a minute, this is too difficult to accept."
It does, however, begin to lead one in the same direction as the "basic" response. Recall how the rich young ruler began with , "What do I do to go to heaven?" Jesus began with, "Well, just do the commandments." Response, "Oh, I have already done those." Sure, Bob (Peter later notes no one has ever done them Acts 15). But, instead of chiding him, Jesus simply says, "Oh, alright, here is another thing...just sell everything, give the money to the poor, and follow me." Well, that might be three more things, but you get the idea. The point was, Jesus was going to continue to lay upon the man "things to do" until the response was despair. Thus, the answer to the disciples "What is impossible with man is possible with God."
If a man said, "Ha Ha on you, Jesus, I still have one eye.", Jesus would respond, "Okay, when that one fouls up, you know the drill." This is of course not in the text. But, taken as a developing story, this hermeneutic does not do damage to the text as does the addition of qualifiers that make the commands "doable". Especially when it comes to Matt. 5:48.
I'll have to leave now, but if you have additional thoughts, have at it. Grace to you.
That was a very good reply. I can almost see the self-righteous Pharisee plucking out an eye, just so he can taunt Jesus over it. & your hypothetical reply for Jesus seems entirely plausible.
Plus, it is immanently debatable whether a Pharisee would have taken the ‘You can’t count’ route, or would simply have pointed out to Jesus that he was adding commands that are not included in the Mosaic Law. A Pharisee would have taken modifications to the Mosaic Law very seriously. Perhaps a more likely response would have been, ‘Book, chapter and verse, ‘Teacher.’ I have studied the Mosaic Law all my life, and these additional commands with which you seek to burden us are nowhere to be found in it.” After all, challenging Jesus’ authority was usually a Pharisee’s first move in confronting Him.
I do wonder about the proffered interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler. In Mark 10:21 we receive this powerful and amazing insight:
‘Looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”’
It seems unlikely Jesus would have experienced such a reaction were the Rich Young Ruler either dishonest or hypocritically deluded. A more likely explanation is that Jesus looked upon a sincere man who had devoted himself to keeping the Law from his youth up. Jesus loved that about him, and so issued the ultimate challenge. This is consistent with the fact that Jesus appreciated the absence of deceit [see the calling of Nathaniel, at the end of the first chapter of the Gospel of John] and He did not appreciate self-righteousness: see most of His interactions with the Pharisees.
‘I’ll have to leave now, but if you have additional thoughts, have at it. Grace to you.’
Grace and blessings to you as well; I also have appreciated this discussion.