These verses in Matthew 5 are similar and yet different from the corresponding verses in Matthew 18.

These verses in Matthew 18 are similar and yet different from the corresponding verses in Matthew 5.

To simply the analysis, only the "eye" verses will be used.

Jesus uses a different Greek word in Matthew 5:29 than in Matthew 18:9. In both cases the KJV (King James Version) makes a value decision on which is more "profitable" or "better" whereas Jesus, as usual, does not make a value decision but appears to be providing two ways of saying something similar (or opposite). In Matthew 18:9 Jesus uses "good" or "right" for what is translated as "better".

As a reader, one should make a value decision but, in this case, the translators make the value decision for the reader.

The ancient Greek word "συμφέρω" ≈ "bring together, work with, to be carried along with" and means, literally, "carry together".
The KJV translates this word as "profitable" while Jesus uses this word in the more literal sense of the before and after being "carried together". Here are the similar ideas "carried together" involving the "eye" at the start of each clause.

• Before: the eye entraps so separate from it.
• After: the member (eye) perishes and not the whole body.



More: Bringing together an expedient analogy

Matthew 18:9: "καλός" ≈ "beautiful, good, right". The KJV translates this word as "better". Jesus does not use the Greek word for "carry together" here. Doing so would break the model of how he uses that word.

Here are the not similar ideas and not "carried together", involving the "eye" and then "you".

• Before: the eye entraps so separate from it.
• After: you enter life with one eye.

Matthew 5:29: Similar ideas "carried together" involving the "eye" at the start of each clause.

• Before: the eye entraps so separate from it.
• After: the member (eye) perishes and not the whole body.

Matthew 18:9: Not similar ideas and not "carried together", involving the "eye" and then "you".

• Before: the eye entraps so separate from it.
• After: you enter life with one eye.

The Greek word for "carried together" had been used by Jesus three verses earlier.

Verse comparison summary:

• Matthew 5:29: "carry together" the same idea before and after.
• Matthew 18:9: different ideas before and after, so the word "good" as "right" is used to not break the model.

This pattern or model reinforces the idea that the use of "carry together" in 18:6, three verses earlier, should fit the model. The "he" can be "it" and matches the "one" "little one". This leads to Peter's insightful question about forgiving the one who entraps.

The similarities become apparent with the following transformations.

• One (or more) Greek words are translated correctly.
• A questionable inference is corrected
• A simple logical observation is made for the verse in Matthew 5.
• Two-valued truth table logic from the mid 1800's is used.

English has ways to unambiguously express a question. In many languages, including Greek, a statement and a question are written in exactly the same way.
To make a statement a question, one raises the voice at the end of the statement. These non-written hints are not in the Greek text.

Greek word order: ... good (for/to) you is one-eye into the life go ...

This part of the verse can be either a statement or a question. Traditional translations have assumed that it is a statement.

What Jesus says can be either a statement or a question. To make it a statement, the Greek word for "or" needs to be translated as "rather than". Consider the second part of the verse.

• Let A be "enter into life one-eyed".
• Let B be "having two eyes and cast into hell".

To support the first alternative being "better" the word for "or" is translated as "rather than".

• Translated as a statement: It is better for A rather than B.
• Translated as a question: Is it better for A or B?

Let us now look at Matthew 5:29.

The word translated as "profitable" means "carry together" and is used by Jesus to say "carry these two (nearby) ideas together". Consider the second part of the verse.

• Let not A be "one of the members (the eye) perish" so that A is "one of the members (the eye) live".
• Let not B be "not the whole body cast into hell" so that B is "whole body cast into hell".

To support the first alternative being "profitable" the word for "carry together" is translated that way.

• Translated as a statement: Better for A than not B.
• Translated as a question: Taken/carried together it is (not A) and (not B)

Simplified expressions:

• Matthew 5:29: (not A) and (not B)
• Matthew 5:29: not (A or B) by DeMorgan's law.
• Matthew 18:9: A or B

By DeMorgan's Law for propositional logic (i.e., truth table logic), from the mid 1800's, these are opposites. This can be useful for getting showing both sides of a conditional probability.

• Matthew 5:29: carry together these two ideas (in this case, that follow)
• Matthew 18:9: which is the better of the two (in this case, that follow)

In neither case is Jesus making a value judgment as to which is "better" or "expedient". It should be clear which is more "better" or "expedient" but that is implied and left to be inferred and not stated unequivocally.

Though not apparent without logical analysis, the following parts of the above verses are opposites.

• Matthew 5:29: ... one of thy members should perish and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
• Matthew 18:9: ... enter into life with one eye or (rather than) having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Simplified expressions that say the same thing.

• Matthew 5:29: (not A) and (not B)
• Matthew 5:29: not (A or B) by DeMorgan's law.
• Matthew 18:9: A or B

DeMorgan's laws are always useful for reasoning about programs, especially loops and conditional statements. Here is one of DeMorgan's laws.

The extended truth table constitutes a proof of the law since all values under the "=" are 1. DeMorgan's laws can be used to flip the then part and else part of an if construct in an algebraic manner. Here are some equivalent ways.

Here is another way to express DeMorgan's laws.

The extended truth table constitutes a proof of the law since all values under the "=" are 1. DeMorgan's laws can be used to flip the then part and else part of an if construct in an algebraic manner. Here are some equivalent ways.

It appears that DeMorgan's Law is needed to fully analyze what Jesus says about mammon in Matthew 6:24.

More: Matthew 6:24 A wealth of logical ideas on mammon