Should we repay evil with evil? (Proverbs 24:29 vs. Romans 12:17)

I. Overview of the Passages

Proverbs 24:29 states, “Do not say, ‘I will treat him as he treated me; I will repay that man for what he has done.’” Romans 12:17 likewise commands, “Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Carefully consider what is right in the eyes of everybody.” Despite being written in different eras, both passages uphold the principle that one should not match wrongdoing with wrongdoing.

In ancient times, individuals sometimes appealed to a concept often summarized as “an eye for an eye,” found in passages such as Exodus 21:24. However, the immediate context of those verses focused on a legal standard to ensure proportionate justice rather than personal revenge. By contrast, Proverbs 24:29 and Romans 12:17 address how to respond when personally wronged, emphasizing mercy and self-restraint.

II. Context of Proverbs 24:29

The book of Proverbs was compiled primarily as wisdom literature, instructing people in righteous and prudent conduct. Proverbs 24:29 warns against harboring thoughts of vengeance. The verse uses a direct prohibition—“Do not say…”—to underscore the folly of planning to dish out what was received.

Several early Hebrew manuscripts, including fragments that echo the wisdom tradition found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (circa 3rd century BC to 1st century AD), support the consistency of this teaching. These manuscripts reveal that the call to refrain from personal vengeance is not an isolated idea but part of a larger moral framework urging humility and reliance on divine justice.

III. Context of Romans 12:17

Romans, authored by the Apostle Paul in the mid-to-late 50s AD, addresses both Jewish and Gentile believers in Rome under the Roman Empire. The letter consistently highlights the transformative power of grace, urging a lifestyle that reflects Christ’s sacrificial love. Romans 12:17 expands on earlier Biblical themes by applying them to a pluralistic, sometimes hostile, environment.

Early papyri such as P46 (dated around AD 175–225) and major codices like Sinaiticus underscore the reliable transmission of Paul’s words. The directive “Do not repay anyone evil for evil” echoes Jesus’s teachings in Matthew 5:38–39 and harmonizes with the overarching biblical tradition of rejecting personal retaliation.

IV. Reconciling Alleged Contradictions

1. Comparing Old and New Testament Instructions

Some see tension between Old Testament exhortations to uphold justice (Deuteronomy 19:21) and New Testament commands of non-retaliation (Matthew 5:44). Yet Proverbs 24:29 already demonstrates the Old Testament’s stance against personal vengeance, showing that Scripture, across both testaments, warns believers not to repay evil with evil.

2. Legal Versus Personal Vengeance

Under the Mosaic Law, provision was made for structured, judicial responses to wrongdoing, ensuring fair treatment rather than lawless revenge. The commands in Proverbs and Romans, by contrast, speak to personal behavior—teaching that believers ought to release vengeance into God’s hands rather than take matters into their own.

3. Commandment in Practical Life

The Proverbs passage pertains to everyday wisdom in personal relationships, while Paul’s admonition in Romans addresses believers living in a broader social context. Both converge on the principle that vengeance belongs to God (cf. Romans 12:19).

V. Early Interpretations and Church Understanding

The ante-Nicene writers, such as Tertullian (late 2nd to early 3rd century AD), frequently emphasized that any call to retaliate in kind stands outside the spirit of Christ’s teaching. Subsequent church councils and patristic commentators upheld the view that one must resist the urge to respond to evil with evil.

Writings outside the Bible, like those by the Jewish historian Josephus, illustrate how destructive cycles of retaliation were in antiquity. These historical examples contrast starkly with the biblical instruction urging restraint and forgiveness. Such counsel was countercultural in societies where personal honor often demanded swift retaliatory acts.

VI. Philosophical and Behavioral Implications

From a behavioral perspective, the admonition not to repay evil with evil counters natural human impulses toward revenge. Studies in psychology highlight that harboring resentment can lead to stress and relational conflict, whereas practicing forgiveness can foster emotional health and community cohesion.

Philosophically, if individuals are guided by a transcendent moral code, as these scriptures propose, moral conduct remains constant regardless of provocation. One’s choice to refrain from repaying evil with evil transforms personal vendettas into opportunities for grace and reconciliation.

VII. Practical Application

1. Personal Relationships

In family life, workplaces, and friendships, refusing to retaliate defuses conflict. Proverbs 15:1—“A gentle answer turns away wrath”—complements Proverbs 24:29 by showing how a tempered response can prevent escalation.

2. Community and Society

Romans 12:17–18 encourages believers to live at peace with everyone “as far as it depends on you.” While the justice system deals with criminal aspects of wrongdoing, individuals guided by these verses should avoid personal revenge and seek the common good.

3. Testimony of Grace

By declining to mirror evil, believers testify to the power of divine grace. This principle can soften hearts, open doors for reconciliation, and reflect the example set by Christ (1 Peter 2:23).

VIII. Conclusion

Scripture presents a consistent message: refusing to repay evil with evil stands as an expression of wisdom and faith. Proverbs 24:29 advocates restraint and rejects self-serving vengeance, while Romans 12:17 fortifies believers to live peaceably and mirror Christ’s love. Both passages affirm that a measured, gracious response to wrongdoing honors God, fosters healthy relationships, and upholds a moral standard that ultimately leads to deeper personal transformation and communal well-being.