If Thine Eye Be Single

The Open Future and the Undivided Intent: Matthew 6:22-23 Through an Open Theist Lens

The teaching of Jesus, "The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light," (Matthew 6:22) is often interpreted as a call for undivided spiritual loyalty. When viewed through the theological framework of Open Theism, which holds that God leaves certain future events and free human choices genuinely open, this passage transforms from a statement about destiny into an urgent, moment-by-moment ethical imperative.

The Radical Contingency of Moral Light

Open Theism challenges the idea that God exhaustively knows every free choice an individual will ever make. Applied to this passage, this means the resulting state of "light" or "darkness" is not a foreordained certainty but a contingent future dependent solely on the free human choice made in the present.

The structure of the verse itself is inherently conditional: "if... then..." This condition is taken as a reflection of a real, open possibility. The individual's moral condition—their entire life (whole body)—is genuinely poised between illumination and obscurity. God sincerely offers the possibility of light, but the person must choose the haplous (single, sincere) intention to realize that outcome. The future state of being "full of light" is an emergent reality that comes into existence only after and because the free human agent has chosen purity of motive.

The Dynamic Ethical Choice of Singleness Haplous

The Greek word haplous (single, simple, uncompounded) stands in contrast to diplous (double or folded), often associated with duplicity or mixed motives. In an Open Theist reading, the choice to have a haplous intention is not a static characteristic but a dynamic, continuous orientation that requires constant renewal.

The Ethical Weight of the Immediate Present

Because the future is open, the weight of the moral decision rests entirely on the immediate present. The individual must consciously choose to sustain that "single eye" in this very moment. This interpretation opposes any notion that a past decision guarantees future moral clarity; rather, ethical integrity is a sustained act of the will. The danger of the "evil eye" is the genuine possibility of moral regression—the free choice to allow duplicity or selfishness to enter, thus instantly darkening the entire being. The threat of falling into darkness is real because God does not predetermine or pre-know the person's next choice.

God's Responsive Guidance

The concept of a single eye allows for a model of God that is actively responsive to human intentionality. God does not compel the light, but rather respects and reacts to the individual's free choice.

• If the person chooses the single eye, God responds by allowing that light (guidance, clarity, moral strength) to flourish, entering into a cooperative process to fill that life completely.

• If the person chooses the evil eye, God grieves and respects the choice, allowing the inevitable darkness and moral confusion to take hold, in line with the genuine, self-inflicted consequence stated in the text.

In conclusion, applying Open Theism to Matthew 6:22-23 underscores the radical freedom and moral responsibility of the individual. It transforms the text into an urgent, perpetual challenge to maintain a sincere, simple, and undivided focus, knowing that the spiritual clarity of one's entire existence hangs precariously on the quality of one's intention in this very moment, a quality that is genuinely unknown to God until the human agent freely chooses it.