No, it's a pretty good example. It just doesn't fit your hyper-dispensationalism.

Turn the other check is not law - an eye for an eye was law.

As far as these verses go:

Matthew 5:29-30 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Jesus is showing the seriousness of sin - it is better to be on earth and saved, without an eye or a hand, than to be whole and in hell. This is repeated in several other places in the Gospels. Instead of explaining these passages away, find out what they mean and apply them.

It must be sad to thrown out so many rich passages that would otherwise be a blessing to you.