The Sermon on the Mount Lesson 5 - The Righteousness of the Kingdom Citizen pt. 1
The Sermon on the Mount • Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 2 viewsA look a the righteousness Jesus prescribed for kingdom citizenship
Notes
Transcript
Handout
Handout
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
The Kingdom and the Law
The Kingdom and the Law
What was Jesus’s attitude toward the Law?
Jesus’s preaching concerning His kingdom would have been disconcerting for many in His day. In ancient times, a new kingdom typically meant an overthrow of the old kingdom.
For the suffering Jewish christians of Matthew’s day, the notion that Jesus was just an insurrectionist intent on destroying the law of Moses and turning Jewish world upside down would have been used against them as reason for persecution.
For the modern day Bible student, there is often difficulty reconciling the sinless life of Jesus and acts that seemed to violate the Sabbath (, )
Jesus relationship to the Law -
Jesus relationship to the Law -
2. Is the Gospel in conflict with the Law
The kingdom message that Jesus preached was in harmony with the Law that Moses had delivered.
By stating that His purpose was not to “abolish” but to “fulfill” the Old Law, Jesus placed the law of His kingdom in harmony with the Law of Moses
This should be remembered along side the "you have heard that it was said...but I say to you...." statements of veres 21-46. Jesus was not contradicting the law; rather He was contradicting their mistaken view of the Law.
This should be remembered along side the "you have heard that it was said...but I say to you...." Jesus was not contradicting the law; rather He was contradicting their mistaken view of the Law.
Much of the rest of chapter 5 could be viewed as undercutting Moses, however with this introductory statement we find that we should look for an interpretation that is in harmony with the Old Law.
What was Jesus’s attitude toward the Law?
1. Much of the rest of chapter 5 could be viewed as undercutting Moses, however with this introductory statement we find that we should look for an interpretation that is in harmony with the Old Law
In verse 17, Jesus stated that His ministry serves a purpose in relation to the Old Law, specifically that He came to fulfill the Law. This statement is difficult and has been understood in many ways, however the context helps us to narrow down what Jesus meant by this.
3. What does it mean that Jesus came to fulfill the Law?
Whatever fulfill means it must be seen as the opposite of abolish and related to “accomplished” in vs. 18.
The term translated “abolish” means to destroy; throw down; demolish (BDAG)
The term translated fulfill was often used in the sense of to satisfy, conceived of as filling a container completely.
fulfill - (pleroo) - to make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full. 1a to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally. 1a1 I abound, I am liberally supplied. 2 to render full, i.e. to complete. 2a to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim. 2b to consummate: a number. 2b1 to make complete in every particular, to render perfect. 2b2 to carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out, (some undertaking). 2c to carry into effect, bring to realisation, realise. (Strong’s)
Significantly, plēroō should not always be equated with direct prophetic fulfillment. In , for example, Jesus’ baptism fulfills d“all righteousness,” but this is not to be understood in the context of prediction. Neither should Jesus’ claim that he fulfills the Law and the Prophets (5:17) be understood in the limited sense of prediction and fulfillment. Rather, in eschatological contexts like these, plēroō is best regarded as portraying Jesus as the one to whom the entire OT points and the one for whom Israel longs (cf. ). William D. Mounce, Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 275.
So we see that Jesus was not looking to invalidate the Old Law, rather He came in service of its purpose.
Verse 18 unpacks this further for us.
In vs. 18 we see that the law has is as enduring as the heavens and the earth
The law is as enduring as the heavens and the earth.
2. As the heavens and the earth serve a purpose, they will endure until that purpose is complete.
As the heavens and the earth serve a purpose, they will endure until that purpose is complete.
3. Likewise the Law is permanent until such a time as every item on the Law's agenda has been achieved. It was in force until every thing God intended for it to do for mankind is achieved.
Nothing would disrupt the Law until every item on the Law's agenda has been achieved.
It was in force until every thing God intended for it to do for mankind is achieved.
The Citizen’s Relationship to the Law - vs. 19-20
The Citizen’s Relationship to the Law - vs. 19-20
4. Did Jesus advocate for a less conservative view of the Law than the Pharisees?
As the heavens and the earth serve a purpose, they will endure until that purpose is complete.
Jesus did not advocate for a less conservative view of the Law, but for a scriptural view of the law.
Jesus did not advocate for a less conservative view of the Law, but for a scriptural view of the law.
b. Every command was seen as important, obedience to them was deemed necessary
Every command was seen as important, and obedience was deemed necessary.
Likewise the Law is permanent until such a time as every item on the Law's agenda has been achieved. It was in force until every thing God intended for it to do for mankind is achieved.
c. What Jesus did demand was that these commandments be carried out in a way that demonstrated righteousness, rather than legalism
What Jesus did demand was that the commandments be carried out in a way that demonstrated righteousness, rather than legalism.
5. How can our righteousness be greater than the scribes and Pharisees?
It was this legalistic mindset that Jesus referred to in verse 20 by stating that the citizen’s righteousness must “surpass that of the the scribes and Pharisees.”
Much of this legalism was contained in oral pronouncements, readily memorized in middle-eastern lands where writing was not very common. But even now we can see how vast and how repressive it was. In the third century ad some of it was codified in the Mishnah, which runs to some 800 pages (in English). Then commentaries emerged, to explain the Mishnah. These were known as talmuds. There are twelve printed volumes of the Jerusalem Talmud and sixty of the Babylonian Talmud! The pettifogging nature of the legislation was often heartbreaking. Broad principles of the law, such as keeping the Sabbath holy, were encrusted with a thousand rules and regulations which must have cowed the spirit of the normal Israelite. Glancing, for example at Shabbath 3–6 in the Mishnah we note that a new lamp can be moved from one place to another on the Sabbath, but not an old one; hot food may be kept warm by covering with clothes, feathers or dried flax, but not by covering with damp herbs or straw—which could engender fresh heat (and thus ‘work’) on the Sabbath day. An ass may go out on the Sabbath day wearing its saddle cloth if this was fixed on before the Sabbath, but may not wear a bell even if it is plugged (that would be work for the ass). Goats may go out with a protective cloth on their udders if it is to keep them dry, but not if it is intended to collect the milk … and so forth. And all this was intended to preserve scribal righteousness.
Much of this legalism was contained in oral pronouncements, readily memorized in middle-eastern lands where writing was not very common. But even now we can see how vast and how repressive it was. In the third century ad some of it was codified in the Mishnah, which runs to some 800 pages (in English). Then commentaries emerged, to explain the Mishnah. These were known as talmuds. There are twelve printed volumes of the Jerusalem Talmud and sixty of the Babylonian Talmud! The pettifogging nature of the legislation was often heartbreaking. Broad principles of the law, such as keeping the Sabbath holy, were encrusted with a thousand rules and regulations which must have cowed the spirit of the normal Israelite. Glancing, for example at Shabbath 3–6 in the Mishnah we note that a new lamp can be moved from one place to another on the Sabbath, but not an old one; hot food may be kept warm by covering with clothes, feathers or dried flax, but not by covering with damp herbs or straw—which could engender fresh heat (and thus ‘work’) on the Sabbath day. An ass may go out on the Sabbath day wearing its saddle cloth if this was fixed on before the Sabbath, but may not wear a bell even if it is plugged (that would be work for the ass). Goats may go out with a protective cloth on their udders if it is to keep them dry, but not if it is intended to collect the milk … and so forth. And all this was intended to preserve scribal righteousness.
This is stated as a condition of entrance into the kingdom itself. The remainder of the sermon serves as an exposition of this statement
The remainder of the sermon serves as an exposition of this statement
The heart is a necessary component to true service to God , ; .
, ; .
This is seen in Jesus’s statement that the greatest commandment is to love God and your neighbor as yourself
- This is seen in Jesus statement that the greatest commandment is to love God and your neighbor as yourself
The remainder of chapter 5 makes it clear that the motivation for obedience is as essential as the obedience itself.
Anger and the Law of God
Anger and the Law of God
fulfill - (pleroo) - to make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full. 1a to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally. 1a1 I abound, I am liberally supplied. 2 to render full, i.e. to complete. 2a to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim. 2b to consummate: a number. 2b1 to make complete in every particular, to render perfect. 2b2 to carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out, (some undertaking). 2c to carry into effect, bring to realisation, realise.
In verse 21, Jesus began His exposition and application of the principle of righteousness He established in verse 20.
In verse
You shall not murder
You shall not murder
6. What application did Jesus make of the sixth commandment beyond the act of homicide?
Jesus combined the sixth commandment with the commentary of the rabbis to high light the kind of mindset that fails in righteousness. Evidently, the Pharisees were restricting the application of the sixth commandment to murder alone. As long as one did not murder their brother they had kept the commandment and were thus “righteous.” However, Jesus, and the Law itself, made application far beyond this (Lev. 19:18).
Jesus taught that this commandment encompasses thoughts, words and actions, anger and insult as well as murder.
The scribes and Pharisees were evidently seeking to restrict the application of the sixth commandment to the deed of murder alone, to the act of spilling human blood in homicide. If they refrained from this, they considered that they had kept the commandment. And this apparently is what the rabbis taught the people. But Jesus disagreed with them. The true application of the prohibition was much wider, he maintained. It included thoughts and words as well as deeds, anger and insult as well as murder.
The scribes and Pharisees were evidently seeking to restrict the application of the sixth commandment to the deed of murder alone, to the act of spilling human blood in homicide. If they refrained from this, they considered that they had kept the commandment. And this apparently is what the rabbis taught the people. But Jesus disagreed with them. The true application of the prohibition was much wider, he maintained. It included thoughts and words as well as deeds, anger and insult as well as murder. (The Message of the Sermon on the Mount)
In verse 22, Jesus taught that this commandment encompasses thoughts, words and actions, anger and insult as well as murder.
The prohibition against anger points to and the fact that God desired His people to love one another. Any unloving attitude or action should have been seen as unrighteousness.
We see the same principle in effect today ().
To illustrate the principle Jesus looks to the insulting language that people use to demean one another.
This is not intended to be an example of escalating wickedness; rather an attitude that leads to sinful action is being exemplified
Jesus is not saying there is never a situation in which a man should be labelled a fool - , ;
“He is teaching that insulting language—name calling, racial, ethnic and social slurs, etc.— that demeans a fellow human being is condemned by God.”
Likewise the mention of the council, the supreme court and the fiery hell are not intended to indicate there are escalating punishments for these sins; rather this points out that the true judge is God and the condemnation we should be concerned with is the condemnation of God.
- The severity of this state of anger is seen the admonition of vs. 23-25.
The point of these two illustrations is clear - avoid this state at all costs, even if it means you are wronged.
The first illustration deals with a brother, or an issue within the church.
This passage places proper relationships with our brethren above worship. (cf. )
This passage places proper relationships with our brethren above worship.
First be reconciled — then come and worship
The passage calls for the “offender” to take responsibility and seek reconciliation.
The response of the offender should not be a list of all the reasons they have not offended, or were correct in offending, but seeking reconciliation. ()
The response of one who has offended another should not be an explanation of all the ways h
We should be willing to take responsibility for pursuing reconciliaton
The second illustration takes out of the church and deals with how we respond to our enemies.
Notice that the principle remains the same - seek reconciliation not reparation.
- Resisting reconciliation, remaining in a “murderous” state will be severely punished.
The figure uses the concept of a debtors prison to illustrate the severe way in which God will deal with those who resist reconciliation.
Such a situation was merciless. If one did not have friends or family who could pay the fine it was essentially a life sentence.
The points is clear, “neglected grievances can have irrevocable consequences.” (Chumbley, 100)