There is no more profound message given in the history of the world than the message of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. Regardless of whether you refer to Him as “the Messiah” via Matthew’s Jewish perspective or “the Christ” via Luke’s Greek vantage point, Jesus is the chosen one. He is the long anticipated champion of mankind’s cause before God. He does not minimize the law. He enhances it in the sense that every covenant expectation or commandment ever brought to bear on us is still valid. Even God’s own covenant people had lost their way time and again. Jesus came to bring a new covenant and a new kingdom that would be written on their hearts and would transform its people from the inside out. It was simple and straightforward. Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.
Explanations for the “Inaccuracies” of the Sermon
The “Sermon on the Mount” given by the Lord Jesus is one of some degree of controversy. That is true if a person holds valid the objections of higher critics who point out the differences between Matthew’s account and Luke’s account. However, there are a number of reasons why there might be some differences between them. Robert Duncan Culver suggests that the one given by Matthew was addressed to the disciples (Matt. 5:1) on top of the mountain. Whereas Luke’s account was the same sermon, or parts of it, with some variation offered to the crowd at the base of the mountain (Luke 6:17). This being the case, Jesus did repeat some things to the multitude, and he added perhaps some other things as in the repetition of the beatitudes with added woes to those who are rich, who are full, who laugh now, and to those whom are spoken well of by others.
John MacArthur offers perhaps another explanation of why the “Sermon on the Mount” is somewhat different between Matthew and Luke. He suggests that there is simply a difference between the translation of the original Aramaic in which the original address was heard by the two separate translators who translated it into Greek. Of course, a person would expect there to be differences in translations between two separate authors. So this accounts for it, but there are apparently additions and a lot of parallel’s between the two. So it goes without saying that Jesus would have given the one address, and Matthew and Luke picked out different things to use, which would not hinder the message at all.
There is a third alternative explanation that I would have offered myself. A person could also add the fact that this might have been a sermon that Jesus spoke to many “multitudes” or even to his “disciples” multiple times with some degree of variation between the many different times that Jesus gave it. All of these are certainly legitimate explanations, especially the first two by Culver and MacArthur. There could also be the simple fact that what really happened involved some combination of all or parts of the above. Jesus was certainly entitled to preach the same message to different people or repeatedly with variation to the same people, and there certainly could have been some differences in translations from Aramaic into Greek by separate redactors. It is also possible that Matthew and Luke recalled the same event both at the top of the mountain and then at the bottom of the mountain to the masses. No one knows. The bottom line is that there are legitimate reasons for why there are variations as opposed to questioning the Bible’s accuracy or legitimacy as the higher critics do.
Structural Differences Between the Two Gospels
In Matthew, the sermon is one long message in chapters five through seven. He includes such sections as when He talks about “salt and light,” and Jesus talks about how He has come to fulfill the law. There are many more parts to Matthew’s account. Here they are listed in total as the section titles that appear in the NIV edition of BibleGatway.Com:
Matthew’s Account:
- Salt and Light
- Christ came to fulfill the law
- Anger
- Lust
- Divorce
- Oaths
- Retaliation
- Love your enemies
- Giving to the needy
- The Lord’s Prayer
- Fasting
- Lay Up Treasures in Heaven
- Do not be anxious
- Judging others
- Ask and it will be given
- The Golden rule
- The tree and its fruit
- I never knew you
- Build your house on the rock
Luke’s account only adds one section, and that is the woes (already mentioned above) in addition to the much fewer sections that he pulls out of the much more full sermon in Matthew. The woes in Luke follow on the heels of the beatitudes that begin both accounts. If one of the accounts is complete, it is Matthew’s account, and Luke’s version picks out sections, if you will. The sections in Luke’s account are in this order as titled in the same NIV edition of BibleGateway.Com: “The Beatitudes,” “Woes,” “Love Your Enemies,” “Judging Others,” “The Tree and Its Fruit,” and “Build Your House on the Rock.”
Overview of Matthew’s Theology
Matthew traces his royal genealogy from Abraham stating immediately that He was “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (Matt. 1:1). “The Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology” says that Matthew appeals to the Jewish mindset as they were looking forward to the Messiah that had been foretold. He, being Matthew, introduced a new concept that those who now follow the Messiah were now representative of the true Israel or the true offspring of Abraham that had been promised to him. We, and Matthew’s original audience, are living in the intermediary time between the coming of Jesus the Messiah and His return when the eschatological Israel will come to be and the promised kingdom will return.
The problem for Israel and for the church is the moral lethargy and sinful living that permeates both as the Pharisees still ruled Israel, and the church wrestled with its own wavering faithfulness. Thus there is a heavy emphasis on the issue of right conduct and final judgment in many of the lessons and parables that Jesus taught in His ministry in this book. The new kingdom rules are spelled out in the Sermon on the Mount in the clearest fashion. The message of what now to do in light of our dilemma is captured in Jesus’ theme, “Repent! For the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.” All those who live in this intermediary time of redemptive history are called to do as Jesus’ disciples did during His lifetime. We must repent and follow Jesus.
Overview of Luke’s Theology
The Gospel of Luke, on the other hand, is meant to be more universal in scope as opposed to being focused on the Jews alone. The genealogy, for example, at the beginning of the Gospel account is different in that it apparently traces Mary’s genealogy as opposed to Joseph’s. It also starts with Adam, whereas Matthew starts with Abraham, thereby emphasizing the Messiah’s humanity. Jesus came to us physically by this lineage while Matthew’s line would be only His legal rights to the throne of David. However, Luke brings out His physical nature.
Throughout the rest of the book, it seems that Luke, “the beloved physician,” as he is elsewhere referred to (Col. 4:14), focuses on the poor and otherwise disadvantaged such as the sick or lame, women, and those otherwise on a lower social plane than most. Luke emphasizes Christ’s compassion and His love for all, especially these people. In Luke’s Gospel, Jesus is the savior of the world, and His ministry to outsiders from the Jewish mainstream is emphasized in many different ways.
The Theology of the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew
Jesus says in Matthew 5:20 that unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees and scribes, you will never go to Heaven. Jesus is presenting a new kingdom righteousness, and He is contrasting that sharply with the “righteousness” of the religious elites of the day. I do not believe that Jesus was saying that everyone has to do even better than the scribes and Pharisees to enter the kingdom, as if the scribes and the Pharisees were doing pretty well. Rather He was laying out a new kingdom plan for His people who would strive to please God from the heart as Jesus brought the moral requirements of the law (e.g. do not murder and do not commit adultery) to the level of not committing these things from the heart. He says that if you lust after a woman in your heart, you have committed adultery with her already. This was extreme and new, not that no one was aware of this before, but Jesus emphasized it specifically in His new kingdom. He was saying that you have to be a servant of God from the heart, from the inside out, to be a part of His kingdom. Weber in his commentary states this succinctly:
Matthew 5:20 provides the thesis for the entire sermon: God’s kingdom servants will live by an internal supernatural righteousness that goes beyond the religious facade of the scribes and Pharisees.
This was the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31). God would indwell His servants and they would have a new heart and a new spirit within them (Ezekiel 36:26). These were the new kingdom principles, which though promised to Israel now includes the church as we have been grafted into the kingdom and inherit it by living out these new kingdom promises. However, we are not living perfectly, and that is why the principles of the new kingdom life is not summed up in obedience to God from the heart alone. That is why additionally we have the beatitudes within this sermon which tells us beyond this that blessed are the poor in spirit, those who mourn, the meek, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, the merciful, and yes, the pure in heart, and peacemakers and those persecuted for righteousness’ sake. Blessed are all these people living out the new kingdom of Jesus the Messiah, but it includes those who mourn and weep and are repentant and poor of spirit and lowly and humble. This is the righteousness that surpasses the scribes and Pharisees.
This all gets back to grace verses law. John 1:7 says that the law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus. The point of this is not to say that the law and grace are mutually antithetical, but rather that Moses gave the law, and grace and truth are embodied and brought to us by the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus says in Matthew 5:17-19 that He did not come to abolish or to cancel the law as if it no longer mattered in His kingdom, but rather He came to “establish” or “fulfill” the law, depending on your translation. Jesus is not about a separation of law from grace, but rather, Jesus gives the grace to empower us to live out the law in His new kingdom. He is the true King of the Jews, and this is Matthew’s Gospel focus. Jesus fulfills the law perfectly as the Messiah, yet He defines the rules of the new kingdom not in terms of doing perfectly as He has always done. He rather welcomes in those who mourn and weep and repent and hunger for this same righteousness, but you have to hunger for it and mourn and weep for it.
The Theology of the Sermon on the Mount in Luke
As noted above, Luke had in mind a slightly different emphasis on the Messiah. He wanted to expand the vision to reach out to the world at large, or at least to the Greeks. He pictured Jesus as the compassionate savior of not only the rich or even the middle-class, but Jesus was the savior of the poor, the wretched, the dis-advantaged, the blind and the lame. He valued these people. This would have been radically different than even the Greek mindset at large, but it was a message meant to grab them.
In Luke 6:20-22, Jesus says blessed are the poor, the hungry, those who weep, and those who are hated for His sake. His kingdom was new, and His emphasis was on saving people that the world did not value. His kingdom was made up of these common folk. It would not be true to say that Jesus did not save or value rich people as if the kingdom was not for the economically advantaged, but Jesus did call on them to give of their resources to feed and to care for those less advantaged (e.g. Luke 14:12-14 et. al.).
This would be a profound message for the church which was often made up of such persons after they had come to Christ and counted the cost in some form or another, either through persecution or from ministry. At the same time, Christianity was not exactly a religion of the elites of Greek culture and influence. It certainly included many poor and destitute in more ways than one.
Jesus taught in Luke’s account that a person must love their enemies and do good to those who hate you (6:27). The contrast could not be more profound. Greeks knew nothing of this. Thales is quoted as saying, “Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing.” Isocrates is said to have taught, “Do not do to others that which angers you when they do it to you.” However, these are all negative in the sense that they command the disciple not to do that which you do not want done to you. Jesus commanded his disciples to do to their enemies that which they themselves wanted done to them. This is radically different. It is positive love.
Jesus also taught that a person should never judge with hypocrisy because it will be measured back to you to the degree that you use it on others. Again, He teaches that the tree is known by its fruit. If a tree bears bad fruit, you know that such a person is a bad person just like a tree is bad if it bears bad fruit. Then, Luke closes out his version of this sermon with the command to build ones’ house on the rock by doing as the Lord tells you to do.
Conclusion
The Sermon on the Mount and/or the Sermon on the Plain, be it Matthew’s or Luke’s account, is the central message of the new kingdom of the Messiah. Matthew includes the Messiah’s contrast with the Pharisees and scribes of the day as he seeks to correct wrong thinking about the one who would come and deliver Israel from all of her sins. Jesus was radically different. Luke sought to correct Greek thinking on the issue of what a Messiah would be or “Christ,” as they would have translated it. Both Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts were meant to solicit a response. They were creating an image of the true Lord’s kingdom as it is in this world. It is not incorrect to presume that they were somewhat redacted polemically in that it was intended to contrast with both Greek and Jewish thought at the time. However, a person must definitely take into central focus the state of the church to whom both of these Gospels would have been addressed at large as they would be scattered throughout the early church of that time. Jesus was radically different. His message was emphatically counter-intuitive, and His kingdom would spread throughout the then known world.
Bibliography
Butler, T. C. Luke. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000
Culver, Robert Duncan. The Earthly Career of Jesus, the Christ. Baker Book House: Grand Rapids, MI, 1991.
“Golden Rule.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule Accessed 12 February 2018.
MacArthur, John. One Perfect Life. Thomas Nelson: Nashville, TN, 2012.
McKnight, S. “Matthew, Theology of.” In Evangelical dictionary of biblical theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996.
Scott Jr., J. J. “Luke-Acts, Theology of.” In Evangelical dictionary of biblical theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996.
Weber, S.K. Matthew. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.
Leave a Reply