Not so silly questions about the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew

Matthew's Gospel is grouped into various related 'scenes' or 'chapters' each with its own emphasis and connection with the overall purpose of his Gospel.

It is commonly recognised that the Sermon on the Mount was

a) A parallel to the giving of the law on Mt Sinai, thereby teaching that a new phase in history was beginning with Jesus. and

b) It is a collection of sayings. Jesus undoubtedly reused common themes and teaching (Luke has some of the same material with some variations) and Matthew has compiled some of them. It was not a full account of an actual talk as it takes no more than 20 minutes at a very slow read to complete.

John
NZ

I agree with Johnnz. But I think we should envision it as being given to a reasonably large group of disciples. Disciple is simply the term for follower. There are certainly more specific groups such as the 12 and his core female followers.

Looking through Matthew, it seems from context that "disciples" often refers to a larger group, but sometimes specifically to the 12. A few times they are specifically identified as the twelve disciples.

I think Christians should envision the Sermon on the Mount as directed to all Christians.

Johnnz said:

Matthew's Gospel is grouped into various related 'scenes' or 'chapters' each with its own emphasis and connection with the overall purpose of his Gospel.

It is commonly recognised that the Sermon on the Mount was

a) A parallel to the giving of the law on Mt Sinai, thereby teaching that a new phase in history was beginning with Jesus. and

b) It is a collection of sayings. Jesus undoubtedly reused common themes and teaching (Luke has some of the same material with some variations) and Matthew has compiled some of them. It was not a full account of an actual talk as it takes no more than 20 minutes at a very slow read to complete.

John
NZ

Click to expand...

Agree. And as such, looking at the Sermon on the Mount as a parallel to Moses on Mt. Sinai, Jesus' words apply to us all as Christians, even if they may have only been delivered to a small group (4 or 12ish). Not every Jew went up on Mt. Sinai, but what was delivered most certainly applied to all of the . In the same way, not every disciple went to the Sermon on the Mount, but what was delivered to them most certainly applies to all of us.

Nice question. Thanks for letting me comment along with you!

Peace in Christ

heirmiles said:

The simple way to ask this question is:

Does the Sermon on the Mount apply to all believers in its entirety or only to Jesus' immediate disciples in its entirety) who were present at the time?

Click to expand...

doctrine in the greek has two different words

didaskalia doctrine for faith but not practice

didachē doctrine for faith and practice

must be careful within context ... because didache doctrine during law times are different than in grace times thus the confussion


Matt 5-7 , 13 is talking about the rules to live by during the 1000 yr regien of Christ but since they did not accept Him it been put off till after the 2nd coming according to Revelations


2 cor 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

I think a plain reading of the text would indicate that he is speaking universally, and to all who would seek to follow him.

heirmiles said:

Does the Sermon on the Mount apply to all believers in its entirety or only to Jesus' immediate disciples in its entirety) who were present at the time?

Click to expand...

While the Sermon on the Mount was addressed to a specific group of people, it is universally applicable as the teaching of Christ concerning moral and spiritual matters. Therefore it is also applicable to each one of us as individuals. It is God's interpretation of His own moral and spiritual laws.

[VERSE]Mathew 13:10-11[/VERSE]
Some sermons were meant to be understood by only his disciples.
Some were meant to be understood by everybody. I feel the Mount's sermon is the latter because most people can easily understand it.

heirmiles said:

My first question is concerning Matthew '5:1,2 which reads

"And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him. Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:"

I have an exegetical/hermeneutical-interpretation/application question about this that has several layers.

First it appears that in this particular form of Jesus' Sermon, His primary audience is His disciples. In Matthew's account in chapter 4:18-22, Jesus has at this point only "formally" called four people to be His disciples (Simon-Peter, Andrew, and the sons of Zebedee, James and John). Yet, as Jesus taught, preached, and healed, in Galilee, great multitudes "followed Him" (4:25).

So my first question is, Was Jesus addressing this particular sermon only to the four disciples He had formally called, a further group of disciples who Matthew chose not to mention (e.g. the twelve), a group of followers who were also present (who had been with them from the beginning -- e.g. Joseph and Matthias; Acts '1:21-26), or an even larger group of followers, possibly inclusive of the "great multitudes" who followed Him?

The reason why I ask this question is twofold:
First, Jesus uses the "You" word a lot in this sermon. In particular the plural form of "You", 'umeis.
If Jesus was only talking to the 4, or 12, or those who could "potentially become" apostles, His statements "You are the light of the world," "You are the salt of the earth" may be thought to only apply to a maximum of 14 people plus Paul.
So the first implication would then be that this sermon was in fact a training lecture directed to the 14.

The Second option is that Matthew has included this rendition of Jesus' teaching with the intention that Jesus was teaching all His disciples (ad infinitum- in terms of all people who would become His disciples 'through the ages' inclusive of us who follow Him today)

Yet is this second option actually viable?

The answer to this question may address our practice of internalizing God's Word as being addressed to us as His disciples, His people in Christ.

Or is it necessary to exegetically disconnect from this internalization, recognizing that some parts of this sermon are not directly applicable to us since some of His statements may be directed specifically to the "14"?

(I recognize that there were more people who were personally close to Jesus, who were also disciples, yet I have focused on the "14" as His "Lights of the world in training", to emphasize the distinction in understanding the question at issue toward one way or the other)

I hope this makes sense.

The simple way to ask this question is:

Does the Sermon on the Mount apply to all believers in its entirety or only to Jesus' immediate disciples in its entirety) who were present at the time?

Click to expand...

He was speaking specifically to His disciples and not the multitude, but he was both teaching them what they would teach, so in a sense it applies to everyone. John Chrysostom's commentary on this passage (written in the late 4th or early 5th century) begins:


It is for this reason that He cautions the disciples at the end of the first part of His Sermon, Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven (v.16) and Ye are the salt of the earth (v.13)

John Chrysostom's comment, especially his description of 'the multitude' reflect a sub Christian, elitist view carried over from the Greeks.

Matthew reprises Moses and the ten commandments, God's principles delivered by revelation in the setting of a mountain. That is consistent with The Messianic presentation of Jesus in his and the other Gospels.

John
NZ

I think Jesus was similar in His use of sermon material as any traveling preacher and use the material over and over.
So I see this as being to all. With large groups Jesus might have even walked among the crowd stopping to sit at different places to repeat what
He has said to another part of the crowd. There were a few preachers that could speak loud enough and have their voice carry to be heard
by thousands. But with these sermons being outside, I tend to think Jesus would only be heard by those fairly close to Him.
Thus even when he was speaking to the 12, I think he also spoke so that others could hear Him. The crowd did say no man spoke like this man.

heirmiles said:

My first question is concerning Matthew '5:1,2 which reads

"And seeing the multitudes, He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him. Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying:"

I have an exegetical/hermeneutical-interpretation/application question about this that has several layers.

First it appears that in this particular form of Jesus' Sermon, His primary audience is His disciples. In Matthew's account in chapter 4:18-22, Jesus has at this point only "formally" called four people to be His disciples (Simon-Peter, Andrew, and the sons of Zebedee, James and John). Yet, as Jesus taught, preached, and healed, in Galilee, great multitudes "followed Him" (4:25).

So my first question is, Was Jesus addressing this particular sermon only to the four disciples He had formally called, a further group of disciples who Matthew chose not to mention (e.g. the twelve), a group of followers who were also present (who had been with them from the beginning -- e.g. Joseph and Matthias; Acts '1:21-26), or an even larger group of followers, possibly inclusive of the "great multitudes" who followed Him?

The reason why I ask this question is twofold:
First, Jesus uses the "You" word a lot in this sermon. In particular the plural form of "You", 'umeis.
If Jesus was only talking to the 4, or 12, or those who could "potentially become" apostles, His statements "You are the light of the world," "You are the salt of the earth" may be thought to only apply to a maximum of 14 people plus Paul.
So the first implication would then be that this sermon was in fact a training lecture directed to the 14.

The Second option is that Matthew has included this rendition of Jesus' teaching with the intention that Jesus was teaching all His disciples (ad infinitum- in terms of all people who would become His disciples 'through the ages' inclusive of us who follow Him today)

Yet is this second option actually viable?

The answer to this question may address our practice of internalizing God's Word as being addressed to us as His disciples, His people in Christ.

Or is it necessary to exegetically disconnect from this internalization, recognizing that some parts of this sermon are not directly applicable to us since some of His statements may be directed specifically to the "14"?

(I recognize that there were more people who were personally close to Jesus, who were also disciples, yet I have focused on the "14" as His "Lights of the world in training", to emphasize the distinction in understanding the question at issue toward one way or the other)

I hope this makes sense.

The simple way to ask this question is:

Does the Sermon on the Mount apply to all believers in its entirety or only to Jesus' immediate disciples in its entirety) who were present at the time?

Click to expand...

heirmiles,

1. The whole bible old and new is universal for everyone to understand in the proper perspective. 2 Timothy 3:16.

2. Gradual revelation is throughout the entirety of the bible of how God dealt with men differently in different ages.

3. Jesus was born of a woman made under the law. Galatians 4:4

4. The Law of Moses was a different set of rules and ethics to live by in a particular way. They also had specific blessing and cursing system. The righteousness of the law was those that do them shall live in them. Today, our righteousness is by faith and the finished work of Christ and who we are in Christ and not what we do.

5. The Sermon on the Mount was historically to the Jews under the Mosaic law and they were backslidden out of the covenant of Moses. This is why they had to repent. Blessed are they that mourn for they shall be comforted. Mourn meant to repent. They had to be poor in spirit meaning completely dependent on God and humble. They were not especially the leaders. They were hard hearted and the people were lost sheep that needed to be found. Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth. This had to do with receiving the kingdom but they were not meek for the most part they just wanted a conquering messiah and not the spiritual rule in their hearts unto salvation. They had to hunger and thirst after righteousness to be filled in order to be blessed. They were to be peacemakers and they weren't because they had many insurrections against Rome and hated them. They had to do this in order to be the true children of God and receive the kingdom. They were to be merciful in order to receive mercy. They were to be pure in heart to see God.
The point is that they were backslidden and the church is not to be backslidden. Jesus said the jews were the light of the world and today we are to be the light of the world as the church. But Jesus also said if the salt has lost its savor it is no good but to be trodden down under the foot of men. We are to be salt but the church has never been defeated by men for Jesus said the gates of hell shall never prevail against it.
Was Jesus to bring the new covenant to the jews? Yes, most certainly!. But he did not teach the new covenant to them. Matthew 16:23 proves Peter didn't understand it in the plan of God that Jesus had to die as the sacrifice. John 6:53-67.

6. All the gospels were the transition period but the jews had to accept Messiah and believe in Him as the Messiah that would take away the sins of the world and even then he would have to die first but instead they rejected him. They also missed the suffering Savior as in Isaiah 53. Jesus knew they would reject him and there is no scripture that said they would accept him and he also knew he had to die for the whole world.

7. The point is that one would not disagree with other parts of the old testament and how God dealt with them differently and it should be no different in the transition because they were under the old covenant.
Some dispensationalists use the scripture till the seed should come and the law and the prophets were until John and this is why there are some new covenant theologians that say Jesus taught the new covenant. Both of these are wrong. Hebrews 9:16-17 says the testament is of no force unless the testator dies. The law and prophets prophesied of Jesus but when he came he was the reality and they no longer needed to prophesy about him coming etc.

8. So hermeneutically the context has to be understood historically first to understand what was really going on and being said before it can be understood how the church should understand it. That way it magnifies what Christ ministry was about and greater our better promises in the new covenant are for the church. It will lead to a more victorious life and witness for the church instead of the spirit of the law bringing a perception and truth of defeat.

9. This does not discredit anything Jesus said or did or his person as the Messiah and the Son of God. Context in its proper perspective is how the bible should be understood hermeneutically speaking. Jerry kelso

heirmiles said:

Does the Sermon on the Mount apply to all believers in its entirety or only to Jesus' immediate disciples in its entirety) who were present at the time?

Click to expand...

All believers, past. present, and future.

Job8 said:

All believers, past. present, and future.

Click to expand...

job8,
All believers in the past, present, and future in the proper perspective and understanding. Jerry kelso

dayhiker said:

I think Jesus was similar in His use of sermon material as any traveling preacher and use the material over and over.
So I see this as being to all. With large groups Jesus might have even walked among the crowd stopping to sit at different places to repeat what
He has said to another part of the crowd. There were a few preachers that could speak loud enough and have their voice carry to be heard
by thousands. But with these sermons being outside, I tend to think Jesus would only be heard by those fairly close to Him.
Thus even when he was speaking to the 12, I think he also spoke so that others could hear Him. The crowd did say no man spoke like this man.

Click to expand...

Interesting regarding this, they have found a specific area in the Galilee where the land forms a perfect amphitheater. The voice, spoken in a normal tone can be heard from the bottom of the hill all the way up to the top. They have speculated that this area would fit 3-5,000 people and they all could hear quite easily.

Here's a website that will put you in the same place as they were given, it may help to understand the circumstances under which they were given.