Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

[Anguspure]

Then why does Scripture tell us to, “continue in God’s grace”? Or to “continue in the faith”? Or to “continue in his goodness, unless we are cut off”?

The question of whether we are cut off or whether we are being prunned resides in the heart of the person experiencing the hardship. A person who is cut off has their heart set on the branch that falls to the ground, whereas the person being prunned remains in Him and accepts that the branch needed to be discarded for the greater good of the Vine.

 

[RDKirk]

The fact that this teaching was probably done over a period of time in many different teaching situations is not nearly as important as the basic truth of these teachings. To put it a different way, the authority of scripture does not rely upon the details of its historicity but rather upon its ability to instruct us spiritually and point us in the direction of God.

I agree, and in general I apply that concept to all scripture. It is still inspired by the Holy Spirit as the human authors wrote it down, and it is a reliable syllabus in righteousness.

 

[RDKirk]

I agree. The sermon was meant for those in the crowd. As such, I think the key interpretive question is: Who was Jesus' audience?

The crowd was largely (if not entirely) first-century Jews. This sermon took place before Jesus' death/resurrection which means these people were all under the Mosaic Law. No one in the audience (not even the disciples) were born-again or filled with the Holy Spirit.

So, to reframe your question. Why would modern Spirit-filled, born-again, New Covenant Christians believe this message is applicable to them?

The Sermon on the Mount pointedly dispenses with the Mosaic covenant.

It is the the covenant of the Messiah, not a restatement of the covenant of Moses. As the author of Hebrews points out, it is a covenant with more rigorous stipulations--upon both the testator of the covenant (Christ) and His people (Christians). We are given expect more of Christ than the Mosaic covenant promised the Bronze Age rabble out of Egypt, and Christ expects more of us than Moses expected from that Bronze Age rabble.

The Sermon on the Mount defines how citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven are to behave while assigned to this earth.

 

[hedrick]

The Sermon on the Mount pointedly dispenses with the Mosaic covenant.

I think this is debatable, though I can understand the conclusion.

In the Word of Institution, Jesus referred to Jer 31:31, with the concept of the new covenant written in our hearts. His reinterpretation of the 10 commandments in Mat 5 is consistent with that, as he replaced the literal terms with a focus on intent.

If you view the covenant strictly as a legal document, then I suppose that invalidates it. But I think that's a misunderstanding of what the covenant was. It was a commitment by God to his people. Paul tells us that this hadn't changed, despite the fact that Gentiles are now included as part of the covenant people. I don't think the new covenant, and Jesus' reinterpretations in Mat 5, really dispense with the covenant. Rather they change how it is administered, in a way that furthers its original intent. If you want to say that it's a new covenant replacing the old one, that's OK, as long as you understand that God's commitment to his people -- both the old and new people -- remains unchanged.

Of course the Sermon on the Mount applies to Christians. However it's important to understand what it's about. Since its point is to replace literal commandments with a focus on intent, it won't do to turn it into a new legalism.

 

[Swan7]

Wow, this is a first I've ever heard of anyone (Christians) rejecting what Jesus says. I'm sure those that don't think the Sermon on the Mount applies today, don't think they're rejecting what He says - but that's exactly what they're doing. Why else would it be recorded for our reading today? God doesn't do anything by accident....

 

[Anguspure]

The Sermon on the Mount defines how citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven are to behave while assigned to this earth.

As do the 10 commandments that show how we should treat the various relationships in our lives.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?

~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~

I don't. Jesus was letting folk know what God's standards for holy living were, and still are. But not, as some suppose, as prerequisites for salvation, but as guidelines for holy living for converted believers who are developing sanctification. They are reflections of God's moral law - the law that He lives by. Developing sanctification in the believer is the Holy Spirit's workmanship in the believer to conform him to the image of Christ. This is a life-long journey which comes to perfection when we meet Jesus face to face in glory.

Until then, we are always mindful of God's standards of holiness, and the Sermon on the Mount is an important part of that.

 

[Toro]

Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?

~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~

Do I reject it? No. How can I reject His worlds... then say that I love Him?
John 14:23

Can I under my own strength keep His commands and obey? No. Without Christ I am nothing and the most strength I can ever possess is found in my flesh. A source that is weak, no natter how strong Id like to think myself, no matter how much weight I lift, it is weak.

However, IF the strength that I lean on is that of the Holy Spirit, then, THEN there is no weakness to be found in the endless power. However, that power is never about me, or I did... but what the Holy Spirit does THROUGH me.

Can I over come sins? No... I... as in myself alone am its slave, the flesh calls and I obey. HOWEVER by the power of the Holy Spirit I CAN overcome flesh, I c as n master my flesh and overcome sin, ALL sin. Just as the one I follow is without sin, so too am I too follow those footsteps.

Does it mean that I will EVER be in this flesh as perfect? No.... BUT I am to walk as the one I follow walked. I will stumble... yes, I will stumble a gteat many of times... but I get up from that failure and continue in my pursuit to be more like the one I follow, Jesus Christ.... otherwise... I have taken on the name/title of my Lord as Christ, attached it to myself... by calling myself Christian, but refused to follow Him as He instructed.

Is God the Father fair and just? Would Jesus ask one to do that which they had no way of fulfilling at all?

Jesus told tge woman at the well that He did not condemn her, "Go and sin no more." It wasnt the only time He told someone to sin no more... so either... we CAN be brought to a point where we no longer live and wallow in our sins... OR there is NO WAY a person could EVER do what is asked of them and that would mean that none could ever live up to those standards EVEN AFTER Jesus paid the price for us all.

Again, a person can not fight the desires of flesh, with flesh.... but.. WITH prayer AND the power of the Holy Spirit, the heart and mind of a man can be renewed and changed.

What is impossible for man... is possible with God.
Luke 18:27

Some may think the pursuit of of God dealing with the sins in your life may be extreme.... but the path is narrow and few find it..... its better to seek trying to enter through the narrow gate.... than going the way that is wide.

Luke 13:23-28

Matthew 7:13-27

 

[dqhall]

Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?

~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~

The Sermon on the Mount is applicable as long as the sun continues to shine.

A theology teacher told me the Sermon on the Mount is in Matthew. The Sermon on the Plain is in Luke.

I found a teaching from Matthew 6, part of Sermon on the Mount, World English Bible, no copyright restrictions:

25 Therefore I tell you, don’t be anxious for your life: what you will eat, or what you will drink; nor yet for your body, what you will wear. Isn’t life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26 See the birds of the sky, that they don’t sow, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns. Your heavenly Father feeds them. Aren’t you of much more value than they?

27 “Which of you by being anxious, can add one moment to his lifespan? 28 Why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow. They don’t toil, neither do they spin, 29 yet I tell you that even Solomon in all his glory was not dressed like one of these. 30 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today exists and tomorrow is thrown into the oven (1), won’t he much more clothe you, you of little faith?

31 “Therefore don’t be anxious, saying, ‘What will we eat?’, ‘What will we drink?’ or, ‘With what will we be clothed?’ 32 For the Gentiles seek after all these things; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33 But seek first God’s Kingdom and his righteousness; and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore don’t be anxious for tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Each day’s own evil is sufficient.

(1) Trees were scarce. Then they used dead grass for cooking fire fuel during the dry season. DQH

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Do I reject it? No. How can I reject His worlds... then say that I love Him?
John 14:23

Can I under my own strength keep His commands and obey? No. Without Christ I am nothing and the most strength I can ever possess is found in my flesh. A source that is weak, no natter how strong Id like to think myself, no matter how much weight I lift, it is weak.

However, IF the strength that I lean on is that of the Holy Spirit, then, THEN there is no weakness to be found in the endless power. However, that power is never about me, or I did... but what the Holy Spirit does THROUGH me.

Can I over come sins? No... I... as in myself alone am its slave, the flesh calls and I obey. HOWEVER by the power of the Holy Spirit I CAN overcome flesh, I c as n master my flesh and overcome sin, ALL sin. Just as the one I follow is without sin, so too am I too follow those footsteps.

Does it mean that I will EVER be in this flesh as perfect? No.... BUT I am to walk as the one I follow walked. I will stumble... yes, I will stumble a gteat many of times... but I get up from that failure and continue in my pursuit to be more like the one I follow, Jesus Christ.... otherwise... I have taken on the name/title of my Lord as Christ, attached it to myself... by calling myself Christian, but refused to follow Him as He instructed.

Is God the Father fair and just? Would Jesus ask one to do that which they had no way of fulfilling at all?

Jesus told tge woman at the well that He did not condemn her, "Go and sin no more." It wasnt the only time He told someone to sin no more... so either... we CAN be brought to a point where we no longer live and wallow in our sins... OR there is NO WAY a person could EVER do what is asked of them and that would mean that none could ever live up to those standards EVEN AFTER Jesus paid the price for us all.

Again, a person can not fight the desires of flesh, with flesh.... but.. WITH prayer AND the power of the Holy Spirit, the heart and mind of a man can be renewed and changed.

What is impossible for man... is possible with God.
Luke 18:27

Some may think the pursuit of of God dealing with the sins in your life may be extreme.... but the path is narrow and few find it..... its better to seek trying to enter through the narrow gate.... than going the way that is wide.

Luke 13:23-28

Matthew 7:13-27

I also believe one cannot obey the commands or teachings on the Sermon on the Mount without God doing the good work in us to help us to obey them. Jesus said without me, we can do nothing (John 15:5). My problem is when folks attempt to either outright ignore the entire sermon on the Mount as being applicable or they say they accept it and yet they do not accept all parts of it. For example: Most believe Jesus was not referring to the NT believer when He warned against how sin can spiritually destroy us in Matthew 5:28-30 and Matthew 6:15, etc.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Apparently there's a controversy over this? In looking up Brayan Denlinger, I found the term "lordship salvation" that, as I'm understanding, is a John MacArthur teaching that Denlinger is denying he, himself, is teaching. But I don't understand the controversy in this ( I'm going to have to do more digging into this). This is what I find about "Lordship salvation":

According to one website advocating Lordship Salvation, "the doctrine of Lordship salvation teaches that submitting to Christ as Lord goes hand-in-hand with trusting in Christ as Savior​

This made me think of Christians who believe in Jesus as Savior, their ticket into heaven; but not as Lord, their Master to obey.

The problem for the first kind is, if they don't obey, their ticket is invalid.

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

I also believe one cannot obey the commands or teachings on the Sermon on the Mount without God doing the good work in us to help us to obey them. Jesus said without me, we can do nothing (John 15:5). My problem is when folks attempt to either outright ignore the entire sermon on the Mount as being applicable or they say they accept it and yet they do not accept all parts of it. For example: Most believe Jesus was not referring to the NT believer when He warned against how sin can spiritually destroy us in Matthew 5:28-30 and Matthew 6:15, etc.

I don't see what the fuss about the sermon on the mount is. I'm fairly certain that 90% of what Jesus spoke about in it was already listed as commands elsewhere in the NT--it was just reaffirmed in a more orderly way, with a sense of urgency it would seem. The verses about lust, I think, get flack because it sets an 'impossible' standard to most. Most people get lustful thoughts, and a lot of the time it just happens(especially to men). The point is, however, that instead of willfully entertaining the thoughts with the pretense of 'oh, I keep the other commandments so it's fine', if it happens(you sin), then you should repent each time it happens. Lots of good people struggle with sin(some for the rest of their lives)as none can be perfect; the point is that you keep trying to follow ALL of the commandments as best you can, not writing them off as 'OK' because you think you're right with God in other ways.

 

[AlexDTX]

Y

I believe it would be cruel on the part of GOD to tell us to do something that was impossible for us to do without any explanation.

You are right. It would be cruel. Which is why Christ died to give us the new birth. It is the power of the Holy Spirit within all who are born again, to obey his directive. His grace is given us for that process since obedience is not automatic.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I don't see what the fuss about the sermon on the mount is. I'm fairly certain that 90% of what Jesus spoke about in it was already listed as commands elsewhere in the NT--it was just reaffirmed in a more orderly way, with a sense of urgency it would seem. The verses about lust, I think, get flack because it sets an 'impossible' standard to most. Most people get lustful thoughts, and a lot of the time it just happens(especially to men). The point is, however, that instead of willfully entertaining the thoughts with the pretense of 'oh, I keep the other commandments so it's fine', if it happens(you sin), then you should repent each time it happens. Lots of good people struggle with sin(some for the rest of their lives)as none can be perfect; the point is that you keep trying to follow ALL of the commandments as best you can, not writing them off as 'OK' because you think you're right with God in other ways.

It was the 5th chapter of the first book in the New Testament. The apostles didn't come first, Jesus did!

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

It was the 5th chapter of the first book in the New Testament. The apostles didn't come first, Jesus did!

I didn't realize it was only the 5th book(I'm still learning the layout of scripture pfff), but my point was that people who disagree with the sermon on the mount probably quote similar verses from other parts of the NT--and it's pretty much the same thing. Dunno why the sermon on the mount causes a ruckus : P

 

[Kenny'sID]

He says that the Sermon on the Mount applies to the Millennial Kingdom because you cannot possibly obey all of the things on the Sermon on the Mount.

We hear that around here a lot from OSASR's. In my view, it's an excuse, not a reason. Then there is the fact it makes no sense at all.

 

[friend of]

Yet other Christians on the forums imply that we can only glorify God by believing in the finished work of the cross

How is the Finished Work of the Cross unfinished?

 

[CharismaticLady]

I didn't realize it was only the 5th book(I'm still learning the layout of scripture pfff), but my point was that people who disagree with the sermon on the mount probably quote similar verses from other parts of the NT--and it's pretty much the same thing. Dunno why the sermon on the mount causes a ruckus : P

No, 5th chapter of the FIRST book of the New Testament. It was His first sermon, that His New Covenant would be based on. But anyway, there is a false doctrine that because we are not under the Old Testament Law, we have no laws to keep. That the blood of Jesus covers us while we keep sinning, and the Father only sees His Son's blood. You can see that is obviously what the New Testament calls a doctrine of demons - a twisting of Scripture and taking one verse out of the context of the surrounding chapters and verses.

What the Sermon on the Mount shows us is that sin is not just surface, what others can see, like in the Ten Commandments. Jesus' commandments are deeper straight to the cause of sin - the heart. But the gift of Jesus is power to keep them, even though they are harder. He baptizes us with His own sinless Spirit to keep his laws through us. That is called being born again. It is our sin nature that is born again into the divine nature 2 Peter 1 (That is a short book, a few books before Revelation the last book.)

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

No, 5th chapter of the FIRST book of the New Testament. It was His first sermon, that His New Covenant would be based on. But anyway, there is a false doctrine that because we are not under the Old Testament Law, we have no laws to keep. That the blood of Jesus covers us while we keep sinning, and the Father only sees His Son's blood. You can see that is obviously what the New Testament calls a doctrine of demons - a twisting of Scripture and taking one verse out of the context of the surrounding chapters and verses.

What the Sermon on the Mount shows us is that sin is not just surface, what others can see, like in the Ten Commandments. Jesus' commandments are deeper straight to the cause of sin - the heart. But the gift of Jesus is power to keep them, even though they are harder. He baptizes us with His own sinless Spirit to keep his laws through us. That is called being born again. It is our sin nature that is born again into the divine nature 2 Peter 1

//slams head on table

I am so sorry for being a dimwit. I'm running on very few hours of sleep and have been napping this evening pffpfppf. You can really see my noob-ness about where things are located in the bible showing right now > >

That was primarily my point--I agree with everything you said. I just don't understand why(if it is as OP implies)people specifically say that 'The Sermon on the Mount' is not applicable to today. If what the sermon on the mount teaches isn't applicable, neither is 90% of the rest of the NT. I'm speaking out of confusion here because I do not understand the logic behind such a thing LOL

 

[Redwingfan9]

Do you reject the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable today?

If so, then what verses lead you to that conclusion?

~ (Also, please vote in the poll) ~

I've never heard of anyone rejecting the Sermon on the Mount as being applicable. what manner of heresy is this?