The Sermon on the Mount

The comparison of the parable of the wicked husbandmen in Matthew (21: 33-44) and Mark (12:1-12) is interesting. What you find is the exact same story with a different punch line. For Mark, the kingdom is no longer for Jews and will be given instead to Gentiles. For Matthew, the kingdom is for those who bear good fruit. A central theme in the gospel of Matthew is the need to obey religious law. This is what you must do in order to be saved.

The best summary of Matthew’s ethical teachings is the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1-7: 29). As I pointed out in last week’s blog, the author of Matthew uses the Sermon on the Mount to bring together all of Jesus’ teachings. The central point of these teachings is to obey religious law, to be perfect as God is perfect (5:48). This theme dominates Matthew’s gospel.

The Beatitudes (5:1-12) show the way to the kingdom. People who behave in certain ways will be accepted—the gentle, those who hunger and thirst for what is right, the merciful, the pure in heart, and the peacemakers. Good behavior is rewarded, bad behavior is punished. Matthew makes this point again, and again, and again (see Matthew 6: 4-6, 7:22, 13: 36-43, 16:28, 21:44, and 25:31-46).

But there is more to it than that. Jesus the religious reformer points out that religious law is far more than rules to obey. The important part is the inner disposition of the heart. Yes, you must not kill, but the real task is to rid the heart of anger. The same is true for adultery. The problem here is lusting in your heart (see 5:20-48).

If your virtue goes no deeper than the scribes and Pharisees, you will never inherit the kingdom (5:20). The problem with the scribes and Pharisees is not what they teach, but the corruption of their hearts. Their religion is about outward obedience, and not a loving heart (23: 26-27). Jesus redefines Jewish purity rules. Those rules, he points out, are not about unclean hands, but an unclean heart (15:18-20). Jesus summarizes his ethics of love with the famous line that the two greatest commandments are to love God and your neighbor as yourself (22: 34-40).

There is an interesting eschatological flavor to some of Jesus’ teachings. The teachings to offer no resistance to your enemy (5:38-46), to give away your money and follow me (19:18), and to leave your family and follow me make more sense when seen in an eschatological context. God would intervene to take care of Rome, there was no human need to rebel, just turn the other cheek; and there would be no need for financial assets in God’s new order of shared resources.

Producing good fruit, one of Jesus’ favorite analogies, is a matter of training, of character building (7:18). If you make a tree sound, its fruit will be sound. A good man draws from the goodness developed in his heart (12:33-37). There is no question that humans are able to act in loving ways. The smart man is the one who hears his words and acts on them (7:22-24).

These teachings come from Jesus, the Jew. The divine/human relationship is defined in terms of obedience to Law. Jesus comes not to abolish the Law, but to reform it—the new Moses as I suggested last week. Jewish Law is an eternal gift from God (5: 17-19). The last instructions Jesus gives his disciples is to teach the people to obey all the commandments I have given you (28: 20).

As many Christians know, the apostle Paul has a very different position on these matters. For Paul, Christians are saved by faith in Jesus Christ, not by obedience to religious law (Romans 1: 16-17). The only purpose that the Law serves is to point out the sinful nature of humans. The key point for Paul is that humans are not capable of obeying religious law (Romans 7: 1-25).

For Paul, obedience is a consequence of salvation, not a condition. God acts on a believer’s behalf, a gift of grace, and the person becomes loving. God enters your life, you become one in Christ, and sin no longer dominates your personality. The person’s mind is made new by God, human striving to become righteous can never work.

Jesus and Paul posit very different approaches to Christian living. In fact, the two approaches are incompatible. An important question is which one works.
I have always preferred Paul. The goal of my life has been to become a “Sermon on the Mount” person, to act in ways that reflect Jesus’ wonderful teachings. I have prayed for years for God to take control of my heart, to make me into a new person capable of living love.

Sadly, Paul’s approach hasn’t worked. God has not answered my prayers. It’s an approach that hasn’t worked for many Christians, I suspect. Ron Sider, a noted Evangelical theologian, concludes in an interview in Christianity Today (April 2005) that the disconnect between our biblical beliefs and our practice is heart rending. He presents statistical evidence to suggest that Evangelicals get divorced at the same rate as the general society, that Evangelicals are among the most prejudiced people in our society, that physical and sexual abuse are as bad in theologically conservative families as the general public, and that Evangelicals are not particularly generous donors. Most Evangelical Christians claim to be “born again,” an experience generated by God’s action on their behalf. God enters their life, they become one in Christ, a new person, with a personality no longer dominated by sin. My experience and Sider’s statistics suggest that there are problems here. For some reason, the “born again” experience didn’t stick.

As a result, for me, there has been no substitute for the hard work of character building prescribed by Jesus in Matthew. To purify my heart, I examine my resentments. After uncovering them, I take them to meditation where they can be seen and understood in a less defensive and more loving place. This work allows my heart to expand.

Jesus teaches in Matthew that we should not judge, that when we do, we notice the splinter in our neighbor’s eye and ignore the plank in our own (7: 1-5). There is profound wisdom in this teaching. Modern psychologists refer to it as projection. We project on others aspects of ourselves that we don’t like and have trouble accepting. I pay attention to judgment. It signals parts of myself that need sympathetic understanding. When psychological junk is handled in this way, it leaves me freer to choose to love.

Another test I use seeks answers to the following questions: Who is my neighbor? How far does love extend? The goal is to be open to everyone in love. Jesus lived that way. He was fully inclusive, open to all in love. For me, it’s an ego problem. The point is to move beyond self and toward others. I keep working at it. The teachings in Matthew inspire me.