1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:
The Sermon on the Mount is the title of the next 3 chapters, the greatest sermon ever preached. It is the Gospel of the Kingdom in one treatise and is unique to Matthew’s gospel. Much of the material is found in the other gospels, but not in a single, great address. The beatitudes, for instance, appear in Luke 6:17-49, which is called the Sermon on the Plain for its similarity to this one. The Sermon on the Mount is representative of the many sermons Jesus preached in the 3-1/2 years He traveled through the cities and towns of Judea preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom (Mat 4:23; Mat 9:35; Mat 24:14).
This Sermon is the first general teaching lecture of That Prophet (John 1:21; 6:14) which God had foretold to Moses many years earlier. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put My words in His mouth; and He shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which He shall speak in My name, I will require it of him (Deut 18:18-19). That is an astonishing prophecy of Jesus Christ. Moses repeated to the people the words he had heard from God, but the Son’s words were also the Father’s words.
Nevertheless, the giving of the Law by Moses has many other interesting parallels to Christ giving this Sermon. Both took place on a mountain; Moses at Mount Sinai and Jesus upon a mountain in Galilee. Both events were accompanied by miraculous signs validating their divine authority; the Old Covenant witnessed the Lord descending on mount Sinai in fearful power (Ex 19:16-20) and the New Covenant saw many people miraculously healed (Mat 8-9). On both occasions, God communicated His moral code for human life; the First Covenant was directed to the physical children of Abraham, but the New Covenant touches the spiritual children of Abraham. Both were initiated by the giving of a famous set of foundational principles for their respective Covenants; the Old began with the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17) and the New begins with the Nine Blesseds. Additionally, as God’s lawgiver of the Old Covenant, Moses is uniquely a type of Christ, being the only person whom the Lord knew face to face…as a man speaketh unto his friend (Deut 34:10; Ex 34:11). He also came to typify Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice by offering to give his own soul for the sins of the people he had come to so greatly love (Ex 32:31-32).
Anabaptists believe that the Sermon on the Mount is the very essence of the Gospel of the Kingdom that Christ was proclaiming in Israel (Mat 4:23). It is the new Kingdom’s charter, the New and Better Way (Heb 10:20), and is specifically directed for application in this present Age of Grace. The Beatitudes are not just flowery catch-phrases, they are the basic principles for life in the new Kingdom of Christ. Upon reading them, the honest seeker knows intuitively that, regardless of the difficulties in doing, this is the right way, the best way, God’s way. Yes, the Beatitudes form an ideal that most people and churches will never attain, yet if a church body is indeed a foretaste of heaven (see Rev 21), than this is the way the Kingdom on earth should appear and behave. These Beatitudes are so opposite man’s inclinations and so absolutely contrary to the “eye for an eye” law of retribution affirmed by the Old Covenant, and yet the blessings which result by faithfully and sincerely following them leave us with no doubt as to their truthfulness!
Many Protestants miss the significance of the Sermon on the Mount, because its teachings are uncomfortable and difficult, even contrary to common sense, at least by the world’s definition. However, Jesus’ words here are among the simplest and easiest to understand in all the Bible! It is as the old adage says, “Easy to say, but difficult to do.” Dispensationalists have found a way to avoid the Sermon entirely. They claim that it is not directed to the present Church Age, but will be used in some future Millennial Kingdom reign of Christ. The sincere reader, however, cannot escape the conviction of this moment, this great milestone in the history of the world, for Jesus is here instituting a new set of laws, the greatest moral code the world has ever heard, the Law of Christ (Gal 6:2). It is everywhere consistent with the rest of the New Testament in regards to God’s will for His people in the Kingdom which Christ established in place of the old Israelite kingdom.
The new Kingdom of heaven is an inner spiritual condition rather than an external, physical one. The difference becomes strikingly evident upon comparing the Ten Commandments as applied in both Covenants. Thou shalt not kill is re-applied to reach the deeper spiritual problem: anger and hatred (Mat 5:21-22). Thou shalt not commit adultery is newly defined to include lust and immoral thoughts (Mat 5:28). In fact, each of the ten commandments are refitted for good and appropriate application in the New Covenant. They have not been abolished or negated, but simply re-defined under the terms of the New Covenant. Thou shalt not bear false witness now extends to every idle word that man shall speak (Mat 12:36). Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain used to mean that all oaths were to be strictly performed, but in the New Covenant all oaths are to be avoided (Mat 5:33-34). The commandment against making a graven image to bow down and worship now includes more than literal idolatry, it extends to the worship of material possessions: he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God. The list could go on, but the point is made. Each of the Ten Commandments have been newly expanded and re-defined in the spirit and intent of the New Covenant. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law (Heb 7:12).
Another example of the change from physical to spiritual can be seen in Mat 15:1-20, where Jesus changes the laws of uncleanness from being a physical condition to a spiritual one. The Law of Moses had strict laws which labeled some foods unclean and defined various actions of the body to be defiling. In the New Covenant, those laws do not continue in the physical sense, but they are re-expressed in spiritual considerations and truths (Mat 15:16-20). In the Old economy, God dwelt in a specially-built, physical temple that was inaccessible by the common man, but His temple in the New Covenant is the invisible, spiritual soul of the believer (1Cor 6:19).
It is commonly thought that one reason God instituted the New Covenant is because the Old law was too difficult for Man to keep. That is false. The truth is that in all the histories of the nations of the world, there has never been a law so high and lofty, so stringent and strict, so exceedingly difficult to keep, as the one Jesus laid out in the Gospels! The Sermon on the Mount alone is altogether the highest code of conduct and worship ever proposed to mankind, and it can only have originated in the mind of God (Rom 8:4; Mat 5:20). It’s sacred and holy rules simply astonish the mind of every guile-less seeker.
Most of the reformers of the 16th century could not accept that the Kingdom of God was spiritual in nature (Luke 17:21) and so they tried to marry the Church to Government, but with disastrous results. Jesus had no political aims at all, and neither did the early churches of Christianity. The Law of Christ speaks first to the heart of man, who then must act in the world according to those precepts.
2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, 3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
The value that God places on humility in the New Kingdom cannot be over-stated! A man that is poor in spirit is meek and lowly, someone not given to pride and self-love; above all, he has the ability to correctly see himself from God’s perspective. He is deeply aware of his spiritual poverty and of God’s perfect holiness, and he recognizes his need of a Savior. Jesus says these are the real citizens in the Kingdom of Heaven! God dwells in a high and holy place, but His heart is with the man of contrite and humble spirit (Isa 57:15). True humility is a necessary quality for the man of love in 1Cor 13:1-13; while false humility is an outward show that actually exalts self in the eyes of others and yourself (Col 2:23). This first Beatitude resembles Pro 29:23, A man’s pride shall bring him low; but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.
Each of the Beatitudes have a close basis in OT passages, yet none are considered to be complete quotations. Jesus seems to have formulated this phrase, the poor in spirit, to help us remember what a humble person is. A poor person is someone with few possessions, and a man’s spirit is his innermost self; his attitude, will and emotions. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit (Ps 34:18; 51:17). God has chosen the poor of this world rich in faith (Jam 2:5; 1Cor 1:26-29). The parallel passage in Luke 6:20 says only, Blessed are the poor. While a humble person is more likely to be found among the physically poor than the rich, that is not always the case. Zacchaeus was a rich man who humbled himself unto salvation.
To be blessed is to be happy, fortunate, in a place of good favor. Yet for most of these Beatitudes, the condition of blessedness is found in situations that are normally considered to be cursed and unhappy. Who wishes to be poor, in mourning and persecution? Yet, such are blessed of the Father (Mat 25:34-35).
4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
They that mourn should consider themselves to be blessed? Not many will preach that over the pulpit! But the suffering, pilgrim church knows that chastisements (Heb 12:6-11), persecutions (Mat 5:10-11) and denying self (Mat 10:33; Luke 14:26-27) are necessary components of true Christianity (Mat 5:10-11; 2Tim 3:12; Rom 8:17-18; Php 1:29; 2Tim 2:12; 1Pet 4:1). If you find the Christian life to be easy, beware! According to the Word, it will not be so. The mark of authenticity for a Kingdom citizen is not good health, sufficient wealth and a peaceful life. Not one of the Beatitudes would so teach, and not one of the heroes of the faith found it to be so (Mat 10:34-36).
This characteristic is opposite the ideals of the World, which places the highest value on pursuing happiness and pleasing Self. The Christian, on the other hand, should live soberly, appreciating the gravity of life and living accordingly. Some well-meaning church leaders have misunderstood this fact and teach their congregations to expect physical blessings of peace and happiness if they become Christians. In the last decade or so, many Christians cite Jeremiah 29:11 as their favorite verse: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not evil, and to give you an expected end. The prayer of Jabez in 1Chr 4:10 is another example. Yet, is it valid to use these Old Covenant verses when Jesus teaches that the New Kingdom is otherwise? Which hero of Christianity experienced a life of peace and ease? I am not saying that those OT verses should not be read or used, but that they need to be correctly applied in the New Covenant context, just as we do with the Ten Commandments. The New Covenant is primarily a spiritual condition, while the Old was planted upon physical and temporal considerations. The prayer of Jabez and Jer 29:11 can be beneficially used today if we apply them to our spiritual lives as opposed to our temporal lives. Suddenly they become right and meaningful! God does want to bless us, but with spiritual blessings of inner peace and the riches of the knowledge of His will (Col 1:9; Eph 3:16). Unfortunately, many Christians take those OT passages and mis-apply them for their physical lives, thinking that God’s primary hope is that they experience contentment, happiness and peace in life. It is not so taught anywhere in the New Testament.
True repentance must be accompanied by mourning. A sinner who recognizes his need of a Saviour and is sorry for his sins will feel sorrow and sadness for his past errors. It will lead him to humbly bow and petition Christ for forgiveness (2Cor 7:10). Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. This Beatitude can be found interwoven in that prophecy of Is 61:3, which foretold the time of the Messiah.
5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Meekness and humility (the poor in spirit) go hand in hand. It is not possible to have one without the other. Perhaps the difference between the two is that humility describes a man’s inner attitude, but meekness is the outward expression of that attitude. A meek person is gentle (2Cor 10:1; Tit 3:2; 1Pet 3:4) and shows his sincere love for others in action (Gal 5:22-23; 6:1; Col 3:12; 2Tim 2:25; Jam 3:13). The Scriptures hold up Jesus and Moses as men of meekness without peer (Num 12:3; Mat 11:29), yet they were men who spoke and acted with great authority. The world often mistakes meekness for weakness, but actually the opposite is true. Meekness is a sign of deep inner strength that is rooted in honest self-evaluation, enabling them that are exercised thereby the ability to control their actions and respond in kindness and love rather than in anger and disdain. That meekness is truly great strength has been demonstrated many times in the actions of our God-fearing Anabaptist forefathers, who were fearless in the face of torture and flames, never raising a finger in self-defense or angry retribution.
In this verse, Jesus quotes Psalms 37:10-11, where the meek are contrasted with the wicked. The Psalmist says that the wicked person generally finds his life to be dangerous, violent and fleeting, but the meek man will generally be established and peaceable; he shall inherit the earth. The Psalms further describe a meek person as someone who fears God and who trusts and waits upon Him for protection and salvation (Ps 76:9; 147:6; 149:4). In the New Covenant however, the World will often respond to a meek person with slander and persecution.
The OT prophets said the Messiah would defend and reprove with equity for the meek (Is 11:4; 29:19; 61:1; Zep 2:3). Jesus offered Himself (2Cor 10:1) as an example of meekness: Take My yoke upon you and become like Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart (Mat 11:29; 21:5; Php 2:6).
A meek person submits to his Master and does what He asks. His opposite is the man of arrogance and pride. A meek person is not a boastful, loud or big talker, nor is he driven to achieve fame and recognition. Instead, a meek person lets his life speak for him and is content with his position (Heb 13:5), never exalting himself, but letting God do that if He so chooses (1Pet 5:6). He is happy to work in the shadows, completely content with letting others get the credit for his unseen labor in the Kingdom. He rests in the knowledge that God sees all and is the only Rewarder of good that really matters.
6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Righteousness is a characteristic of all true saints of God, whether they lived under the Old Covenant (Ps 11:7; 23:3; Pro 12:8; Is 64:5) or have been born under the New Covenant (1Cor 15:34; 1Tim 6:11; Tit 2:2; 1John 3:7). To hunger and thirst is to desire deeply. Jesus offered living water of life to thirsty seekers of truth (John 4:13-14; 6:35; 7:37). God’s people need to cultivate that inner urge to diligently seek God and unerringly follow after righteousness (1Tim 6:11). The prophets Amos and Isaiah used similar imagery to describe what happens to a country whose people no longer seek for God (Am 8:11; Is 55:1; 41:17).
The Kingdom call to righteousness and holiness goes well beyond the Jewish idea of righteousness in the time of Christ (Mat 5:20). It begins within and is then expressed in actions (2Cor 6:17; 1John 3:7). It is sad that so many hunger and thirst after the things of this world rather than for the things of God. How can we develop this hunger for God and righteousness? By putting His will and Word first, and by denying Self and the World (Mat 6:33). While man can never be perfectly righteous on account of his frailty and sinful tendencies, that cannot be used as an excuse for not seeking to be righteous! Essentially that is what this Beatitude teaches: “Blessed is the one who strives to be righteous.” Some theologies find themselves at odds with this simple statement and resort to re-defining “righteousness” to fit their their doctrine. Their proof-text is Isaiah 64:6, by which they extrapolate Isaiah’s intercessory confession for backslidden Israel to be true of all mankind. Yet that interpretation conflicts spectacularly with many verses which teach that God rejoices to see a man choose to live righteously. See my note for that verse.
They shall be filled. When a person is physically hungry, eating food will satisfy his appetite. But he needs to keep eating or he will become hungry again. So it is with spiritual hunger. The supply of spiritual food and water however, is limitless and everlasting (John 4:14), so the proverb is true: they shall be filled. See Ps 107:9.
7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
A merciful person is one that chooses to forgive. He is kind and compassionate, not given to responding to a wrong with another wrong (Mat 6:14; 1Pet 3:9). Mercy and forgiveness undergird the later command to love one’s enemies and to bless those that curse and persecute (Mat 5:44; Eph 4:32). God is merciful (Ps 86:15) and for that mankind should be forever grateful because there is no hope of salvation otherwise. Mercy is pre-figured in many details of the OT and can be seen in the typological meanings of the Ark of the Covenant (Ex 25:17). God’s great mercy in redeeming Man is amazing! He paid what we never could pay. The picture of Rev 5:1-14 is one of mercy, sacrifice and love. A foundational OT passage for this Beatitude is Psalms 18:25.
When God introduced Himself to Moses, He characterized Himself as both merciful and just (Ex 34:5-7), yet those two attributes are typically considered to be opposites. That is not accurate. In its purest form, mercy is the payment of what justice requires (Jam 2:13). If someone wrongs you, justice requires the wrongdoer to recompense you in like worth; mercy, however, requires you to pay for the wrong. For instance, if you forgive a debt, the debtor is free and you assume the full cost. If you forgive a slander, you release the slanderer from guilt, yet must continue to suffer the effects of the slander.
This exposes another key difference between the Old and New Covenants, for while the OT law is all about justice (Heb 10:28), the NT is all about mercy. Under the Old Covenant, every wrong required recompense, and in fact, mercy was not allowed. The law regarding murder for example, did not permit mercy or some other form of punishment (see Deut 19:1-21). The foundations of the New Covenant, on the other hand, are mercy and love. Beginning with the unsearchable mercy of Christ (Eph 3:8), who Himself paid the price for our wrongs, the Christian is also to be merciful and forgiving (Mat 7:2).
So mercy and justice cannot be opposites. Instead, mercy pays what justice requires. God is both perfectly just and merciful. In a church setting this is important to understand. Mercy does not overlook a wrong, it pays for the wrong. Therefore, a person living in sin may not continue in that sin by citing the mercy of God (Rom 6:1). Justice requires payment, and unrepentant sin means a debt unpaid. Mercy has not been applied and an injustice remains. The biblical concept of mercy is often poorly understood in many Christian churches.
8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
The pure in heart are those who have cleansed themselves from iniquity (Rev 7:14; Heb 10:22) and stand forth in excellence of holiness, purity, honesty and sincerity (1Pet 1:22; Heb 12:14). There is no hypocrisy in their faith or lives (1Tim 1:5; Rom 12:9; Rev 14:5), and their hearts and minds are kept pure from evil. See Psalms 24:3-4, the OT foundation for this Beatitude. The pure in heart possess a singleness of heart that has purposed to serve God alone (Col 3:22; Mat 6:2). They have cast out all ulterior motives, hidden agendas and evil imaginations (2Cor 10:5; Tit 1:15). Antonyms would include jealousy, malice and deceit.
The pure in heart are so in all facets of their lives (James 3:17), but I think a key aspect of purity in the heart involves our inner motives and impulses. It is sad that churches so often struggle with men who’s hearts are not perfect in purity and it becomes doubly difficult when those men are leaders in the church. When decisions are based upon ulterior motives, vindictive thoughts, pet ideas and judgmental biases, truth and right are forced to groan. The counsels of the hearts (1Cor 4:5) will someday be brought to the light and then every man will either have praise of God or judgment.
The contrast of the physical law of justice and duty of the Old Covenant to the spiritual law of mercy and love in the New Covenant is again made evident with this Beatitude. Being pure in heart goes deeper than outward actions and touches the inner intents and thoughts unseen to all except God (Heb 4:12). The actions of man are usually premeditated in the mind (Mat 15:19) and proceed from the intent and condition of the heart (Luke 6:45). In the Scriptures, the heart is the seat of the will and emotions while the mind corresponds to the intellect and conscience.
As with many spiritual actions, purity of heart has a divine aspect and also a human component. After all, the Christian enters into a Covenant relationship with God and that indicates an agreement between two parties. No man can boast that he has made himself pure; that can only happen by coming to Christ in repentance and asking Him to wash us from our sins (1John 1:7; Rev 1:5). Nevertheless, every man who has within him the hope of sonship purifieth himself, even as He is pure (1John 3:1-3). The Spirit working with our spirit can create, at the end, a perfect man (Eph 4:13).
Water is often associated with purity in the New Testament. Jesus spoke of living water that would last forever (John 4:14). A crystal-clear river of pure water will flow though heaven (Rev 22:1), a picture that contrasts with the Devil’s poisonous water (Rev 8:10-11).
9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.
Peace is one of the most important subjects in all of the Bible, as can be seen by the frequency in which it is found (more than 400 times). Interestingly though, this is the only occurrence of peacemaker in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, peace was largely the physical absence of war and enemies. Unfortunately, peace was often elusive, as cruel and unstable kings oppressed the land and warred constantly. Nevertheless, peace was a blessing promised for those who lived according to God’s plan and Covenant (Deut 28; Ps 122:6-7; Jer 29:11). The prophets of old described the coming of Messiah as a tremendous reign of peace (Is 9:6-7; Mic 5:5; Hag 2:9; Zec 6:13), which the Jews erroneously thought He would enforce militarily. After Christ’s death and the coming of the Spirit, many sincere and God-fearing Jews suddenly saw those prophecies in their correct aspect. The Messiah would not bring peace by force (John 18:36), but by Covenant (Is 54:10; Eze 37:26). He would even include the Gentiles (Is 66:12; Zec 9:10) in His Kingdom. Moreover and in contrast to the Old Covenant, that peace would not be temporal and physical, but eternal and inward peace of the soul. It was a compelling and satisfying fulfillment to Scriptures that had long puzzled many honest seekers (Act 8:30-34; Heb 13:20).
In the New Covenant, with its emphasis on things spiritual and eternal, peace is not defined by feelings of physical safety and contentment. Rather, it is that rest of soul which results from experiencing the forgiveness of sins and recognizing God’s acceptance! (Rom 5:1; 8:6). It is a condition of the inner person. The Christian knows that although earthly trials will trouble his soul, the true inner peace that Jesus gives cannot be taken away (John 14:27; 16:33) and that eternal life awaits him in the heavens. That is a peace which passes all understanding (Php 4:7). Peace comes with knowing God’s will and obeying it, which in the last analysis, is the most important work of man. As with every one of the Christian attributes, peace as an emotional feeling can be fraudulent and misleading. That is why we say authentic peace is not a feeling but a state of being, a condition of the person. Feelings of safety and contentment are emotions, but true peace is something deeper, something solidly based on faith and the promises of Christ.
A false sense of peace is dangerous to the Christian and emotional feelings are a poor measure of one’s true spiritual condition! Jesus warns that many will think they are obeying God, but will discover that they were wrong, and to terrible results (Luke 13:23-28; Mat 7:20-23). They apparently felt at peace with their spiritual state, but it was a false, deceptive peace. True peace is based on faith in God, and true faith is based on obedience to God’s Word (Rom 5:1). The world offers temporal peace that comes with fame, fortune and security of mind, but that too is a false peace of emotional and physical feelings. Nevertheless many have been lulled into spiritual sleep by this anti-peace, which like the anti-christ, puts itself in the place of real peace and disguises itself such that it appears to be authentic.
The New Covenant is called the Gospel of peace (Eph 6:15; Rom 10:15; 14:17), first because it brings peace between God and Man (Eph 2:14; Col 1:20), and second because those living in the New Covenant are peacemakers (Rom 14:19; 2Cor 13:11; Eph 4:3; 2Tim 2:22; Heb 12:14; Jam 3:18). A peacemaker works to unite people in conflict, so it is sad to see that one of the most difficult places to maintain peace is within a church. And yet, peace should naturally flow from those who are living the first beatitudes of humility, meekness and mercy. Conflict betrays a person’s lack of the same. On the other hand, some church leaders will allow sin to go unchecked for the sake of peace. That is not a valid outworking of, Blessed are the peacemakers. A Godly peacemaker cannot compromise other Bible principles for the sake of peace (see Mat 10:34-37). If it be possible…live peaceably with all men (Rom 12:18).
Blessed are the peacemakers. The NT everywhere exhorts Christians to acts of peace and non-aggression, to relinquish their rights and even allow their belongings to be plundered. Nowhere is self-defense or pressing for one’s personal rights taught as permissible. In general, a soft answer turneth away wrath (Pro 15), but sometimes the wicked do wickedly and the righteous will suffer at their hands. Blessed are these peacemakers who being reviled, revile not again (1Pet 2:23). An OT passage that underlines this Beatitude is, Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of that man is peace (Ps 37:37).
10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
“The pilgrim church is like an anvil that has worn out many a hammer.” For two millennia now, red-blooded persecution has followed the true churches of the Kingdom, wherever and whenever they are established. The white horse of Christ and the Gospel is always followed by the red horse of Satan and persecution (Rev 6:1-4). It is shocking and sad that the very worst persecutions the saints of the Kingdom have experienced have come at the hands of the professing Church. The first persecutors were the Jews, who began by killing the righteous Stephen in Acts 7:57-60. They were soon followed by the Roman Caesars, who slaughtered the Christians in great numbers and for 200 years. With the first “christian” Roman emperor, Constantine, the churches thought that peace had finally come, but the resulting state-Church almost immediately began to oppress and persecute the kingdom saints once again. The Roman Catholic Church ruled the consciences of the people for well over 1000 years, suppressing any and all doctrines contrary to their religion. Many thousands of conscientious Christ-followers paid the ultimate price for their decision. With the Reformation in the 16th century, a great conflict both physical and theological broke over Europe, as Catholics and Protestants fought for supremacy and rule of the people. Caught in the middle were the peace churches, the Anabaptists, the Waldensians, the Brethren and others. These suffered immensely at the hands of Catholics and Protestants, and many more thousands were martyred for not pledging allegiance to the state churches. Some were able to save their families only by migrating to other lands, such as Poland, Russia and the Americas (see Broadbent’s, The Pilgrim Church). Reading the stories of these brave, dedicated-unto-death men and women is both humbling and inspiring. The Marty’rs Mirror (T.J. VanBraught) records many of their testimonies.
In the case of our Anabaptist forefathers, persecution was primarily physical torture, as the executioners tore the body apart, limb by limb trying to get the “heretics” to recant their “false” doctrine. Meanwhile, today’s Anabaptists (and other like-minded Christians) are also experiencing persecution, but most likely not that torture unto death. Nevertheless, all that will live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution (2Tim 3:12). The last Beatitude will speak to that truth.
The closest OT passages to the present Beatitude may be Psalms 119:161; 143:3.
11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
The subject of this Blessed may seem similar to the previous verse (persecution), but there is an important difference. The previous verse spoke of bodily persecution, but the present one describes persecution by verbal mistreatment. While the two forms may seem disproportionate in severity, they are so only in outward appearance. Many have recanted their faith because of ridicules, criticisms and arguments they have suffered from families and friends, and the resulting spiritual death is no less serious than those who recant under physical torture.
The OT hero David composed the original iteration of this Blessed in Psalms 71:10-12. It takes great strength of character to respond to false and evil accusations without anger or vengeance (1Cor 4:12). Jesus gave His example to follow when He endured wicked accusations, mockery and criticism (Mat 26:59-62; 27:38-44; Luke 23:2). The Apostles were also much reviled and persecuted. Paul was called a fool for believing in Christ, but could not be shamed into stopping to preach (Rom 1:16). Peter wrote, If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye (1Pet 4:14; Luke 6:22). According to the early Christian writers, the churches were falsely accused of being cannibals, atheists and whore-mongerers by the Romans. Those claims were widely believed by the populace. That method has been repeated by enemies of the Kingdom churches down through history and may be even more effective at suppressing the truth than bodily persecution. Slander, gossip and false accusation are one of Satan’s top weapons against the Kingdom of Christ. In Greek, the word Devil is the same as false accuser (2Tim 3:3).
At the conclusion of the Beatitudes, we are once again impressed by the inward, spiritual nature of the New Kingdom that Christ was preaching. So far we have read nothing concerning the Jewish law, nor of its Great Commandment, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul and mind (Mat 22:36-37). The listening Jews marveled at His gracious words (Luke 4:22) and wondered at the great difference between His message and the Pharisees (Mat 7:29). He taught the importance of right attitude and good character for all those who would follow Him, and conditioned the promises upon those concepts. This we see in the repetition of, “Blessed are those…for they shall see God.” Later, in a parable which demonstrates the importance of obeying His words, Jesus says, Come ye blessed of My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you (Mat 25:34). There is no greater word of greeting man can hear than that.
12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
Each of the Beatitudes concludes with a promise, and this verse is the last promise. Be exceeding glad. Athough completely counter to the loves of the Flesh, the true-hearted Christian can rejoice in trials (James 1:2), tribulations (Rom 5:3), afflictions (1Thes 1:6; 2Cor 8:2), chastisements (Heb 12:6-7) and persecutions (2Cor 12:10). The reason given to rejoice is that those in persecutions find themselves in holy, blessed company! The prophets and saints have ever been oppressed and afflicted (see Heb 12), and we, if Christ’s, will also be persecuted (John 15:20; Luke 21:12). In some way however, suffering and difficulties that we endure in this life are working in our favor to bless us with an exceeding and eternal weight of glory (2Cor 4:16-18).
13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.
The people in Jesus’ kingdom are to be the salt of the earth, a light upon the hill to illuminate the world (v14). How truly have these analogies been fulfilled in the centuries of time since they were first spoken! The true churches of Jesus Christ have influenced the world for good as nothing else in all history, and even in the apostate churches individual men and women have found the Truth to set them free. Without argument, the best in literature, the arts, science and works of humanity have their origins under the banner of the Kingdom of Christ.
The analogy of the Kingdom, or a church, or even a Christian, to being the salt of the earth seems to be based on the flavoring capabilities of salt with food. The Christian’s speech should be seasoned with salt (Col 4:6), meaning it should be in good taste, helpful, encouraging and kind to all who hear it. This important Christian quality may have been pre-figured by the OT sacrifices being salted before they were offered (see note on Mark 9:49). Salt is good only if it has savour (Luke 14:34). Just as lukewarm water is distasteful (Rev 3:16), so too is unsalty salt.
This verse almost certainly contains a subtle prophecy of warning to the Jews (Luke 21:24), but the same consequences will befall the flavor-less churches at the end of the world (Luke 18:8). In a sense, the churches of the Kingdom are preserving the world from its programmed end, for that is a primary usage for salt. See Rev 11:2.
14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Darkness and Light. These two opposites are found often in spiritual contexts (see John 1:4-9; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Rom 1:21). Light is associated with knowledge (2Cor 4:6; 2Pet 1:19), and darkness to spiritual ignorance and the works of the flesh. As light entering a dark room allows everyone to see clearly, so too the lives and words of Christians should open vistas of understanding and comfort to a sin-troubled world (Php 2:15). Darkness obscures the true state of things, just as sin and the devil are constantly trying to obscure the knowledge of the truth. Those who reject God are hiding themselves in the darkness (John 3:19-20), while the repentant man will approach the Light to be healed (1Pet 2:9).
Is it appropriate to hide the light of truth? Of course not! The Word of Life should be held forth for all to see (Php 2:16). The true Gospel simply cannot be hid, though countless rulers, governments and false religions have attempted to darken its beckoning light. Let us fear not, therefore, to let the Light that has shined first in our hearts shine also to all the world, so that others might also glorify our heavenly Father. Jesus Christ emits the full and perfect Light of Truth, and Christians are but reflectors of His glory. The moon does not shine of itself either, but reflects the light of the sun.
That they may see your good works. Ignore the false teachers who claim a man’s good works are filthy rags! The Christian’s daily actions and speech are valuable and effective testimonies of the truth (1Pet 2:12), and they are meet for the Master’s use (2Tim 2:21). Contrary to the doctrine of many Protestant churches, the Christian is everywhere urged unto good works in the Scriptures (see Eph 2:10; Tit 3:8; Rev 20:12; 2Tim 3:17; 2Cor 5:10; Tit 2:14). The book of Romans carefully warns both Jew and Gentile that by good works a man can never earn his salvation, and that faith in Christ is essential to forgiveness and justification. But as James wrote, “show me a man who has true faith, and I will show you a man who has good works” (James 2:18). Upon studying each hero in the faith chapter, you will note that while each is commended for his faith, what stands out is his actions. Abraham is famous for his faith, but his action in offering up Isaac was an incredible work of faith. Let your light shine like Abraham! The Father is glorified by our good works.
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
In the next few verses, Jesus will affirm the close link between the Old and New Covenants, never condemning or diminishing the Old, yet always presenting the New as the best and only way. The importance of the Old Covenant and its continued relevance in pointing Man to his God is evident. Paul said, “the Law is a schoolmaster that teaches of Christ” (Gal 3:24). Its laws, sacrifices and prophecies are beneficial even today as examples, types and shadows that testify of Him. It is fitting then, that Christ does not belittle or destroy it, but He does explain that the New Covenant will specify to greater degrees of righteousness and commitment. Examples of that begin in verse 21.
    Jesus did not come to destroy the Old Covenant, but to fulfill it (Acts 13:39). He did not make the Old Testament law useless, nor did He say its establishment was in vain (see note Rom 3:3). Rather, Christ completed and finished the Law, essentially fashioning it into a New and Better Covenant between God with man (Heb 10:20). Said concisely, Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law, as evidenced by His own perfect sacrifice which ended forever the temporary and imperfect animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant. Acting in character, Christ laid down His life; for love is the fulfilling of the Law (Rom 13:10). The Law and Prophets foreshadowed the finished covenant, and during its era, it supplied mankind with provisional atonement based upon the future action of Christ in atoning for the sins of the world. The Law set the requirements by which God and man might be reconciled, and Christ fulfilled those requirements and became the perfect Fulfillment of that Law. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone that believeth (Rom 10:4).
“I am come to fulfil the Law and the Prophets.” No other prophet would have dared to pronounce such a bold statement! And no prophet could have accomplished it either. How those words must have stunned His listeners! Even today they are intensely divisive, for they force all who are seeking the Truth to evaluate and decide for themselves. Is this Man for real? Either He truly was the all-powerful, all-authoritative Son of God, or He was a deluded charlatan. There can be no middle road. For the honest seeker, a great leap of faith is not required to believe that He really had such authority, for Jesus backed up His statements and doctrines with infallible proofs.
The inter-relationship of the Old Covenant with the New should be studied in conjunction with Scriptures such as Heb 8:13; Rom 3:31; 10:4; Gal 3:24. Historically, churches have varied widely on how to take the laws of the Old Testament. The Catholic church and the later general Protestant movement typically divide the OT law into sections, often called the “moral law,” the “ceremonial law,” and the “civil law.” They argue for the continued authoritative relevance of only the moral law. Anabaptists, meanwhile, argue for the dominance of Christ and the New Testament above every ceremony and law of the Old Covenant. They do not attempt to divide the Law and hold obligatory certain parts, but believe that only those OT laws which are repeated in the New should be taken as authoritative in the Kingdom of Christ. This belief naturally led the early Anabaptists to embrace the doctrines of non-retaliation, cultural distinction and the “two kingdoms” concept of the Church and the World.
Attempts to divide the Law and the Prophets into moral, civil, ceremonial and judicial categories (or any similar divisions), are fraught with problems. The Protestant movement’s many disagreements attest to that fact. The OT is not easily sectioned into distinct groups. The Seventh Day Adventists, for instance, keep Old Testament commandments that other Protestant denominations say are obsolete. Then there are OT practices (like polygamy, killing, divorce, etc) that have been entirely reversed in the New Covenant. Clearly there is a true moral law of God which is absolute and unchanging through the Covenants, but the Anabaptist approach of allowing the New Testament (rather than the Old) to determine that law seems both safe and correct. Rather than attempting to put each Old Testament law into its correct division and thereby decide if it is applicable today or not, we find it more valuable to simply say that Christ fulfilled all the Law: the moral and civil laws by His perfect obedience, and the ceremonial law in that His life and work satisfied every OT shadow and type of Him.
Matthew Poole, writing in favor of the Protestant position, says: “There are so many adversaries, Jews, Papists, Socinians, Anabaptists, Antinomians, etc, that make their advantages of this text for the establishing of their several errors…” It is not for nothing however, that the Old Testament is called “Old.” It’s day is past (Heb 8:13; 2Pet 1:19), and those who use it to establish “their several errors” stand either approved or judged by the body of New Testament Scripture.
The law or the prophets. This phrase is used in the New Testament in reference to the Old Testament Scriptures as a whole. See Mat 7:12; Luke 16:16; Acts 13:15. In the next verse Jesus shortens it to the Law.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Many have used this verse to affirm the perfect written accuracy of the Scriptures, for jot and tittle apparently refer to letter points of the Hebrew alphabet. Yet, is that really what Jesus is saying here? And are the Hebrew Scriptures completely free from any scribal errors? Jesus Himself did not quote the Old Testament with such precision. The real affirmation here concerns the meaning and purpose of every point of the Law and not the precise accuracy of its lettering. Even the smallest commandment and detail has (or had) value and intention. Not one rule or prophecy remains unfulfilled by the New Covenant (Is 55:11; Luke 16:17).
The Scriptures do not depend upon an infallible jot-and-tittle rendering of God’s Word in order to be absolute and authoritative. It is the content that matters, the message that is all-important. Spelling and grammar, even word variations and definitions – these will change the content only by manipulation and ulterior motives (2Cor 4:2; 2Pet 3:16). In the time of Christ, there were many variations among the Greek Septuagint manuscripts and Hebrew Proto-Masoretic manuscripts. Jesus quoted from both text families.
Another point against the idea that Jesus was speaking about the perfect lettering of the Old Testament is that the Greek Septuagint was almost certainly more in use than Hebrew in the Jewish synagogues. Scholars say that the average Jew could not even speak the language of the Hebrew Bible. The “unlearned” Apostles all wrote in Greek, not Hebrew. God’s Word cannot be restricted to a single language, nor can it be bound to one infallible and perfect manuscript. While the Spirit did give the original message in all truth and precision, the hand of man is still found therein. Later copying, scribal updates and language translations are not perfect. Nevertheless, the meaning of God’s Word is not hard for the honest seeker to find.
Till all be fulfilled. This implies that the Law would cease to be in effect after Jesus fulfilled it.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
While the basic concept here is simple enough, in order to fully grasp the meaning of this passage it is essential to understand what is meant by the phrase, these least commandments. The Old Covenant commandments? Hardly, for Jesus just announced that He had come to fulfill that Law, and after His death and resurrection all those details were truly and accurately completed (Heb 8:13). Jesus is here preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, in which He formulates the intentions and requirements of the New Covenant law (James 1:25). So these least commandments are New Covenant commandments.
Essentially then, and in agreement with many other NT scriptures, this verse teaches that men will be held rigorously accountable for their actions and judged by their works. The punishments of the unsaved will vary according to their deeds (Luke 12:48), likewise the rewards of the righteous will vary according to their faithfulness to the commandments of Christ. He that dismisses the least commandment in the New Covenant will be held responsible for his errors. He shall be the least in the Kingdom. There will be some in heaven who did not do the full will of God, they did not keep all His commandments.
Any person tempted to take this verse as a license to sin (1Pet 2:16) should consider the seriousness of the context. The bar of righteousness is set very high; not even the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees is sufficient! And breaking even the least commandment means being grouped with the least in the Kingdom. So no Christian should ever take this verse to think that God will overlook his disobedience. Rather, this verse describes those people who, for various reasons, are not fully aware of a particular commandment of Christ. It is similar to the sin not unto death that John speaks about (1John 5:16-17). The person who knows what is right but does not do it will be judged severely (James 4:17; Mat 21:28-32).
Do and teach them. See James 1:22; Mat 7:24; Luke 6:46.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The Pharisees were famous for requiring strict adherence to the numerous laws of the Old Testament. They even added regulations and ceremonies for sabbath keeping, ritual washings, fastings, sacrifices, tithes, etc. However, they often invented ways to circumvent the laws that they did not want to keep, and Jesus reproached them for their hypocrisy (Mat 23:23-35; Rom 2:17-24; Mat 15:9). The Jews of Jesus’ day trusted in their genealogy and their works of righteousness for entrance into the presence of God, yet Jesus says their righteousness was not enough! How could this be? The Pharisees were the most religious and righteous people in the world, and not all of them were hypocrites (remember Saul of Tarsus). The issue is that every man has sinned and so is unrighteous. Works of righteousness can never undo earlier acts of unrighteousness. That is why man needs a Savior and that is why Jesus came to the world. The death of Christ empowers Him to take away man’s acts of disobedience (John 1:29) and wash his soul from every spot of sin (Rev 7:14).
This statement is a prelude to what follows, a remarkable passage of comparisons and re-establishments of select Old and New Covenant laws. In each case an OC law is taken and established to a higher degree of righteousness (Mat 6:33; John 16:8), usually by extending its sphere of application beyond the physical actions of a man and into the spiritual core of his being. This new teaching of Jesus perfectly corresponds with the nine Blesseds and demonstrates again that while the Old Covenant designed to change/direct a man’s integrity by regulating his outward actions, the New Covenant designs to change/direct a man’s integrity by changing his inner being first. The Old worked from the outside to the inside, but the New works from the inside out. See my note on verse 1.
21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
Thou shalt not kill. The sixth of the Ten Commandments, and the most serious of all Old Testament sins if judged by its prescribed punishment, a murderer was to be put to death. This is the most difficult law to reconcile with the history of Israel, who often slew her enemies at God’s direction. The Old Testament is filled with stories of death matches and killings. The Protestant and Catholic approach is to qualify the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill without good cause.” Under that interpretation, taking a human life in self-defense, or in waging “just war,” or in police action, is permissible for Kingdom Christians – wherefore they cite the Old Testament (ie, Ex 22:2).
Anabaptists and other peace churches categorically reject that idea, having no need to defend an old definition of the commandment. They cite the many examples and teachings of Jesus that are incompatible with any kind of killing or retaliation (Rom 12:21), and they answer the Old Testament example of God’s people killing their enemies by pointing out that here Jesus is changing the Law of the Old Covenant and fitting it to the New Covenant. These notes have pointed out that the Old Covenant was primarily a physical and temporal Kingdom. Thus, in addition to mandating structures and laws of worship, it also had civil laws and a judiciary, as well as systems of rule and government. In contrast, the New Covenant is primarily spiritual in nature. It is a Kingdom within you that has no need for politics, society and government. Jesus expanded each of the Ten Commandments and adapted them for application in this new spiritual Covenant.
The right to take human life has never been given to Man, even in the Old Testament. It was God’s decision. And at the very foundation, that is the meaning of Thou shalt not kill (1John 3:15-16). God did command Israel to kill (according to His all-wise, all-knowing counsel), but He has never commanded the Church to kill or punish evildoers. That responsibility was not passed on to the New Testament churches, whether to its leaders, or to her individual members. We say this without possibility of argument, for not only is the NT entirely silent on any such arrangement, it teaches the very opposite: Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you (Luke 6:27). See complementary note on Mat 5:44. The command to not kill is a fundamental, unchanging moral law that is here re-established to a higher degree in the NT because of Christ’s new Covenant with Man.
22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
It was said by them of old time…but I say unto you. This pattern will continue until the end of the chapter, six times in all, as Jesus takes an Old Testament Law and expands it for application in the New Testament. The rule of Christ goes well beyond, Thou shalt not kill to outlaw anger, hatred and ridicule of a fellow man. Those were the causes of the very first murder recorded in the Bible and they spring from the same evil root. Hatred and murder are equals in 1John 3:15.
Many ancient manuscripts do not contain the phrase, without a cause, nor is it found in the quotes of early church writers. It is doubtful that Jesus was permitting the exercise of anger “for a good reason.” If someone steals my cloak or does not return a borrowed item, am I justified in expressing anger? The rest of Scripture would judge the answer to be “no.” A man’s anger does not comport with God’s righteousness (James 1:20), and the Christian is everywhere commanded to put off anger, wrath, malice (Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; 1Pet 2:1). There may be a place for “righteous anger” (or passion) that does not result in calumny, violence, pride, etc (Eph 4:26), but typically anger is an emotional response to a personal wrong, and such anger will be rewarded with hell fire, if it is not followed by sincere repentance.
My paraphrase translation: “Whosoever is angry with his brother will stand before the judgment for it. We know that anyone who scoffs and calls his brother an empty-head is taken to the Sanhedrin, but whosoever in hatred calls him a fool is in danger of hell fire.”
So in addition to wicked actions, in the New Covenant even a man’s words, thoughts, inner emotions and motives will be judged! Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the Day of Judgment (Mat 12:36). Paul calls the willfully ignorant Christian, thou fool (1Cor 15:36), but not in anger. Do not hyper-literalize this verse such that only the word “fool” is to be avoided. There are many other words and phrases just as worthy of judgment. Do not forget that the attitude is what counts. Many commentators innovate, wriggle and squirm around these verses, trying to make them less strict and serious. The honest man of love who believeth all things as written will rejoice in the truth (1Cor 13:6-7).
Hell fire. The Greek word is gehenna, which always refers to eternal hell (Mat 5:29; Mark 9:47; Luke 12:5). Note that the council and hell fire are set in parallel and yet are in no way equivalent terms. For that reason I think the statements concerning Raca and Fool are set to form another comparison between the Covenants. See my paraphrase translation above. The sentence has three parts, the first being the principle and the last two acting as supporting examples. For it is clear that while judgment and hell fire are equivalents, the council is not.
23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
Sins related to anger cover large areas and reach deeply, even to the very soul of Man and sins of the spirit: anger, malice, hatred, jealousy, bitterness, unforgiveness, resentment, etc.
“Don’t come to worship God if you have unresolved relationship problems with your fellowman,” Jesus says. “Take care of those issues first; forgive, be reconciled, clear yourselves of these sins and then go into the house of God to worship.” This agrees with the Lord’s Prayer, Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors (Mat 6:12). The picture is drawn from Jewish life, and describes a man approaching the altar with his sacrifice and already handing it over to the priest when suddenly he remembers an unresolved conflict, perhaps an unforgiving attitude he has with another. Should he go ahead and give the offering to the priest and then go be reconciled, or stop all and first be reconciled? Jesus answers the question again in Mark 11:25-26.
25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.
This illustration, perhaps, continues under the headline of, Thou shalt not kill and the underlying sins of the spirit: anger, malice, hatred, unforgiveness, etc. Courts, attorneys and judges are a sure recipe for lying, slander, more anger and hatred, and sometimes murder. Better to be taken advantage of then find yourself wallowing with the pigs in the mud. Jesus advice, and coming from Him we know it is true, is to agree with your adversary without going to court, even if it that means paying more than is right (Mat 5:40-41). It is unlikely that Jesus gave this as an rigid rule, but rather a generally true illustration. In the U.S., some lawsuits are unavoidable, yet sometimes it is better to throw yourself at the mercy of the judge rather than pay the exorbitant demands of a greedy adversary. In general and for the best and quickest emotional healing, agree with thine adversary quickly. Resolve your disagreements with fellowman and put them behind you without malice or an unforgiving attitude.
Somewhat surprisingly, many commentators see a different meaning here, on the lines of: “Don’t come to God with unforgiven sin, but agree with your Adversary quickly and accept His terms immediately at His price lest He deliver you into eternal prison requiring the impossible payment of the uttermost farthing.” This, of course, is simply representative of the general Protestant difficulty with applying the principles of Christ’s sermon in their world view. The Anabaptist, armed with the knowledge that there are two very separate kingdoms on this earth, encounters no complication at all with Christ’s words.
27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
The seventh Commandment restricted sexual relations to married couples. In keeping with the spiritual nature of the New Covenant, Jesus requires that the inner self be cleansed too. Lustful thoughts and imaginations, pornography and sensual literature stain the heart of man with evil impulses that often become evil actions (Mat 15:19). The Law of Christ will purify a man’s way beginning within. Although he lived during the OT period, Job knew that this was true (Job 31:1; Ps 119:9). Sexual lust is also condemned in 2Peter 2:14 and 1John 2:15-17.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.
While these two verses may stand in truth on their own, they are especially important in the present context of lust (v28). The Christian must take whatever action is necessary to avoid committing sin, even to the point of cutting off those members of his body that he cannot control! Not a literal amputation, but voluntary, self-inflicted removal of the body from evil situations. Example: if you have a problem with drunkenness, avoid those areas that sell liquor. If you are tempted with pornography, avoid those places in which it is available. If you cannot control your cellphone, get rid of it. Cut off from yourself those areas that tempt you to sin. Deny yourself things that you cannot control; avoid those actions that create wrong desires. It is a serious step, but remember the terrible alternative: It is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell (gehenna), the place of eternal damnation (Mat 5:22) and ever-burning lake of fire (Rev 20:15).
There are accounts of well-meaning persons who have literally plucked out an eye and cut off a hand. They have missed the intent of this Law altogether. Literally plucking out even both eyes will not automatically cleanse one’s thought life. The Apostle wrote, “Put to death the members of your body that wish to commit immoral acts” (Col 3:5, Rom 6:12-14). As in His many parables and illustrations, Jesus here gives a striking example of this important command and He repeats it in Mat 18:7-9. It is sometimes appropriate to stand and resist the devil (James 4:7), but in other occasions it is better to flee fornication (1Cor 6:18). In other words, sometimes drastic measures are required to keep oneself pure from sin. Never has this principle been more important than in the present day.
31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
The Old Testament permitted divorce and re-marriage with certain restrictions and in spite of it not being God’s good plan for mankind. Yet, because the people’s hearts were so hardened unto easy divorce (Mat 19:8), the Mosaic Law allowed a writing of divorcement. Once again, Jesus’ rule will make the New Covenant stricter and more righteous!
In the Mosaic law, only men were allowed to initiate a divorce, but then as now, women held the power of pressuring their husbands and divorce was very common in the Old Testament period. The law of divorce did provide a certain protection for the woman’s place in a marriage, for it prohibited a man to remarry his original wife after writing her a bill of divorcement (Deut 24:4). Thus, the man had better not act rashly. There was no going back once the bill of divorcement was enacted.
In the time of Christ, there were two interpretations of the law of divorce as found in Deut 24:1-4. Shammai Jews said that a man could only put away his wife if she had committed adultery, while Hillel Jews took a much more liberal interpretation and allowed divorce for any reason. Actually, the Old Testament rule on divorce could not have been based on adultery, for adulterers were supposed to be stoned (Lev 20:10).
Jesus changed the rules concerning marriage and divorce in three key points. The Old Covenant permitted the husband to divorce his wife (Deut 24:1) and allowed both partners to remarry whoever they wanted (Deut 24:2), but it denied any reconciliation of divorced partners (Deut 24:3-4). In direct contrast, the New Covenant forbids divorce on all grounds saving for porneia, offers no condition for remarriage (Mat 5:32), and petitions in favor of reconciliation between divorced partners (1Cor 7:10-11). These differences in the application of law between the Covenants are, I believe, directly derived from the true moral definition of marriage (Mat 19:4-6), which has never changed since it was first given: “One man and one woman for life” (Gen 2:24). Jesus clearly teaches the true expression of marriage, while the Old Covenant worked upon a provisional expression due to the hardness of the Israelites.
The symbolism of the Christian marriage bond to the relationship of Christ and the Church is evident in the New Testament (Eph 5:22-33), and the rule of no divorce is very consistent with that image. The marriage of Christ to His chosen bride, the true and pure Church, will never be annulled by a bill of divorcement from God. Nevertheless, divorce permitted under the Old Covenant yet disallowed under the New mirrors God’s action in putting away the unfaithful first wife (the Jews). Also consistent in the imagery of Christ and His Bride is the encouragement for reconciliation of estranged partners, for Christ stands ever ready to receive back the repentant sinner. It all corresponds perfectly with the true rule for marriage: One man and one woman for life. And perhaps the key reason that God did not allow marriage partners to be reconciled under the Old Law is to protect that symbolism. Where divorce is permitted, there should be no reconciliation of prior partners for that would signify multiple gods, or idolatry. Remarriage prohibited in the Old Covenant and yet permitted in the New is also consistent with the present conditions of those two covenants, for while no man can return to God by keeping the old Law, every man by keeping the new Law of Christ may return to Him.
Nevertheless, there are some scholars that argue for the continuance of Moses’ command that divorced persons must not “remarry” each other. This is wrong both Scripturally and logically:
- There is only one marriage that God recognizes: when a man and woman pledge themselves and are joined in one flesh. According to Christ’s own words, every other union is adulterous. It is not a marriage in God’s eyes.
- The divorce provision in Deut 24:1-5 was not part of God’s perfect will, nor was it in conformity with His stated moral law. It was made necessary because of rampant divorce within the nation of Israel (Mark 10:3-5). From the beginning the will of God for marriage is “One man, one woman, for life.”
- It is clear that in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gives us a new commandment concerning divorce and remarriage, one that even His disciples found very difficult to accept (Mat 19:9-10). Jesus is abrogating Moses’ law for the non-changing moral law of God.
- The Apostle Paul states unequivocally that those who have separated must remain unmarried or be reconciled to their first and rightful partner (1Cor 7:11).
32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
The teaching of this verse would be ever so simple except for one phrase that has given license to every interpretation imaginable. “Anyone who divorces his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery.” Except for this one phrase, nowhere else does the New Testament allow for any legitimate excuse for divorce. Those of us who believe the New Testament will never give conflicting doctrine will seek the truth honestly and reverently. In my opinion, the answer is not so difficult if we simply and objectively study the meaning of that phrase. The best commentator on Jesus’ words was the Apostle Paul, who strongly disallows divorce without comment of adultery (1Cor 7:10-15). Those who think that Christ does allow divorce in the event of adultery must somehow explain why His disciples thought His teaching was so terribly difficult to accept (Mat 19:9-10), when it was absolutely no different from the Pharisees’ own majority view on the matter! On the other hand, we would expect Jesus to more righteously establish the Old Testament law of divorce, for that is His pattern in the Sermon on the Mount.
Saving for the cause of fornication. The Greek word is porneia, which is not adultery, nor is it translated adultery anywhere in the New Testament. The Greek word for adultery is moichao, and appears in this very verse: “Whoever divorces his wife, except for porneia, causes her to commit moichao.” The word porneia carries a more general meaning: fornication, harlotry, incest. It is extremely unlikely that porneia refers to adultery, and those translations which so render it do so erroneously. If Jesus had meant adultery, then He surely He would have used the appropriate and common Greek word (and one He had just used). Many conservative scholars (Ryrie, Laney) believe porneia is referring to the Jewish laws against marriage between close relatives (Lev 18:6-18). This corresponds exceptionally well in context with Jesus’ complete teaching on the subject in Mat 19:3-12. It also explains Matthew’s account of John the Baptist losing his head for telling Herod it was unlawful for him to marry his brother’s wife (Mat 14:4). Saving for the cause of fornication means that, in Herod’s case, he must put away his unlawful wife. The “exception clause” does apply. And finally, this goes hand in glove with the concept of marriage as a type of Christ and the Church, with a betrothal period that corresponds to this life, and the wedding at the entrance into heaven (Rev 19). Infidelity during this life after having promised oneself to Christ, results in NOT being at the great marriage feast.
Matthew wrote to the Jews, Mark to the Romans, and Luke to the Gentiles. The Romans had laws against polygamy but allowed a woman to divorce her husband. The Jews had opposite social customs. They practiced polygamy and did not permit a woman to divorce her husband. Additionally, the Jews had particular laws against marriage between close relatives, but the Romans had no formal laws governing inter-familial marriage, it being apparently universally condemned (1Cor 5:1). Given their intended audiences, it is certainly significant that Mark gives the case of a woman divorcing her husband (Mark 10:12) while Matthew does not, and this provides a likely reason why Matthew gives the case of divorce for incestuous marriage while Mark and Luke do not.
The usage of porneia in Act 15:20 is another significant proof of this definition. Even a superficial reading leaves one wondering why fornication should be in that list. Surely fornication was just as wicked when found among the Gentile Christians as it was among the Jews? Yet, when we understand porneia in the Jewish sense given above, all becomes clear. Food offered to idols, incestuous relationships, eating the meat of strangled animals and drinking blood were all seriously offenses against the Law for Jews. Gentiles however, with little knowledge of the Law, would not have known that these were highly offensive to Jews.
Another example of porneia in the context of incestuous relationships is 1Cor 5:1-5, where Paul reprimands a Jewish Christian for marrying his step-mother. Incest was not tolerated in Roman culture; it was a fornication that is not so much as named among the Gentiles (1Cor 5:1). Note also that porneia is singular in the present passage, while in more general passages it is plural (ex 1Cor 7:2).
In addition to incestuous relationships, saving for the cause of porneia would include pre-marital sexual relations. If a husband discovered that his new wife was not a virgin, but had played the harlot before time in her father’s house (Deut 22:21), he could divorce her. Even at weddings today the man and woman are asked to affirm that they are free from previous marriages, and if one were to lie, it would constitute grounds for immediate separation. So again, consistent interpretation says that porneia refers to sexual sins and conditions that exist before the marriage. To say it refers to an act of adultery after marriage would make a mockery of Jesus’ teaching on the subject. See below.
A common contemporary interpretation of this passage asserts that divorce and remarriage are one-time acts of sin that can be forgiven, and that any new relationship is accepted by God as a valid marriage. This is certainly a forced view with an ulterior motive, for if true it would again make the Apostles’ statement concerning marriage (Mat 19:10) without sensible foundation. Technically, it would also make remarriage to be the act of adultery, rather than the physical act, an odd idea indeed. Sin has consequences that salvation does not remove, and repentance is more than verbal vows. Is divorce and remarriage the only sin that needs no act of repentance? A murderer serving time in prison will not see his sentence revoked by asking for salvation, neither will a thief be free from his debt by trusting in Christ. A divorced and remarried couple commits adultery each time they have sexual relations, and the only way to stop the sin is to stop the action. As stated in the note on the previous verse, marriage is a spiritual type symbolizing the marriage of Christ to the Church. There is only one rightful marriage partner and that is the first love of vows. All other relationships are adulterous. In the case of death, it is easy to see why a second marriage is allowable – the rightful marriage partner is not in this life.
Some Greek scholars, wishing to find a loophole, say that the verb tenses in this verse indicate the adultery is not a continuing condition but a single event in the past. When pressed, however, they must admit that this is not entirely true, for in the Greek either punctiliar or continuing action could be intended. They choose punctiliar action because they wish it to be so, all while saying that they are basing that choice by context even when it is clear the grammar could be either. However, this argument completely misses the chief point, for Christ is neither making the adultery a one-time act in the past nor a continuing condition. Rather, He is clearly saying that each time a divorced and remarried couple comes together they commit adultery. The action is both punctiliar and continuing if and when the two have sexual relations. Any other interpretation ignores that the definition of adultery is having sex with an unlawful partner, and this holds true throughout an unlawful marriage. In other words, it is not the continuing state of unlawful marriage that forms the sin of adultery, but the periodic act of adultery within that marriage. The only remedy for such a situation is a return to one’s rightful partner, just as Paul describes in 1Cor 7:10-11.
Jesus explains more about divorce/remarriage in Mat 19:3-12; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18. See also 1Cor 7:10-15; 7:39-40; Rom 7:1-3.
33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
In these verses Jesus expands upon the Third Commandment: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain (Ex 20:7). Lying has always been a huge problem for the human race and the Jews were no exception. Oaths were a way of affirming the truthfulness of what a person said, but they had become so misused and regulated that the whole system was rendered without usefulness (Ecc 5:1-6). See Lev 19:12; Deut 5:11. Absolute truthfulness is the rule that Jesus requires.
Honesty is a commodity in short supply and Jesus re-establishes this law by completely overhauling the expression of this moral law. In these verses He is basically saying, “Don’t swear oaths attesting to the truthfulness of your speech, but rather be characterized by always speaking the truth: if you say, ‘yes’ then mean ‘yes’ and if you say, ‘no’ then mean ‘no’.” The usage of oaths can be seen in Heb 6:16, and James 5:12 essentially repeats the new rule.
The third commandment permitted oaths, but they were not to be made in vain. Jews swore by heaven, Jerusalem, the temple, the gold of the temple, and who knows what else (Mat 23:16-22). Evidently even after such dire oaths their promises were still empty, so instead of helping to fix the problem of untruthfulness, the swearing of oaths actually added to the sin when they didn’t comply.
In practice, the command to avoid all swearing and oaths surely refers to both ceremonial oaths before judges as well as personal oaths between men. Peter learned this the hard way (Mat 26:72). Nevertheless, the larger fact that vows were common and commanded under the Law but are entirely forbidden in the churches of the Kingdom makes for an interesting study.
38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
This is the famous law of retribution, the lex talionis, which the Greeks and Romans also used. Again the change that Jesus introduces in the New Covenant is a major one. The Old Covenant allowed a man to sue for damages and demand a “like for like” repayment for all wrongs (Ex 21:1; Lev 24:20; Deut 19:21), but in the Kingdom of Heaven, Christians are asked to suffer wrongdoings and evil without recompense. It is such a radical change, that most Protestant commentators disavow it entirely. They will typically admit that Jesus is teaching non-retaliation, but do not believe that He was denying the right to defend oneself against evil. Nor do they recognize that Jesus is here re-instituting the law in a radically new form, but think that He is simply emphasizing the heart issue by citing verses like Lev 19:17-18. However, the large fact is inescapable, for Jesus’ teaching is stunningly new and radical. Nobody practiced meekness and non-retaliation to this degree. Yet in the New Kingdom it makes sense, for Mercy pays what Justice requires. See note on verse 7.
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
The law of non-retaliation is so opposite the way of “self,” and so stunningly different from the Old Testament laws of retribution, that I can imagine Jesus’ listeners gasping in shock and looking about with their mouths hanging open. Yet intuitively the Christian realizes that this is the best way, and nobody better illustrated that than the Son of God on earth. The Apostles followed His example (Rom 12:17-21). And it is so logical in the new domain of God’s Kingdom! No longer does He have a single, chosen nation and government with all the necessary accompanying judicial rules. The new Kingdom is un-political, a-religious, and super-social. Whosoever will means that any man, woman, or child may become a citizen by following Jesus Christ (Mark 8:34-35). The Old Covenant laws of government, society and religion have no place in a Kingdom without a selected government and society. They have been fulfilled in Christ (Mat 5:17).
Kingdom-Christians live in a society as ambassadors and citizens of another country (2Cor 5:20; Heb 11:16; Eph 2:19; Php 3:20). While obeying the laws of the governments, their first allegiance is to the law of Christ. For many, the most difficult rule in this charter is the law of non-retaliation, but note how naturally it flows from the principles and precepts found herein, beginning with the Blesseds (blessed are the meek, the peacemakers, the persecuted), and followed by the new expression of, Thou shalt not kill. It is not possible to be characterized by these beatitudes and be involved in vengeance and taking human life.
Christians who support their governments militarily and politically end up pointing guns at each other across the battlelines of war. They are literally killing their real fellow-citizens by obeying the rule of some earthly kingdom. That is a seriously incongruous picture. The secondary scenario may be even worse, killing a non-Christian and forever depriving him of the possibility of salvation. In the Old Testament, those were matters that God decided and communicated directly to prophets and kings, but in the Kingdom of Christ, God has established a new standard based upon love, kindness and self-sacrifice. It is very different from the Old, and yet has been far more effective! A killing Christian is a contradiction of terms.
On a personal note, I once found myself explaining the principle of the two Kingdoms and Christ’s rule of non-retaliation to a good Protestant friend in Chile who had always been taught to stand and fight for one’s country. I was surprised to find no common agreement at all with him, and not even compassion for a fellow-Christian from his denomination in Argentina. No, if the Argentinians were to start a war with Chile, he would have no problem killing members of his own church denomination! Just a few weeks later, I had virtually the same conversation with a very nominal Catholic. As I explained the Bible verses at play and the obvious principles that fell out, I watched his impassive expression for clues as to what he was thinking and to see if it was making any sense at all to him. He listened quietly and suddenly said, “You know, I never could figure out why Christians go to war and kill people, it just doesn’t seem very….Christian!”
Resist not evil. Most Protestants say this law applies only on the personal level and that good Christians will fight for their countries’ interests. Jesus gives no hint that is true. Unlike the law of divorce, there isn’t even an exception clause! Intuitively this idea should strike any honest-thinking Christian as wrong. How can we as Christians expect to advance Christ’s Kingdom by fighting and killing the very ones we are called to win (John 18:36)? Forced conversions are no conversions at all. The true Kingdom of Christ is never advanced militarily, a fact that Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli and many others of the Reformers never learned.
Non-retaliation does not stand on its own as a unique concept, but is firmly based upon the law of Love, the great Second Commandment (Mat 22:39). It puts others ahead of oneself, rates their needs more important than self-defense, and it recognizes the value of the soul above the value of personal rights. While the word non-retaliation sounds negative, defensive, and even an act of surrender, in practice it is not. It is pro-active, an offensive strategy that often ends up winning the battle! Many times, non-retaliation has broken the strongest heart and taken down the most hardened enemy, for this kind of “suffering love” is perhaps the powerful witness of all. It is the active message of the Cross, where Jesus refused to defend Himself and laid down His life.
Obviously, resist not evil is not a blanket statement for all topics and times. We are called to resist Satan and the forces of darkness. The chief concept here is that we do not resist evil by returning evil, but we return good for those evils we experience.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
The subject of litigation amid hatred and vengeance was already addressed in Mat 5:25-26, where Jesus says that every effort should be made to avoid going to court at all. Again, a meek and non-retaliatory spirit is in order. Resist not evil. It is better to suffer wrong than to argue for your rights in a court room. Nevertheless, I don’t think Jesus is advocating that you offer the judge to give up your shirt also, but rather that you fully comply with what the judge requires. The picture is meant to contrast with the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth rule of the OT. “Don’t begrudge what is just, if you have wronged someone, give even more than what is only required by law.”
The picture of being compelled to walk a mile appears to be drawn from the right and practice of Roman soldiers in Israel of pressing into service any local man who happened to be passing by to carry his equipment for one mile. The proud Jews hated this practice but had no choice but to obey. An example is Simon of Cyrene, who was compelled to carry Jesus’ cross (Mat 27:32). It again calls the Christian to a life of giving and loving others. The NASB reads shirt and coat in the place of coat and cloke. Luke 6:29 reverses the two.
42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
The parallel passage in Luke 6:30-38 adds that the one who gives generously will be rewarded generously. The Old Testament law also required a giving hand (Deut 15:7-10), but the Israelites had found many ways to avoid that distasteful rule. They would say that it applied only to a fellow Jew, or that they had given their alms to the Temple, etc. And at the foundation, the idea of freely giving is incompatible with the lex talionis.
The Christian is a steward of God’s money, that is, the money that God has given him. Use it to benefit the Kingdom! As in most of Jesus’ teaching and parables, a hyper-literal keeping of the text is possible….but would miss the heart of the commandment. Jesus has been contrasting the Old law of retribution to the New law of non-retaliation and this verse is a further expression of the latter. The law of retribution required that wrongs be repaid like for like. The law of non-retaliation requires forgiveness and suffering, not avenging our wrongs, but letting God be the avenger (Rom 12:19-21).
Let us keep the spirit of the law and not the letter. If a criminal asks for a murder weapon, we would never give him one! If you know the person who is asking for money will only use it to support his drug habit, don’t give it to him! Buy him a meal, clothes or a taxi ride, but giving him cash is not helping the Kingdom. Be a steward of God’s money.
On a separate note, it is good for a needy person in the church to ask for help rather than expect to be noticed and given money. That frees those with better means to give without their generosity being evil spoken of, and the needy person is blessed in admitting his need and accepting assistance.
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
If Jesus’ listeners were astonished at His new doctrine, what He now advocates must have completely floored them! Even today many doubt that Jesus actually means for us to love your enemies,…do good to them that hate…and persecute you. Society cannot exist in such a climate, they say, for evil-doers will rise unchecked to terrible powers of wickedness. We would point out that history shows evil-doers will rise unchecked in a lex talionis world too. Think Hitler, Stalin, and the cruel Roman emperors of long ago. That, however, is a completely different realm anyway. Jesus is not speaking to governments, but to individuals who choose to join His everlasting Kingdom. The Kingdom and the State are two separate domains whose appropriate intersection is controlled by Christ’s laws and commands. Dual-citizenship is not legal in secular countries of the world, so make your choice of Kingdoms now.
The command to love one’s enemies is not surprising to those of us who believe the Beatitudes are for today. Blessed are the meek…the peacemakers…the merciful. Those attitudes naturally should be expected to extend to actions such as, Do good to them that hate you. Probably no doctrine was so unanimously held by the early church writers as non-retaliation. For the first 300 years of church history, all early texts show that war and killing were denounced by the Christian church. The change began when the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and not only reversed the state-mandated persecutions of Christians but made it politically and socially advantageous to be a Christian. The marriage of Church and State has had serious repercussions for the pilgrim church from that time forward. The picture in Rev 17:1-6 is an astonishing prophecy of that very fact.
Amazingly, some otherwise well-intentioned Christians believe that in war you can love your enemies and still kill them. “God is love and yet He kills people,” they say. But the comparison between God and man is entirely inappropriate, for the all-wise Creator of the universe is all-sovereign. There are many things He may do that we may not. As a pointed example, vengeance is God’s responsibility, not man’s (Rom 12:19). The error in this line of reasoning is self-evident and equal to the Pharisees negating unpopular Scriptural commands by using other Scriptures.
We have said often in these notes that the New Covenant principles of rule are outside the domain of government and politics. As citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven, Christians are to live by the law of non-retaliation, but governments of the world continue in their God-ordained responsibilities to check evil-doers (Rom 13:1-4). The Christians’ call to live a different rule should not be made to hinder the government’s rightful duties.
And yet, a hyper-literal interpretation of the rule of non-retaliation could even aid evil-doers in their sins, and that is clearly wrong and harmful. Some well-meaning people have fallen into this error, and refuse to report crimes of burglary, drunkenness and violence to the authorities. They are aiding the criminal in his sin and exposing others to the risk of possible wickedness. Prison is not that bad. Many have testified to receiving Christ within its walls. Refusing all assistance in the carrying out of justice on the grounds of following Christ’s law of non-retaliation subverts the intent and spirit of the law. That fact however, cannot be used to release the Kingdom-citizen from the law of non-retaliation when working for the State. His first allegiance is to the laws of Christ’s Kingdom. It is absurd to think that any human institution’s rule of law may negate Christ’s law. Nevertheless, many Christians try to use this as an escape clause, joining the military and taking human lives at the will and command of the state. It is confusion.
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
If we seriously want to be counted as children of the Father, we should seriously follow the rules He has set forth for His children. Many are duped into thinking that heaven will be filled with children who apparently do not love Him! Those that keep His words are the ones that love Him (John 14:23); they are keeping His commandments and remain in His love (John 15:10). Otherwise they are cut off and burned (John 15:6).
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
Christ calls His followers to a higher level of love, a supreme love that the world cannot know. It is a love in action and not one of words.
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Be ye perfect. At the end of this new and lofty doctrine, Jesus encourages His followers to put them into practice. Luke 6:36 has it, Be ye merciful as your Father also is merciful. The difference is not great, for mercy is the theme of Jesus’ new teaching. Not the justice of the lex talionis, but the mercy of loving one’s fellowman. Obviously, full perfection is not attainable by Man. If it were, Christ’s perfect life and sacrificial death would not have been necessary. His work alone can make us perfect. The Greek word carries the idea of “maturity, complete, perfect.”