Matthew 5

Mt 5:1 Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him,

Chapters 5-7 contain the widely known and loved Sermon on the Mount. It is one of five long discourses by Christ found in Matthew, the others being Mt 9:35-10:42 13:1-52 17:24-18:35; and Mt 23:1-25:46. The Sermon on the Mount does not present the way of salvation but the way of righteous living for those who are in God’s family, contrasting the new Way with the “old one” of the scribes and the Pharisees. For the Jews of Christ’s day this message was a detailed explanation of “repent.” {Mt 3:2 4:17} It was also an elaboration of the spirit of the law. {Mt 5:17,21-22,27-28} For all of us it is a detailed revelation of the righteousness of God, and its principles are applicable to the children of God today.’ (Ryrie)

The Sermon on the Mount is:-

1. The longest record discourse of Jesus.
2. Formal, rather than occasional.
3. Stands at the threshold of the NT.
4. A manifesto of the kingdom of heaven, and an agenda for the Christian life. It defines the quality of their witness, goodness, piety, ambition, relationships, and commitment.

It ‘is probably the best-known part of the teaching of Jesus, though arguably it is the least understood, and certainly it is the least obeyed.’ (Stott)

There are those -especially non-Christians – who imagine that they live by the Sermon on the Mount. They need to be asked if they have ever carefully read it.

See Interpretations of the Sermon on the Mount.

He went up on a mountainside – There is a possible parallel here with Moses, who went up Mount Sinai to receive the law. If so, then Jesus becomes the new Moses, and the Sermon on the Mount the promulgation of a new law.

Mt 5:3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

vv3-12 – The Beatitudes. They are pronouncements of blessing. Blessing is the smile of God’s favour. ‘It is a popular conception that if only we had wealth, absence of sorrow and suffering, unrestricted gratification of appetite and were kindly treated by all – that would be blessedness indeed. But Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount reversed this entirely.’ (J.O. Sanders)

Indeed, the Beatitudes stand in almost total opposition to popular opinion: ‘Happy are the self-confident’; ‘Seek pleasure and fun’; ‘Look after number one’:-

• Happy are the pushy, for they will get on in the world.
• Happy are the hard-nosed, for they never let life hurt them.
• Happy are they who complain, for they will get their own way in the end.
• Happy are the blase, for they never worry over their faults.
• Happy are the slave drivers, for they get results.
• Happy are the streetwise, for they know their way around.
• Happy are the troublemakers, for they make people take notice of them.
• Happy are those who look after ‘number one’, for they will get more than their fair share.

The Beatitudes of Jesus are simple, yet startling; direct, yet disturbing. They tell us that the experiences we are most anxious to avoid, are the very ones which promote our bliss.

They describe, not 8 types of people, but an 8-fold description on one person, the citizen of the kingdom of God. ‘There is no thought that the disciple may choose in which of the beatitudes he will specialise.’ (J.O. Sanders) The same writer points out that in an age of activism it is startling to find the Lord emphasising the passive qualities of character as he does here.

“The poor in spirit” – These are not (a) the uncharitable; (a) those with mock humility (Uriah Heep); (c) those with suppressed personalities; (d) the graceless.

‘Not those who are spiritually poor, that is, lacking in faith or love, but those who have a humble spirit and thus depend on God. {Mt 5:3} Luke’s parallel speaks simply of the poor. {Lu 6:20} That God has “chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to possess the kingdom” was regarded as a well-established fact.’ {Jas 2:5 REB} (Holman)

Two Gk words are translated ‘poor’. One means a pauper, the other means a beggar. The first describes the condition and circumstances of a person, the second his attitude: conscious of his need, he looks for help and gratefully accepts it. It is the second which is used here: these people are ‘those who have become convinced of their spiritual poverty. They have been made conscious of their misery and want’ (Hendriksen) See Ps 34:18.

‘”The way to deeper knowledge of God is through the lonely valleys of soul poverty and abnegation of all things. The blessed ones who possess the Kingdom are they who have repudiated every external thing and have rooted from their hearts all sense of possessing. These are the ‘poor in spirit’”‘ (Tozer)

Examples: (a) Laodicean church, Re 3:17; (b) The publican, Lu 18:13. Even Jesus counted himself ‘poor’ in this sense of his own depedency on his Father, Joh 5:30

Importance: (a) Christ has committed himself to no other way of dealing with men, except as sinners, Mt 9:13; (b) it disposes us to receive grace: ‘If the hand be full of pebbles, it cannot receive gold’ (Thomas Watson).

Application: (a) Am I poor in spirit? This is a fundamental quality in the Christian life: it will govern my actions and attitudes, and will determine my approach both to God and others. (b) How to become poor in spirit: look to God, his holiness and glory; look to Christ, compared with whom we must all see our utter sinfulness, Lu 5:8.

“The kingdom of heaven” – ‘The use of ‘kingdom of heaven’ in Matthew is certainly due to the tendency in Judaism to avoid the direct use of the name of God. In any case no distinction in sense is to be assumed between the two expressions (cf., e.g., Mt 5:3 with Lu 6:20).’ (NBD)

Mt 5:4 Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.

“Blessed are those who mourn” – This once again presents us with the paradoxical nature of the Beatitudes: “Happy are the unhappy!” The world has little time for those who mourn. It favours the happy, the optimistic. Mourners are either neglected, or offered plattitudes.

How different the gospel! Lu 6:25.

What is this mourning? – (a) not sinful mourning – a miserable temperament; a killjoy frame of mind; Jesus pronounces no blessing on the moody and morose; (a) not natural mourning – due to bereavement, illness, adversity, disappointment; although God often does use such things to draw us to him; (c) but spiritual, or godly mourning: see the context, vv3,6; 2Co 7:10; what is principally in mind here is mourning over our sin and spiritual failure.

Who has not reason to mourn of the slowness of his spiritual growth, the bondage of his besetting sin, the obstinacy of his rebellion against the will of God, the paucity of his spiritual attainment?

Why should we trouble ourselves about sin? -

(a) because sin is an act and a condition of hostility and enmity against God;

(a) because sin is an act of lowest ingratitude;

(c) because sin keeps us from enjoying so many good things: it is impossible to be truly happy while unforgiven.

“For they will be comforted” – As physical pain leads us to the doctor, so spiritual anguish leads us to Christ, 2Co 7:10.

What this comfort consists of:

• forgiveness, Mt 9:2;
• peace, Ro 5:1;
• contentment, 2Co 12:10;
• joy, Ps 126:5;
• ultimate blessedness, Re 7:17.

Mt 5:5 Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

“Blessed are the meek.” What ‘meekness’ is not: amiableness, servility, lack of opinions or principles. ‘Meekness is not an invertebrate virtue.’

Meekness is the opposite of haughtiness and self-assertion. Meekness is not weakness, but implies rather that strength is under self-control. The word was used of the breaking-in of horses, and carried the idea of controlled energy.

Examples:

• Abraham (permits the younger Lot to have first choice of land, so that there will not be ‘any quarrelling between you and me,’ Ge 13:8.
• Moses (‘Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth,’ Nu 12:3)
• David (with regard to Saul)
• Paul, 1Th 2:7 ‘We were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.’
• Christ, Mt 11:29 ‘I am gentle and humble in heart.’

The Revelation refers to the song of ‘Moses and the Lamb’, Re 15:3, strong, vigorous meekness being an outstanding characteristic of both. Both could blaze with righteous anger, and yet their strength was held on a leash.

Meekness then, is a humble and lowly view of ourselves, which results in certain attitudes and conduct towards others:-

• Godward: trust and obedience.
• Manward: the meek person is not proud or boastful, but humble, esteems others more than self, and is teachable. Not self-righteous, but sees the best in others. Not grabbing or envious, but is willing for others to have more than himself. Not sensitive about his own status or well-being, but is zealous for the honour and good of others. Not resentful or envious, but forgiving, returning evil with good.

Is this a tall order? Where does this meekness come from? See Ga 5:22.

Meekness is part and parcel of the Spirit’s work in regeneration. We see the futility and sinfulness of our own ways and turn to Christ for new life. Meekness is a natural result of this new estimation of ourselves, of God, and of other people.

To summarise: meekness is not weakness, but strength. See Jas 3:13,19???.

“They will inherit the earth” – Strange expression! Harks back to Ps 37:11, ‘The meek with inherit the promised land and enjoy great peace.’

In a sense, the meek are already inheriting the earth: ‘a man who is truly meek is a man who is always satisfied, he is a man who is already content.’ (Lloyd-Jones) Cf Phil 4:11ff. Because he puts God’s glory and the good of others before himself and his comfort, he is satisfied with little, and knows that God will give him all that he really needs. He is seeking God’s kingdom and righteousness, and all these other things are being added unto him.

But this has a future reference too. We shall reign with Christ, and enjoy all things in heaven. ‘So that all the blessedness of heaven above, and all the blessings of earth beneath, are the portion of the meek.’

Mt 5:6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness” – The world says, ‘Seek happiness’. But those who seek happiness will never find it. We are here taught that happiness is a by-product of righteousness. It is the same with a good reputation: {cf Pr 22:1} if our prime aim is to persuade others to think well of us, we will fail miserably. A good reputation is the reward of a good life; happiness is the reward of a righteous life.

‘Righteousness’ – what is means to do God’s will and to act rightly is a key theme in the Sermon on the Mount, Mt 5:6,16,17-20,21-48 6:1-18,33 7:12,13-14,16-21,23-27. It could well be translated as ‘justice’.

‘It would be a mistake to suppose that the biblical word “righteousness” means only a right relationship with God on the one hand and a moral righteousness of character and conduct on the other. For biblical righteousness is more than a private and personal affair; it includes social righteousness as well. And social righteousness, as we learn from the law and the prophets, is concerned with the promotion of civil rights, justice in the law courts, integrity in business dealings and honour in home and family affairs. Thus Christians are committed to hunger for righteousness in the whole human community as something pleasing to a righteous God.’ (Stott)

What is righteousness? (a) Not just social justice and fair play: it more personal and spiritual than this; (b) It is an entire conformity to the mind and will of God; it is freedom from the guilt, power, and desire of sin; it is holiness; it is Christlikeness; (c) What a beautiful thing, yet how elusive! Cf Ps 14:3. The man of the Beatitudes knows he cannot achieve this himself; he knows he is ‘poor in spirit’, and he mourns over his depraved condition. But his very despair leads him to seek help from God: he is learning meekness. No amount of good deeds will make him right with God, cf. Isa 64:6.

Into a hopeless and helpless situation steps God’s Son in his glorious and sovereign grace. He comes to do for us what we could never do for ourselves. Isa 53:11 Jer 23:6 Php 3:9.

This righteousness is twofold: (a) it is imputed; we are justified; we are counted righteous, Ps 32:1 Ro 4:3; (b) it is imparted; we are sanctified; we are progressively made righteous.

What conditions does the Lord lay down so that we might be filled with these good things? He requires an appetite: not English peckishness, but starvation, cf the Prodigal Son, Lu 15:14-18. See also Ps 42:1 63:1 Joh 6:27.

This hungering and thirsting is (a) painful; (b) is satisfied by nothing but wholesome food; (c) leads to a singleminded pursuit of nourishment (keeps righteousness constantly in mind); (d) avoids all alternatives and distractions, and puts itself in the way of getting it (like Bartimaeus, Mr 10:46); (e) relishes the meal.

Remember that the Lord is ‘our righteousness’, Jer 23:6, so Jesus could have said, ‘Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for me.’

“They will be filled” – This satisfaction is (a) promised by God, Isa 41:17 Ps 107:9; (b) found in Christ himself, Joh 4:14 6:33ff.

The fulfilment is (a) immediate; (b) progressive; (c) final, Re 7:16.

Mt 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

We turn from our relationship to God to our relationship to others.

Blessed are the merciful – ‘”Merciful” embraces the characteristics of being generous, forgiving others, having compassion for the suffering, and providing healing of every kind.’ (Blomberg)

Here is the bliss of the compassionate. There is a danger of having a passion for righteousness which has no pity for those who have failed to attain it. Such righteousness is cold and unfeeling. Mercy, by definition, is exercised to the undeserving. It is a rare grace, little seen among non-Christians, and all too scarce amongst Christians too. The fallen nature tends naturally to criticism and retaliation, if only to cover over its own deficiencies.

Mercy is not just a feeling: it expresses itself in acts of mercy. It does not condone wrong, but attempts to put the best possible construction of ambiguous motives or conduct.

They will be shown mercy – There is a reciprocal relationship between receiving and giving mercy. The merciful “shall obtain mercy.” And we put ourselves in a perilous position if, having obtained mercy, we are reluctant to show it to others, Mt 18:23-25.

‘The person whose experience reflects these batitudes is conscious of his spritual bankruptcy, Mt 5:3, grieves over it, 5:4, and hungers and thirsts for righteousness, 5:6. He is merciful tward the wretched because he recognises himself to be wretched; in being merciful he is also shown mercy.’ (Carson)

The quality of mercy is not strain’d,

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven

Upon the place beneath:  it is twice blest;

It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.

-Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, act 4, scene 1

‘Am I merciful or supercilious to the wretched? Am I gentle or hard-nosed toward the downtrodden? Am I helpful or callous toward the backslidden? Am I compassionate or impatient with the fallen?’ (Carson)

Cf. Mic 6:8

Mt 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.

This beatitude closely mirrors Psa 24:3f. See also Heb 12:14.

“The pure in heart” – ‘In biblical imagery, the heart is the centre of the entire personality. Jesus’ assessment of the natural heart, however, is not very encouraging. Elsewhere in Matthew’s Gospel he says, “For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander,” Mt 15:19; cf. Jer 17:9 Ro 1:21 2:5.’ (Carson)

This is moral purity, not the outward, ceremonial purity that Jesus so consistently by-passed. Behind the word ‘pure’ lies the idea of being unadulterated, free from alloy, like pure gold or clean linen. The pure heart, then, is (a) Single and sincere; free from deceit and hypocrisy, Ps 86:11 Php 3:13. Stott: ‘How few of us live one life and live it in the open! We are tempted to wear a different mask and play a different role according to each occasion…Some people weave round themselves such a tissue of lies that they can no longer tell which part is real and which is make-believe.’ Nothing spoils relationships so much as deceipt and hypocrisy. (b) Obedient and faithful; free from sin and corruption, 1Pe 1:22 Re 22:14.

‘Because it is the heart which must be pure, this beatitude interrogates us with awkward questions like these: What do you think about when your mind slips into neutral? How much sympathy do you have for deception, no matter how skillful? For shady humour, no matter how funny? To what do you pay consistent allegiance? What do you want more than anything else? What and whom do you love? To what extent are your actions and words accurate reflections of what is in your heart? To what extent do your actions and words constitute a cover-up for what is in your heart?’ (Carson)

“They will see God” – ‘The vision of God is not a matter of optics, but or moral and spiritual affinity with him. Cleanness of heart brings clearness of vision. Sin fogs the heart and and God becomes invisible. There are moral conditions for spiritual vision.’ (J.O. Sanders)

‘With Christ, the fountain of all purity, dwelling in our hearts, the maintenance of a pure heart is no longer a tantalising mirage but a glorious possibility.’ (J.O. Sanders)

‘We are afraid that Heaven is a bribe, and that if we make it our goal we shall no longer be disinterested. It is not so. Heaven offers nothing that a mercenary soul can desire. It is safe to tell the pure in heart that they shall see God, for only the pure in heart want to.’ – C. S. Lewis in The Problem of Pain

‘The Scriptures are nowhere concerned with the theistic proof or proofs for the existence of God, such as are found throughout the history of philosophy and theology: first, because the knowledge of God in Scripture is essentially revelational, thus displacing the function of such proofs; second, because the knowledge of God’s being from the human side is everywhere intuitional; {cf. Mt 5:8 hence the immense scriptural data on hearing and seeing, which are intuitional terms} and third, because such a simple or abstract statement as “God is” cannot begin to carry all the weight necessary for a meaningful theology and religion.’ (Ramm, ISBE, art. ‘Apologetics, Biblical’) Ramm points out that Calvin’s emphasis was accordingly on the knowledge of God, rather than on the existence of God.

‘Before the plenary fruition of God in heaven, there must be something previous and antecedent; and that is, our being in a state of grace. We must have conformity to him in grace, before we can have communion with him in glory. Grace and glory are linked and chained together. Grace precedes glory, as the morning star ushers in the sun. God will have us qualified and fitted for a state of blessedness. Drunkards and swearers are not fit to enjoy God in glory; the Lord will not lay such vipers in his bosom. Only the ‘pure in heart shall see God.’ We must first be, as the king’s daughter, glorious within, before we are clothed with the robes of glory. As King Ahasuerus first caused the virgins to be purified and anointed, and they had their sweet odours to perfume them, and then went to stand before the king, Es 2:12, so must we have the anointing of God, and be perfumed with the graces of the Spirit, those sweet odours, and then we shall stand before the king of heaven. Being thus divinely qualified by grace, we shall be taken up to the mount of vision, and enjoy God for ever; and what is enjoying God for ever but to be put in a state of happiness? As the body cannot have life but by having communion with the soul, so the soul cannot have blessedness but by having immediate communion with God. God is the summum bonum, the chief good; therefore the enjoyment of him is the highest felicity.’ (Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity)

Mt 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

Blessed are the peacemakers – ‘Peace’ (heb. shalom’) is a comprehensive term covering healthy and harmonious relationships in all aspects of life.

Relationships break down, and when they do so there is a need for reconciliation. Be a peace-maker, not a trouble-maker.

Peace-making is not appeasement. God is the great peace-maker, but it cost him the life of his dear Son. So it may mean the giving or receiving of a rebuke, or the giving of an apology, or continuing estrangement until the other person offers reconciliation.

The evangelist is a peacemaker, Isa 52:7 Ro 10:15. But the scope of this beatitude is not limited to gospel peace-making. ‘The Christian’s role of peacemaker extends not only to spreading the gospel, but to lessening tensions, seeking solutions, ensuring that communication is understood.’ (Carson)

No wonder they will be called sons of God, for they are like God, and are God’s true ambassadors. In Jewish thought, the term ‘son of’ often carried the meaning, ‘partaker of the character of’ (cf. ‘son of a dog’) and so it is here. The peacemake reflects the character of God.

The greatest peacemaker is the Son of God himself. He is the Prince of Peace. ‘He makes peace with God and man by removing sin, the ground of alienation; he makes peace between man and man both by removing sin and by bringing men into a right relationship with God, Eph 2:11-22.’ (Carson)

Mt 5:10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness – Just as Christ was persecuted, so his followers will be as well.

This does not pronounce a blessing on all the persecuted. After all, some bring persecution upon themselves by their own offensive behaviour, 1Pe 3:14 4:14-15. There is no bliss in the persecution itself, ‘but in the compensations it brings, or the fruit it bears’ (J.O. Sanders). And it must be for righteousness’ sake: some religious persons seem to actively seek persecution as though the more people hate them, the more God will love them.

We live in a sinful and ungodly world. Therefore, we should expect righteous and godly behaviour to stir up ridicule, resentment, even hostility. But let us make sure that any persecution we suffer is because of righteousness. See Joh 15:18-20 Php 1:29 2Ti 3:12.

‘In persecution, earth is shut, but heaven opens; Antichrist threatens, but Christ protects; death enters, but immortality ensues; the world is taken from us, but Paradise is awarded; the life of time is quenched, but the life of eternity is accomplished.’ (Cyprian)

Mt 5:11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.”

When ‘persecuted because of righteousness’, believers should, (a) recall the past (“in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you”); (b) rejoice in the present (“blessed are you…rejoice and be glad”); and (c) remember the future (“great is your reward in heaven”). (See Brown, The Message of Nehemiah, 59).

Mt 5:12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

‘He never brings them into so low a condition that he does not leave them more cause of joy than sorrow.’ (Richard Baxter, The Saints’ Everlasting Rest, 37)

Mt 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.”

“You are the salt of the earth” – Salt acts inwardly, secretly, by direct contact.

William Barclay points out that there were three special qualities associated with salt in Jesus’ day. First, its whiteness was associated with purity. Likewise, the Christian is to be an example of purity. Second, it was used as a preservative to keep food from going bad. In the same way, the Christian’s influence should protect against moral corruption. Third, the most obvious quality of salt was that in lent flavor to bland foods-the way Christians are to add spice to a spiritually bland world.

When a Christian’s salt has lost its savor, too often he tries to save the world with pepper.

Danger of becoming ineffective, esp. by contamination, Jas 1:27 Ro 12:2.

Consider Christian influence at home, neighbourhood, work, education, arts, politics.

Stott notes that one of the areas of tension between the ‘now’ and the ‘not yet’ is in the social sphere, in the area of progress. ‘Already, we affirm God is at work in human sociey. This is partly in his “common grace,” as he gives the world the blessings of family and government, by which evil is restrained and relationships are controlled. But it is also through the members of his redeemed community, who maintain without compromise the alues of his knigdom. They must penetrate society, Jesus taught, like salt and light. It is legitimate to deduce from these models that Jesus intended his followers to nifluence the world for good. For both are effective commodities. They make a difference in the envoronment in which they are placed, salt hindernig decay and light dispelling drakness. In consequence there has been over the centuries, alongside social decay, measurable social progress – the greater availability of health care, the spread of literacy and education, the defence of human rights, improved working conditions, the abolition of slavery and the slave trade, and the protection of the weak and the vulnerable.

Not yet, however, has God created the promised “news heaven and…new earth, the home of righteousness,” 2Pe 3:13 Re 21:1. Not yet has the justice of the kingdom ousted all oppression, and the peace of the kingdom all violence. There are “wars and rumours of wars,” Mr 13:7. Not yet have swords been beaten in ploushares and spears into pruning hooks, Isa 2:4. The nations have not yet renounced war as a method of settling their disputes. Selfishness, creulty and fear continue.

So then, although it is right to campaign for social justice and to expect to improve society further, in order to make it more pleasing to God, we know that we shall never perfect it. Christians are not utopians. Although we know the transforming power of the gospel and the wholesome effects of Christian salt and light, we also know that evil is ingrained in human nature and human socieyt. We harbout no illusions. Only Christ at his second coming will eradicate evil and enthrone righteousness for ever. For that day we wait with eagerness.’ (The Contemporary Christian, 389f)

Mt 5:14 “You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.”

Light acts outwardly, visibly, by radiation. It functions are to reveal, to warn, to illuminate and to guide.

How hidden under a bucket: misplaced humility, alleged incompetence, fear of ridicule, fear of failure.

A city on a hill cannot be hidden - Possibly Jesus pointed out some city on the skyline as he spoke. Christians are set on the skyline. The church is to be a landmark. How noticeable is our witness, and how God-glorifying?

Mat 5:15  Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house.

Mt 5:16 In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.

‘Christianity is something which is meant to be seen. As someone has well said, “There can be no such thing as secret discipleship, for either the secrecy destroys the discipleship, or the discipleship destroys the secrecy.” A man’s Christianity should be perfectly visible to all men.’ (William Barclay)

E.J. Carnell was a scholar who was concerned to uphold orthodox theology. However, he rightly criticised ‘fundamentalist’ for many of their unchristian attitudes: ‘The fundamentalist often takes a magical attitude toward the Word of God. This attitude belittles the necessity of material righteousness in the soul-winner. Get the Word out – any manner will do – and God will see that his Word will not return void. This assumes that the responsibility for arousing conviction rests solely with the written Word. But the written Word says otherwise…A {Mt 5:16} prophet must speak, but he must speak with compassion. Example first, then precept. Unless kindness arouses a sense of fellowship, the Word of God will not arouse a sense of conviction.’ (The Case for Orthodox Theology, 123)

Mt 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

‘This long section is all on one theme, and it is important that its parts should not be interpreted in isolation from each other. The theme is Jesus’ ‘fulfilment’ of the law, which is expressed by general statements (17-20) followed by a series of six examples contrasting Jesus’ teaching with the accepted understanding of the OT law (21-47) and a concluding summary (48).’ (NBC)

‘Jesus essentially says, “Look, if you thought the law was tough, wait till you see this. If you really want to be my disciples, give me your hearts without reservation”‘ (IVP Commentary)

To fulfill them - ‘He will bring the law to its intended goal’ (Blomberg). Or, ‘to make fully known’, cf Col 1:25.

‘Since throughout Matthew’s story Jesus is portrayed as the true interpreter of God’s will as expressed in Scripture (cf. 12:13, 5, 7; 15:13-14;16:6, 12; 19:3-9; 22:23-46; 23:10), it would appear that “fulfilling” the “Law and the Prophets” necessarily includes revealing in word and deed the true intention of God’s will as preserved in Scripture. Fulfillment is therefore not to be seen in terms of a Pharisaic legalistic adhesion to the minutia of law keeping. In fact, Jesus’ interpretative agenda shifts the focus from the letter of the Law to the heart of the Lawgiver.’ (College Press)

When Jesus of Nazareth, the Carpenter’s son, began his public ministry, the event was not so much a breath of fresh air as a force ten hurricane. Here was an untried, untested, untrained teacher and miracle-worker, who was threatening to blow everything away, to turn everything upside down, to destroy everything that people had been used to. He seemed to entertain no doubts about himself. While all his rivals could do was quote ancient authorities at you, he would look you in the eye and say, ‘I tell you the truth’. We read, Mr 1:27, that ‘the people were all so amazed that they asked each other, “What is this? A new teaching – and with authority! He even gives orders to evil spirits and they obey him.”‘ He did things his own way. He persistently broke the Sabbath. He let his disciples pick ears of corn in the field, Mr 2:23, and it’s against the law to do work on the Sabbath! He healed a man with a shrivelled hand in the Sabbath, Mar 3:31ff, and you’re not allowed to do that! And then, ‘not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God’, Joh 5:18.

So what was he trying to do? Why had he come? To throw the past into the dustbin and make a completely new beginning? And what about the ancient Scriptures? Was he discarding them too?

People today sometimes ask similar questions. Surely, they say, the OT is redundant? It’s just a collection of unbelievable myths and legends, of irrelevant laws and meaningless rituals. The law, surely, has been superceded by grace. Isn’t that why Christ came, to abolish all that Old Testament stuff and to establish a completely new way? They might quote Joh 1:17: ‘For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.’

Jesus answer, now as it was then, is absolutely clear. ‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them.’ His attitude to the OT is: not abolition, but fulfilment. Not eclipse, but culmination. You can liken the OT to a partly-filled container of water. Jesus didn’t come to empty it, but to fill it up. You can liken the OT to the sketch of a picture. Jesus didn’t come to rub it all out, but to complete it.

Jesus’ Defence of the Old Testament. ‘Critics often say that when Christ defended the Old Testament, he was simply accommodating himself to prevailing religious opinion. But such a hypothesis offends the most patent evidence in the Gospels. Whenever religious tradition was inharmonious with the claims of the Old Testament, Christ defended the Old Testament…”Christ neither denies the existence of spirits in order to conciliate the Saducees; nor does he instruct the woman of Samaria in doctrines which opposed before the Jews…In a word, we find Christ quoting Moses and the prophets to friend and to foe; in the desert and in the Temple; at the commencement of his ministry and at its close; in exposition by acts, and exposition by doctrine – combining, on all occasions, the Old Testament with the new revelation as being conveyed by the same Spirit.”‘ (E.J. Carnell, The Case For Orthodox Theology, 38, quoting William Lee)

How Jesus Fulfilled the Scriptures

Jesus came, not to abolish the Law or the Prophets, but to fulfil them. But Jesus doesn’t leave at that. Not content with a general endorsement of the the OT Scriptures, he hammers his point home by saying, ‘Until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.’ The law, in Jesus’ view, is unmovable, unshakeable. While heaven and earth last, not the least part of it will pass away. Every minute detail must be carried out. ‘The smallest letter’ of the Hebrew alphabet is almost as small as a comma. ‘The least stroke of a pen’ is a tiny projection which distinguishes some Hebrew letters from others. Everything must be accomplished. Accomplished when? Well, as Jesus spoke, some things had already been accomplished (in his coming down from heaven to earth to be born in Bethlehem’s manger), some were being accomplished (in his earthly life and teaching), and some were yet to be be accomplished (in his death, resurrection, ascension, and glorious return). And all this according to God plan which he had been unfolding in the OT Scriptures.

We have seen so far then, that Christ endorsed the OT as a whole and in its detailed parts. And we need to ask: Do we have that same confidence in the OT as the word of God? A vital part of our trust in him, is our trust in those same Scriptures; Scriptures of which he said, ‘I didn’t come to abolish them, but to fulfil them…not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.’ We have also seen that Christ is the key to the OT; he unlocks its meaning. The Scriptures, he said ‘testify about me,’ Joh 5:39. If you go to your OT expecting to find Christ there, you will not leave disappointed.

Mt 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

“The smallest letter…the least stroke” - The smallest Hebrew letter is yodh, which looks like an apostrophe (‘). A stroke is a very small extension or protrusion on several Hebrew letters, which distinguish these letters from similar ones (like, in English, an R from a P). The Lord’s point is that every letter of every word of the OT is vital and will be fulfilled.’ (Ryrie)

Mt 5:19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

“Breaks” - From the same root as ‘abolish’ in v17. Not so much ‘disobeys’ as ‘sets aside’ or ‘repudiates’.

“The least of these” - The rabbis identified 613 commandments, of which 248 were positive, and 365 negative. They debated which were the most and least important, some of them considering De 22:6 to be the least weighty (‘If you come across a bird’s nest beside a road…and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young’. As to which was the greatest commandment, see Lu 10:27-28. Jesus referred elsewhere to ‘the more important matters of the law – justice, mercy and faithfulness’, Mt 23:23. Still, he asserts that none of God’s laws is to be repudiated.

“These commandments” - Probably the OT commandments (so France, who says that the word is only used in Mat to refer to the OT law, and Blomberg), but possibly those of the kingdom, which receives some prominence in these verses (Carson, Banks). In other words, they are the commands given in the Sermon on the Mount. Obedience to Jesus’ commands is also emphasised in Mt 28:18-20.

“and teaches others to do the same” - ‘In this passage Jesus also warns that teachers who undermine students’ faith in any portion of the Bible are in trouble with God. This text addresses not only obedience to the commandments but also how one teaches others (and teaches others to do the same; compare Jas 3:1). I have occasionally taught alongside colleagues who actively sought to undermine students’ faith in the name of “critical thinking;” sometimes they succeeded. Critical thinking is important, but it functions best with the firm foundation of the fear of God.’ {Pr 1:7} (IVP Commentary)

Mt 5:20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus says, “I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.” Here is some very bad news. The Pharisees and the teachers of the law were the experts. They read the law, they debated the law, and everyone could see that their observance of it was faultless. Now Jesus is telling his disciples that they must surpass all of this.

We do not need to look very far to discover the reason why the righteousness of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law needed to be surpassed. See Mt 23:1 ff on the difference between the righteousness of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, and the righteousness which Jesus requires. One is just for show. They other comes from the heart. One is a pretence, the other is based on an attitude of love and obedience to God. The righteousness which Jesus requires does not, as we have seen, set aside the OT law, but fulfils its true intent and purpose.

Jesus is about to show by means of six examples that this righteousness does not accord with the traditional interpretation of God’s law.

Mt 5:21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’”

v21, etc. “You have heard that it was said…but I tell you.” Jesus has just asserted, v20, “Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of God.” He now proceeds to give six examples of how the righteousness of Christ’s disciples must surpass that of the scribes and Pharisees. And there is a kind of refrain, itself occuring six times, “You have heard that it was said…But I say to you.” But what is Jesus saying here? Is he now rejecting and contradicting Scripture?

In answer, three vital things should be noticed. (a) Jesus has just said, ‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law of the Prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them.’ He isn’t likely to have completely changed his mind within two sentences, is he? (b) notice Jesus does not say, ‘It was written,’ but, ‘It was said.’ He is referring not so much to the words of Scripture themselves, but to the ways they have been misquoted or misinterpreted or misapplied by the Jewish teachers of the day. (c) in all six examples, Jesus does not subtract from the Law; he takes it further. Thus in the first example he does not say, “You have heard that is was said, ‘Do not murder’, but I say “Go ahead, kill anyone you like.” Rather, he says, “Don’t limit this commandment against murder too closely. You can break it simply by being angry with people.” It’s the same with adultery. You can break God’s command not only by your outward act, but also by your inward attitude. And similarly with divorce, with the taking of oaths, with revenge, and with love. The standards of the kingdom are in each case more demanding, more far-reaching, more radical than people have been led to believe. How radical? 5:48, “Be perfect…even as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Everybody needs to respond to this in one of two ways.

Firstly, if we take seriously Jesus’ teaching here, our first reaction is one of total self-despair. It simply cannot be done. The standard is unattainable. However respectable we manage to keep our outward behaviour, we know that festering in our hearts are thoughts and motives and attitudes which totally disqualify us from entering the kingdom of heaven. So let Jesus’ teaching here destroy any confidence you may have in your ability to reform yourself, to improve yourself, to recommend yourself to God. Let it lead you from the tattered rags of your own goodness, to the perfect goodness of Christ himself. What you cannot do for yourself, he has done for you. The righteousness that God demands, is a righteousness that God offers to you in Christ. Christ alone has perfectly obeyed the law of God. He alone has born the penalty that our disobedience deserves. He alone has purchased redemption, the forgiveness of our sins. So here is the first purpose of God’s law: to show us our need; to make us conscious of sin; to drive us to Christ. Ro 3:20-22 ‘No-one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin. But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.’

But, secondly, when we have found forgiveness and new life in Christ, God’s law still has a vital part to play. That law, and these lofty commands of Jesus, now become goals for us to strive towards, standards for us to set our sights on. Not out of raven fear, but out of love and gratitude. Ps 40:8 ‘I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.’ For this holiness of life is not some outward, mechanical, heartless conformity to a set of rules and regulations. It grows, rather, out of a living relationship with our heavenly Father, and with his Son, Jesus Christ our Saviour. It goes something like this: Col 3:1ff, ‘Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things. For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God…As God’s chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all togehter in perfect unity. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.’

That is what the Law and the Prophets were all about. That is why Jesus came. That is what the Lord calls each of us to today.

Mt 5:22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca, ‘ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

“The fire of hell” - The word translated “hell” is Geenna, or Gehenna, a place in the valley of Hinnom where human sacrifices had been offered {cf. Jer 7:31} and where the continuous burning of rubbish made it an apt illustration of the lake of fire. {Mr 9:44 Jas 3:6 Re 20:14}

Mat 5:23  “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you,

Mt 5:24 leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

“First be reconciled” - At the Keswick Convention in 1905, F.B. Meyer delivered an address on this text which was so powerful that people rushed out to make restitution, and the post office in Keswick ran out of postal orders!

Obedience to this command brings great blessing to the church. At a conference of pastors in South Vietnam, the Holy Spirit worked with great power. The climax of the meeting came when ministers and missionaries went to one another in confession and seeking reconciliation. The result was that, despite the continuing war, the Vietnamese Church doubled in three years. (J.O. Sanders)

‘The message given by Jesus and the apostles is resoundingly clear: whether our conflicts involve minor irritations or major legal issues, peace and unity are of paramount importance to God. Therefore, peacemaking is not an optional activity for a believer…Token efforts will not satisfy this command; God wants you to strive earnestly, diligently, and continually to maintain harmonious relationships with those around you.’ (Isaac Barrow)

Mat 5:25  “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison.

Mt 5:26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

Mt 5:27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’”

“Do not commit adultery” - ‘Jesus’ teachings expanded the Old Testament law to address matters of the heart. Adultery has its origins within, {Mt 15:19} and lust is as much a violation of the law’s intent as is illicit sexual intercourse. {Mt 5:27-28} Adultery is one of the “works of the flesh.” {Ga 5:19} It creates enmity with God, {Jas 4:4} and adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God. {1Co 6:9}

The New Testament associates remarriage after divorce and adultery. Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman. Divorce does not break the bond, so remarriage is viewed as adultery except in cases where unfaithfulness was the reason for the divorce. {Mt 5:32 Mr 10:11-12} The marriage bond is broken by death. {Ro 7:3 1Co 7:39}

Adulterers can be forgiven; {Joh 8:3-11} and once sanctified through repentance, faith, and God’s grace, they are included among God’s people.’ {1Co 6:9-11} (Holman)

Mt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

‘Jesus traces the adulterous act back to the lustful glance and thought, and says that it is there that the rot starts: it is there, therefore, that the check must be immediately applied. Otherwise, if the thought is cherished, or fed by fantasy, the commandment has already been broken.

‘Pope John Paul II excited some comment in 1981 by saying that a man could commit adultery in this sense with his own wife. Emil Brunner, in fact, had said something to very much the same effect over forty years before. But there is nothing outrageous about such a suggestion. To treat any woman as a sex object, and not as a person in her own right, is sinful; all the more so, when that woman is one’s own wife.’ (F.F. Bruce, Hard Sayings of Jesus, 52f)

Mt 5:29 If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.

Mat 5:30  And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Mt 5:31 “It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’”

“Anyone who divorces his wife” - ‘Under Jewish law, “adultery” referred only to the wife’s misbehavior, not the husband’s. Matthew does not agree with this view; {Mt 5:28} but because his readers must obey the law of their communities, he deals only with the issue of the wife.’ (NT Background Commentary)

‘There is no time in history when the marriage bond stood in greater peril of destruction than in the days when Christianity first came into this world. At that time the world was in danger of witnessing the almost total break-up of marriage and the collapse of the home.’ (DSB)

A certificate of divorce - According to DSB, this read: “Let this be from me thy writ of divorce and letter of dismissal and deed of liberation, that thou mayest marry whatsoever man thou wilt.” All that had to be done was to hand that document to the woman in the presence of two witnesses and she stood divorced.

In this antithesis, Jesus is opposing, not Scripture, but scribal tradition. The scribal quotation in the verse seems to be a deliberately misleading abbreviation of the Deut 24 passage, in that it gave the impression that divorce was readily available, even for trivial reasons, provided that a certificate was produced.

‘From early time provision was made for divorce among the Israelites. {De 24:1-4} Persumably prior to this decree, a wife could be put out of the home at the pleasure of the husband. Now he was required to write out “a bill of divorce” and give it to his wife as proof that he was divorcing her. This gave some dignity and protection to the divorced woman.’ (Holman)

Here is Calvin’s comment:- ‘As the Jews falsely imagined that they discharged their whole duty toward God, when they kept the law in a national manner, so whatever the national law did not forbid, they foolishly supposed to be lawful. Divorces, which husbands were wont to give to their wives, had not been prohibited by Moses as to external order, but only, for the sake of restraining lewdness, he had ordered that “a bill of divorcement” should be given to the wives who were put away, {De 24:1} It was a sort of testimonial of freedom, so that the woman was afterwards free from the yoke and power of the husband; while the husband at the same time acknowledged, that he did not send her away on account of any crime, but because she did not please him. Hence proceeded the error, that there was nothing wrong in such putting away, provided that the forms of law were observed. But they did wrong in viewing as a matter of civil law, the rule which had been given them for a devout and holy life. For national laws are sometimes accommodated to the manners of men but God, in prescribing a spiritual law, looked not at what men can do, but at what they ought to do. It contains a perfect and entire righteousness, though we want ability to fulfill it. Christ, therefore, admonishes us not to conclude, that what is allowed by the national law of Moses is, on that account, lawful in the sight of God. That man, (says he,) who puts away his wife, and gives her a bill of divorcement, shelters himself under the pretense of the law: but the bond of marriage is too sacred to be dissolved at the will, or rather at the licentious pleasure, of men. Though the husband and the wife are united by mutual consent, yet God binds them by an indissoluble tie, so that they are not afterwards at liberty to separate. An exception is added, except on account of fornication: for the woman, who has basely violated the marriage-vow, is justly cast off; because it was by her fault that the tie was broken, and the husband set at liberty.’

Mt 5:32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

Except for marital unfaithfulness - See Mt 19:3-9 Mr 10:2-12; and Lu 16:18 for Jesus’ teaching on divorce. {cf. 1Co 7:10-11} It is disallowed except for unfaithfulness, which may mean (1) adultery, (2) unfaithfulness during the period of betrothal (see 1:19), or (3) marriage between near relatives.’ {Le 18 Ac 15:29}

‘The reason for the omission of the exceptive clause in Mark and Luke could be that no Jew, Roman or Greek ever doubted that adultery constituted grounds for divorce, and the Evangelists took it for granted. Similarly, Paul in Ro 7:1-3, referring to Jewish and Rom. law, ignores the possibility of divorce for adultery which both these laws provided.’ (NBD)

The authenticity of the so-called Matthean ‘exception clause’ has been called into question by some scholars, on the ground that it does not occur in Mark and Luke. But ‘it is a difficult matter to invade the psychology of writers who lived nearly two thousand years ago and tell why they did not include something in their text which someone else did in his. Neither Luke nor Mark were personal disciples of the Lord. They wrote second hand. Matthew was a personal disciple of Christ and has twice recorded the exception. It will be a new position in regard to judgment on human evidence when we put the silence of absentees in rank above the twice expressed report of one in all probability presentone known to be a close personal attendant.’ (ISBE)

‘In all matters of Jewish law there were two schools. There was the school of Shammai, which was the strict, severe, austere school, and there was the school of Hillel which was the liberal, broad-minded, generous school. Shammai and his school defined some indecency as meaning unchastity and nothing but unchastity. “Let a wife be as mischievous as the wife of Ahab,” they said, “she cannot be divorced except for adultery.” To the school of Shammai there was no possible ground of divorce except only adultery and unchastity. On the other hand the school of Hillel defined some indecency, in the widest possible way. They said that it meant that a man could divorce his wife if she spoiled his dinner by putting too much salt in his food, if she went in public with her head uncovered, if she talked with men in the streets, if she was a brawling woman, if she spoke disrespectfully of her husband’s parents in his presence, if she was troublesome or quarrelsome. A certain Rabbi Akiba said that the phrase, if she find no favour in his sight, meant that a man might divorce his wife if he found a woman whom he considered to be more attractive than she.’ (DSB)

‘Some Pharisaic rabbis allowed divorce for almost anything (just as Roman law did); others allowed it only if the wife were unfaithful (see comment on 19:1-10; both Jewish and Roman law required divorce for adultery). Yet the stricter rabbis did not view more lenient divorces as invalid. Jesus thus goes beyond the stricter position: not only does he allow divorce only if one’s wife is unfaithful, but he regards divorce for any other reason as invalid, thus making remarriage in those cases adulterous. This seems, however, to be hyperbole (as in 5:29-30), a graphic way of forbidding divorce except when the other partner has already irreparably broken the marriage covenant.’ (NT Background Commentary)

‘If anything is clear about the teaching of Christ, it is that whether rigorist or liberal it was not legalistic…The seemingly impossible commands of Jesus are meant to be obeyed but they cannot be kept piecemeal. They belong to the whole context of a new covenant: “The Gospel preceded the demand” (Jeremias). They are illustrations of a way of living. To argue about whetehr they are “optional” or “compulsory,” “ideals” or “laws,” misses the point, just as it misses the point to say that they are binding only upon those who belong. They are kept as a response to something seen, human or divine, that overcomes hard-hartedness. When hard-heartedness remains, it is too much to expect them to be kept. We may have to admit even in the church that the harvest of the Spirit {Ga 5:22f} is not ready for reaping.’ (Oppenheimer, in A New Dictionary of Christian Ethics, 161f)

Mat 5:33  “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’

Mt 5:34 But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne;

‘The Anabaptists said that Christ’s prohibition, “Do not swear at all” must be taken literally and was a prohibition against all oath-taking. Calvin looking (sic) beyond such literalistic logic. He pointed to the purpose or intention that Christ had in giving this commandment, and proceeded with his exegesis, commenting, “Here, however, we shall never attain the truth unless we fix our eyes upon Christ’s intention and give heed to what he is driving at in that passage” (Inst IIviii.25).’ (Rogers & McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible, 97f)

Mat 5:35  or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.

Mat 5:36  And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black.

Mt 5:37 Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

See Jas 5:12 for a close parallel.

Mt 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’”

‘In Ex 21:24,Le 24:20 and De 19:21 we have laws given for the administration of public justice. The practice of private revenge and family feud was to be replaced by strictly fair and impartial public administration of justice. In our Lord’s day this excellent, if stern, principle of judicial retribution was being utililised as an excuse for the very thing that it was instituted to abolish, namely personal revenge.’ (John Wenham, Christ and the Bible, 35)

Mt 5:39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

To the Jew, being slapped in the face was equivalent to being spat in the face. The rabbis held that a blow with the back of the hand, which would normally strike you opponent’s right cheek, was twice as bad as hitting him with the flat of the hand. Therefore, to turn the other cheek is to be prepared to receive the ultimate insult. It is better to submit to a second insult than to retaliate. ‘It is better to suffer wrong twice than to do wrong once.’

For Jesus’ own behaviour in this respect, see Joh 18:22-23. He did not literally turn his other cheek, but fulfilled the spirit of his own injunction by his courteous and dignified bearing.

Mt 5:40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

Tunic - an undergarment

Cloak - an outer garment.

Mt 5:41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

This saying is said to have its source in a practice of the Persian postal service. Couriers were placed at fixed points, in order to relay messages. If a man was passing one of these points, the courier could compel him to go to another post to perform an errand on the King’s behalf. But the legal limit for such conscripted service was one mile. So, says Jesus, show that you have a different attitude and a higher motive by cheerfully going further than you have to.

The lesson for us is that we should not be content with doing our mere duty. We should do more, and do it cheerfully. Our Lord willingly relinquished his rights, Php 2:6, and so should we.

Mat 5:42  Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Mt 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’”

‘The OT had given the command, “You shall love your neighbour.” This had been misinterpreted as involving the corollary, “You shall hate your enemy.” But of course in making this addition, which is not a quotation from the OT, the popular teaching was giving it a meaning which is not implied in the context. Le 19:18 was a command originally intended to embrace every member of the Israelite community, and the rest of the verse makes it clear that an Israelite was not to seek for vengeance or harbour grudges against any of his compatriots. Le 19:34 goes further and applies the same principle to the resident alien…”Love your neighbour” in the Levitical rule already implied “Love your enemies.”‘ (John Wenham, Christ and the Bible, 35f)

See Le 19:16-18.

Mt 5:44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

‘When the fundamentalist develops his ethical code, he is somewhat prompted by a quest for status in the cult. Consequently, he defines the good life as the separated life – separated, that is, from prevailing social mores. Whereas Christ was virtuous because he loved his neighbour as himself, the fundamentalist is virtuous because he does not smoke, dance, or play cards. By raising a scrupulous demur over social mores, the fundamentalist can divert attention from grosser sins – anger, jealousy, hatred, gossip, lust, idleness, malice, backbiting, schism, guile, injustice, and every shade of illicit pride.’ (E.J. Carnell, The Case for Orthodox Theology, 120)

Cf. Ro 12:20 1Pe 3:9.

Mat 5:45  that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

Mat 5:45:  “He causes his sun to rise…and sends rain”

Mat 5:46  If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that?

Mat 5:47  And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?

Mt 5:48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

The ‘greater righteousness’ has been (a) demanded, v20; (b) illustrated, v21-47; and is now (c) summarised.

“Be perfect” - Gk teleioi. Cf. Mt 19:21 “If you want to be perfect…” It indicates completeness, wholeness, maturity, as opposed to the outward legal conformity to the law as practiced by the scribes and Pharisees. Our lives are not to be lived with robotic obedience to arbitrary rules and regulations, but with total integration to the will of God, and with heartfelt conformity to his character. And after all, this had been taught in the OT itself, De 18:13, ‘You must be blameless before the Lord your God.’ Le 20:26, ‘You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy.’ We are to base our lives, not on the standards of the world around us, but on those of our heavenly Father.

Some have built on this verse grandiose dreams of sinless perfection. But Jesus is about to teach us to pray, ‘Forgive us our sins’, 6:12.

Such, then is to be the goal of all Christ’s disciples. No Christian will attain it in this life, but all should set it before them as their ultimate aim.