StriperAddict
Senior Member
Simple tools for those burdened by the old yoke ...
=====================================
I am continually amazed at how many Bible teachers essentially gloss over the harsh and impossible teachings of Jesus without really weighing the implications of what they would mean for the church today.
Perhaps most of all, teachers do this with the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer.
Passages within these sections of Scripture speak of the amputation of body parts, animal sacrifices, giving money to whomever asks without question, and a conditional forgiveness from God based on how well we do at forgiving others.
So how can we accurately interpret the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer within their true context? Here is my suggestion:
1. Work backwards.
2. Start with Peter, James, John, and Paul and what they shared with the New Testament church in their epistles.
3. Then compare these with Jesus’s words.
Example 1: The Vine and the Branches
Did Peter or James or John or Paul talk about our union with Christ and dependency on Him? Absolutely yes! So the Vine and the Branches passage describes the New Testament church’s relationship with Jesus.
Example 2: Sermon on the Mount
Did Peter or James or John or Paul tell us to amputate body parts in order to enter the kingdom? Did they tell us that we should get right with our brothers before offering animal sacrifices on altars? Did they tell us that we should give money to anyone who asks of us without hesitation? Did they tell us we would be answerable to the Sanhedrin? Absolutely not. None of these teachings appear in the epistles. So these parts of the Sermon on the Mount are intended to show a Jewish audience how hopeless Law-based living really is.
Example 3: The Lord’s Prayer
Did Peter or James or John or Paul ever tell us that we would only be forgiven if we forgive others first? Again, absolutely not. In fact, Colossians 3:13 and Ephesians 4:32 say the exact opposite- that we forgive others now because God already forgave us! So again this was designed to show a Jewish audience how hopeless a system of conditional forgiveness would really be.
Conclusion:
This sort of holistic look at the New Testament gospels and epistles helps us understand that, at times, Jesus is taking the Law and amplifying it, showing the true spirit of the Law. He did this to show his Jewish audience that it was in fact impossible for them to fulfill the true spiritual requirements of the Law.
Note that Jesus reminded the disciples to teach everything He had commanded them to teach. I believe the disciples obeyed Jesus on that one when they wrote their epistles.
So if the New Testament epistles do not contain instructions on amputation of body parts or conditional forgiveness teachings, then obviously Jesus did not intend those to be taught as being for the church today.
Instead, those harsh teachings were intended for the Jewish hearers of Jesus’s day, and they were given for a specific reason: to bury every single prideful hope of self-righteousness and to highlight why there absolutely must be another way, the way of grace.
- Andrew Farley
=====================================
I am continually amazed at how many Bible teachers essentially gloss over the harsh and impossible teachings of Jesus without really weighing the implications of what they would mean for the church today.
Perhaps most of all, teachers do this with the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer.
Passages within these sections of Scripture speak of the amputation of body parts, animal sacrifices, giving money to whomever asks without question, and a conditional forgiveness from God based on how well we do at forgiving others.
So how can we accurately interpret the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer within their true context? Here is my suggestion:
1. Work backwards.
2. Start with Peter, James, John, and Paul and what they shared with the New Testament church in their epistles.
3. Then compare these with Jesus’s words.
Example 1: The Vine and the Branches
Did Peter or James or John or Paul talk about our union with Christ and dependency on Him? Absolutely yes! So the Vine and the Branches passage describes the New Testament church’s relationship with Jesus.
Example 2: Sermon on the Mount
Did Peter or James or John or Paul tell us to amputate body parts in order to enter the kingdom? Did they tell us that we should get right with our brothers before offering animal sacrifices on altars? Did they tell us that we should give money to anyone who asks of us without hesitation? Did they tell us we would be answerable to the Sanhedrin? Absolutely not. None of these teachings appear in the epistles. So these parts of the Sermon on the Mount are intended to show a Jewish audience how hopeless Law-based living really is.
Example 3: The Lord’s Prayer
Did Peter or James or John or Paul ever tell us that we would only be forgiven if we forgive others first? Again, absolutely not. In fact, Colossians 3:13 and Ephesians 4:32 say the exact opposite- that we forgive others now because God already forgave us! So again this was designed to show a Jewish audience how hopeless a system of conditional forgiveness would really be.
Conclusion:
This sort of holistic look at the New Testament gospels and epistles helps us understand that, at times, Jesus is taking the Law and amplifying it, showing the true spirit of the Law. He did this to show his Jewish audience that it was in fact impossible for them to fulfill the true spiritual requirements of the Law.
Note that Jesus reminded the disciples to teach everything He had commanded them to teach. I believe the disciples obeyed Jesus on that one when they wrote their epistles.
So if the New Testament epistles do not contain instructions on amputation of body parts or conditional forgiveness teachings, then obviously Jesus did not intend those to be taught as being for the church today.
Instead, those harsh teachings were intended for the Jewish hearers of Jesus’s day, and they were given for a specific reason: to bury every single prideful hope of self-righteousness and to highlight why there absolutely must be another way, the way of grace.
- Andrew Farley
