Sermon on the mount

[Wootah]

What was the point of this sermon?

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

To outline the principles that should govern Christian living.

That's what I think.

JW

What evidence can you provide that Jesus was preaching here to Christians and not to his fellow Jews?

Did I say he was preaching here [ie in the Sermon on the mount] to Christians and not to his fellow Jews?


Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Jesus was outlining the principles of Jewish living as he saw it, or Godly living?

No I don't think so because that would in my opinion imply that it wouldn't be applicable to Christians.

What makes you think that Jesus was preaching to Christians here?. And did I say only Jews? I believe "Godly" principles would apply to Christians as well, though the real Jesus most probably did not have any conception of the term, or what the term would come to signify.

Yes, of course Chrsitans can find useful Godly principes in the sermon, which could arguably be stretched even to apply to those who put pre-eminence to Paul's wayward theology as well.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

To outline the principles that should govern Christian living.

That's what I think.

JW

What evidence can you provide that Jesus was preaching here to Christians and not to his fellow Jews?

Did I say he was preaching here [ie in the Sermon on the mount] to Christians and not to his fellow Jews?


Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that Jesus was outlining the principles of Jewish living as he saw it, or Godly living?

No I don't think so because that would in my opinion imply that it wouldn't be applicable to Christians.

So how does it follow that even if Jesus intended target was to his fellow Jews, that his messge would not be universal enough to apply to future Chrsitians as well?

Do we agree that it is not an "either/or"?

Principles of Godly living could apply to Christians as well as Jews, especially in the absence of Pauline blood-atonement theoogy.

(not a trace of that in this particular sermon )

[2timothy316]

Principles of Godly living could apply to Christians as well as Jews, especially in the absence of Pauline blood-atonement theoogy.

(not a trace of that in this particular sermon )

Actually there is reference.

"Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill." Mat 5:17

One of those mentioned prophets was Isaiah who among other prophets foretold Jesus' death.

"He was oppressed and he let himself be afflicted, But he would not open his mouth. He was brought like a sheep to the slaughter, Like a ewe that is silent before its shearers, And he would not open his mouth. Because of restraint* and judgment he was taken away; And who will concern himself with the details of his generation? For he was cut off from the land of the living; Because of the transgression of my people he received the stroke. And he was given a burial place with the wicked, And with the rich in his death, Although he had done no wrong And there was no deception in his mouth." - Isaiah 53:7-9.

Remember "sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one stroke of a letter to pass away from the Law until all things take place." Mat 5:18. Jesus came to fulfill Isaiah's God inspired prophecy because all things foretold must take place.

[Elijah John]

Principles of Godly living could apply to Christians as well as Jews, especially in the absence of Pauline blood-atonement theoogy.

(not a trace of that in this particular sermon )

Actually there is reference.

"Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill." Mat 5:17

One of those mentioned prophets was Isaiah who among other prophets foretold Jesus' death.

"He was oppressed and he let himself be afflicted, But he would not open his mouth. He was brought like a sheep to the slaughter, Like a ewe that is silent before its shearers, And he would not open his mouth. Because of restraint* and judgment he was taken away; And who will concern himself with the details of his generation? For he was cut off from the land of the living; Because of the transgression of my people he received the stroke. And he was given a burial place with the wicked, And with the rich in his death, Although he had done no wrong And there was no deception in his mouth." - Isaiah 53:7-9.

Remember "sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one stroke of a letter to pass away from the Law until all things take place." Mat 5:18. Jesus came to fulfill Isaiah's God inspired prophecy because all things foretold must take place.

That's quite a stretch and if that is indeed an allusion to the Isaiah passage, it is certainly open to interpretation. The passage from Isaiah is not necessarily the same as references to Pauline style blood atonement.

Jews, for example, interpret that passage as referring to Israel as a whole, and their martyrdom as a people being redemptive. But they do not take that to mean their suffering is a "payment for sin" as Pauline apologists interpret the sufferings of Christ. At least not a literal "payment".

It is a price they paid to bring ethical monotheism to the world, not a legalistic payment in order to appease the Father.

[imhereforyou]

What was the point of this sermon?

Political and social-economic purposes were likely known only to those there at the time, assuming it happened at all.
Why was it included in the bible?
People probably thought it had moral implications for future generations (but that's the point of the bible according to a lot of people anyway).

I don't remember much about it (or anything about it to be honest but it's bouncing around in the old noodle somewhere I'm sure) so obviously it's relatively pointless to me at this time.

[2timothy316]

Principles of Godly living could apply to Christians as well as Jews, especially in the absence of Pauline blood-atonement theoogy.

(not a trace of that in this particular sermon )

Actually there is reference.

"Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill." Mat 5:17

One of those mentioned prophets was Isaiah who among other prophets foretold Jesus' death.

"He was oppressed and he let himself be afflicted, But he would not open his mouth. He was brought like a sheep to the slaughter, Like a ewe that is silent before its shearers, And he would not open his mouth. Because of restraint* and judgment he was taken away; And who will concern himself with the details of his generation? For he was cut off from the land of the living; Because of the transgression of my people he received the stroke. And he was given a burial place with the wicked, And with the rich in his death, Although he had done no wrong And there was no deception in his mouth." - Isaiah 53:7-9.

Remember "sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one stroke of a letter to pass away from the Law until all things take place." Mat 5:18. Jesus came to fulfill Isaiah's God inspired prophecy because all things foretold must take place.

That's quite a stretch and if that is indeed an allusion to the Isaiah passage, it is certainly open to interpretation. The passage from Isaiah is not necessarily the same as references to Pauline style blood atonement.

Jesus gave the whole 'Old Testament' or 'Hebrew Scriptures' as a reference as to what would be fulfilled. That give me free reign to pick anything that points to the sacrifice in the OT as a reference.

Even if you don't think that Jesus was the one that was 'brought like a sheep to the slaughter.' Isaiah is still speaking of a sacrifice of yes a person that "had done no wrong And there was no deception in his mouth."

Sure everything is open to interpretation. Yet I'm not concerned with interpretation to fit doctrine. I'm concerned with what is recorded in the Gospels as to what Jesus said and did being in harmony with what was written in the 'Law and the Prophets'. Thus I'm not interpreting anything, but matching up with what was foretold and what is said in the Bible to be it's fulfillment.

[2timothy316]

Jews, for example, interpret that passage as referring to Israel as a whole, and their martyrdom as a people being redemptive. But they do not take that to mean their suffering is a "payment for sin" as Pauline apologists interpret the sufferings of Christ. At least not a literal "payment".

It is a price they paid to bring ethical monotheism to the world, not a legalistic payment in order to appease the Father.

Just like trinitarians everyone is free to interpret the Bible however they want. To avoid 'doing my own thing', the message of the Bible to me should be understood as objective and not subjective. I feel we should conform to what the Bible says and not the other way around. There is only one truth and that truth no matter what it says to me is the Bibles message. So If I look at your interpretation of Isaiah 53:7-9 objectively as pointing Israel as a whole, that interpretation it doesn't harmonize with the rest of the Bible. The Bible says in 1 Peter 2:21, 22 says of Jesus, "he committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth." Not Israel. In fact there is nothing in the Bible that ever says that Israel as a whole is ever found with 'no deception in it's mouth.' To interpret the Bible to say that Israel fits Isaiah 53:7-9...now that is not even a stretch, it's completely false.

"Hear the word of Jehovah, O sons of Israel, for Jehovah has a legal case with the inhabitants of the land, for there is no truth nor loving-kindness nor knowledge of God in the land. There are the pronouncing of curse and practicing of deception and murdering and stealing and committing of adultery that have broken forth, and acts of bloodshed have touched other acts of bloodshed." - Hosea 4:1-2. This is just one of many scriptures that show a time when Israel is the exact opposite of Isaiah 53:7-9.

So when I compare the evidence of the interpretation you presented verses that of the Bible, Jesus is the one that wins the fulfillment of "he committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth." To me the Bible only speaks the truth. All other interpretations, whether Jewish, Baptist, Catholic or a person's personally made doctrine, these in my opinion are counterfeit. No matter i they claim to be God's people, how many people or how long the interpretation has been around. If the interpretation doesn't harmonize with the whole Bible, I file it under incorrect interpretations.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 16 by 2timothy316]

" If the interpretation doesn't harmonize with the whole Bible, I file it under incorrect interpretations."

I accept your way of dealing with it but don't know how do you get around areas which are impossibe to grasp.
We know that Moses copied few chapters of Genesis from Ancient Writings of which we know nothing. It certainly was not written in 20th century English.
One book mentioned, Wars of Jehovah. Did Jehovah really go around the universe proclaiming wars?

This is where people do all sorts of things to try fit square into a circle and it ends up as nonsense.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 17 by Monta]

I accept your way of dealing with it but don't know how do you get around areas which are impossibe to grasp.

I have yet to encounter this. If it can't be grasped then what is it doing in the Bible? “All the things that were written aforetime were written for our instruction, that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope.� (Romans 15:4)

If there is anything in the Bible that is "impossible to grasp" then that is like saying Jehovah is flawed. That He doesn't know His own creations and can't instruct us even through a simple book...if He can't do that then, what kind of God is that?

We know that Moses copied few chapters of Genesis from Ancient Writings of which we know nothing.

'We know'? I'm not convinced of such a statement. If Moses did this then the Bible would have noted it. As far as I know Moses talked to Jehovah symbolically 'face to face'. With that kind of closeness, why rely on other writings?

Did Jehovah really go around the universe proclaiming wars?

Only against those that proclaimed a war against Him.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 16 by 2timothy316]

" If the interpretation doesn't harmonize with the whole Bible, I file it under incorrect interpretations."

I accept your way of dealing with it but don't know how do you get around areas which are impossibe to grasp.

Looking at this statement closer I think the term 'impossible' is why I feel the statement is not completely inaccurate. It seems as if to say, 'we can never know', but that can't be true of a book that is there for our instruction to gain life. However, God can keep a secret. For example, Paul said, "I became a minister of this [congregation] in accordance with the stewardship from God which was given me in your interest to preach the word of God fully, the sacred secret that was hidden from the past systems of things and from the past generations. But now it has been made manifest to his holy ones..." Colossians 1:25, 26.

So Jehovah can keep things secret from people. Even His own people. Yet He gives 'food at the proper time'. (Luke 12:42). In other words He will reveal what seems impossible to interpret at the right time. Another example is what Danial wrote about when the time the kingship of the line of David would be restored. Though Daniel wrote it, it was impossible to understand what he wrote until John wrote Revelation hundreds of years later. An angel told him: “Daniel, keep the words secret, and seal up the book until the time of the end.� (Daniel 12:4)

So the answer to how do we "get around areas which are impossible to grasp". We wait for Jehovah to reveal it to us. That revelation comes in two ways, through His word the Bible or through prophecy fulfillment. Yet it only through His granting us His Holy Spirit that we can see it. Take the "Last Days" for example. Many do not see we are living in the "Last Days" or the "The Time of the End". Yet many who read the Bible and look at what is happening around them do see it. God's Holy Spirit is what opens eyes and hearts.

After all, what Daniel wrote and John wrote went undiscovered for almost 2000 years. Right in front of millions of eyes, yet no one put it together until the late 1800s. Just a few decades before it was fulfilled. Why? "He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction." - Acts 1:7. Jehovah knows the best time to reveal His secrets. So nothing is impossible to know about the Bible unless Jehovah has made it secret. If He has then it is not for us to know yet and we should wait on Him to make it known and not jump ahead.

How do we guard against being misled? We must be like the Beroeans. Compare everything we hear to what we see happening around us and comparing what we hear to the Scriptures to see if it harmonizes.