The Sermon on the Mount

Since the Sermon is part of a larger story it should not be interpreted on its own. To do so assumes that Matthew is not a single progressive plot (story) but a collection of events, each which stands on its own (anthology). But since Matthew is story, interpreting the Sermon while leaving out the rest of the book invites error. If indeed the “Sermon” reveals the “philosophy” of the story, then the events that follow (and precede) must be integrally tied to the “Sermon”. In other words, if the Sermon is the “philosophy” that drives the Main Character to victory and the story is the record of the progression to that victory, then the Sermon will control the whole story.

Some propose that the Sermon institutes a greater righteousness than that of the Old Testament, thus upping the bar for the New Testament reader over the Old. This is proposed in the “You have heard it said, but I say unto you . . . “ formulas that propose that the first statement is the Law and the second is Jesus raising the standard of the Law. But if the Law is “holy and righteous and good”, one wonders theologically how there could be a greater holiness than holy, a greater righteousness than righteous.

God is righteous. There is no other standard. The question is how may a man become as righteous as God and meet that standard. The Sermon explains this. The Sermon not only explains this in salvation, but in sanctification. Thus, man must walk and live his life as righteous as God. And, as one might expect, Jesus is the means by which this righteousness becomes the character of a man, only through the gift of imputed righteousness by believing.