seek Jesus for hunger

Next Jesus turns to people’s attitude to uprightness. Matthew uses the verb “to hunger” 9 times, but in all the other 8 it refers to literal hunger while here the meaning is clearly metaphorical (as it is twice in Luke and once in John). With it is linked thirst, which is more often used in the metaphorical sense (cf. Ps. 42:2). Jesus is speaking of an intense longing after righteousness that may be likened to both hunger and thirst. Everyone now and then does what is right, but Jesus is pointing his hearers not to occasional acts but to a passionate concern for the right. Righteousness is often used in the New Testament for the right standing believers have before God because of Christ’s atoning work, but this is often said to be a Pauline concept rather than one that Matthew sets forth. Now it is plain that Matthew has a strong interest in the upright living that should characterize the servant of Christ, and we must not try to turn him into a pale shadow of Paul. But we must not minimize his emphasis on grace either (cf. v. 3). Specifically we should notice that he is not suggesting that people can make a strong effort and achieve the righteousness of which he is writing: it is a given righteousness, not an achieved righteousness. The blessed do not achieve it but hunger and thirst for it. They will be filled, which surely means that God will fill them (cf. 6:33, “his righteousness”). We need not doubt that the term here includes the doing of right, an indication that we are expected to live in full accordance with the will of God. How could anyone have a strong desire for a right standing before God without at the same time strongly wanting to do the right? Today there is a strong emphasis on social righteousness, the liberation of people from oppression, and that can scarcely be out of mind either. Righteousness is a rich and full concept, but whichever way we understand it, it is a righteousness that people cannot produce of themselves. We are to do our best and we may be able to avoid “the gutters of life,” but this righteousness is a gift of God. And of those who have this wholehearted longing for the right Jesus says, they will be filled.²⁶ They do not achieve it of themselves, but God fulfils their longing. God will not disappoint anyone who has this deep desire to do his will. Those who long for righteousness will have a full measure, not a mere trace. There are two thoughts here, the first of which insists on the disposition of the seeker. The good gift of God does not come indiscriminately to all the race, but only to those who seek it wholeheartedly. The second is that, for all their intense longing, the seekers do not fill themselves with righteousness, but are filled; righteousness is a gift of God.¹

the righteousness of God is a gift when one is saved.

What about the natural man; does he hunger and thirst for righteousness? The ones I meet do not! “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14). The “natural man” is in contrast to the spiritual man who has found that Christ is his righteousness—“… of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30).²

. “Blind guides” is a perfect description, one that must have brought a smile to the lips of the listeners. Jesus had used it before (Matt. 15:14). The Pharisees were blind to the true values of life. Their priorities were confused. They would take an oath and use some sacred object to substantiate that oath—the gold in the temple, for example, or the gift on the altar. But they would not swear by the temple itself or the altar. It was the temple that sanctified the gold and the altar that sanctified the gift. They were leaving God out of their priorities.

Jesus knew that the Pharisees wanted both the gold and the gifts on the altar. This is why the Pharisees practiced “Corban”—anything dedicated to God could not be used for others (Matt. 15:1–9; Mark 7:10–13). These men were not seeking for the righteousness of God; they were greedy for gain. They worked out a “religious system” that permitted them to rob God and others and still maintain their reputations.³

These future possessors of the earth are its presently-installed rightful heirs and even now they hunger and thirst after righteousness. They experience a deep desire for personal righteousness which is, in itself, a proof of their spiritual re-birth. Those who are poor and empty in their own spiritual poverty recognize the depth of their need and hunger and thirst for that which only God can give them. To hunger means to be needy. It is joined with to thirst; the born-again man has a God-given hunger and thirst (inner passion) for righteousness. This hungering and thirsting continues throughout the life of the believer. He continues to hunger and to be filled and to hunger and to be filled. God supplies his every spiritual need daily. This act of hungering and thirsting after righteousness is the by-product of a regenerated life.

Lawlor (p. 60) rightly states that this is the description of a man who has already been saved. Nowhere does the Bible command unbelievers to hunger after righteousness in order to be saved. Rather, Paul clearly states “there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God” (Rom 3:11). The biblical writers make it clear that while man must come to Christ for salvation, it is not within man’s normal ability and desire to want to come to God. Therefore, God is depicted throughout the New Testament as the seeking Saviour going after the lost. They shall be filled (Gr chortazō) refers to a complete filling and satisfaction. The psalmist proclaimed: “He satisfieth the longing soul, and filleth the hungry soul with goodness” (107:9). This filling comes from God, who is the total source of satisfaction of His people. It comes now and it will continue to come throughout eternity to those who hunger and thirst for it.⁴

“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled” (v. 6). Commentators say that what Jesus had in mind here are those believers who passionately search for the imputation of the righteousness of Christ by which we receive our standing before God. We do not have enough righteousness of our own to get us into heaven, they say. Only those who are clothed with the righteousness of Christ will ever enter into His kingdom. Certainly that is true, but I doubt that is what Jesus had in mind here, because even though we are justified by faith and not by our works, we are justified unto works. We have been elected by God and received His grace unto righteousness. Even though our righteousness will never justify us, the fruit of our justification is growth in real righteousness. As Martin Luther said, we were dead in our sins, but God raised us from the dead, and He declared us well while we were still in sin. That is what justification by faith means. Not only did He give us that declaration, but He gave us the medicine by which we actually do become conformed to the image of Jesus, and every Christian is called to grow up into maturity and righteousness.

Elsewhere in this Gospel we are going to see this quest for righteousness, but we have an allergy to it because we tend to link righteousness with self-righteousness, that which the Pharisees displayed, rather than with real righteousness. Real righteousness is, simply, doing what is right. That should be a concern for us, and not just a passing concern. The images used here are those of hunger and thirst. This message was given to people who, for the most part, lived in the desert, who knew what it meant to have such a parched palate that their thirst was so consuming that just one cup of cold water would dramatically improve their condition. They also knew what it meant to endure starvation, to go hungry for long periods of time. For someone who is in that state of hunger, like one who crosses the desert and runs out of water and prays every second for the appearance of an oasis, the pursuit of that oasis is the only thing that keeps him going. The intensity of that sort of thirst and hunger is what Jesus says should mark our lives.

As a young man Jonathan Edwards wrote down resolutions for the virtues that he sought to achieve in his life, and by the grace of God he became a model of righteousness. At almost the same time there was another man in colonial America who also sought after righteousness without the aid of God. His name was Benjamin Franklin. Franklin made a list of the virtues that he wanted to manifest. Each day he would examine himself as to whether he had accomplished a particular righteousness during the preceding twenty-four hours. He confessed that, after noting for a number of consecutive days his success with humility, that he was becoming proud of his humility. Even the unregenerate understand at certain points their failure to achieve real righteousness.

That would be a wonderful thing to have on our tombstone, that we were righteous. We ought not to despise righteousness as something that belongs only to the self-righteous; rather, we should love righteousness enough to pursue it intensely as those who hunger and thirst, because God promises that if we hunger for righteousness, we will not be sent away empty. We will receive the bread of life that will feed us for eternity. If we thirst for righteousness, the Son of righteousness will come with living water that will well up in our souls to eternal life. We will be filled. We will be satisfied from these pursuits.⁵

So again, the blessedness pronounced on them who hunger and thirst after righteousness. It were a weakness of judgment indeed, to suppose, that the righteousness such souls most earnestly desire, is the righteousness of mere moral honesty and justice between man and man in life. These things the laws among men enforce, and the Scribes and Pharisees of our Lord’s days, prided themselves upon them. Surely no one who reads his Bible can for a moment, if he thinks rightly, suppose that the Son of God came upon earth to preach what even unenlightened heathens had always insisted upon. This would be indeed to run back to the law of Moses, instead of preaching the Gospel of Christ. But the righteousness the Son of God had in view, when declaring these souls blessed which hungered and thirsted for it, was his own complete righteousness, which alone can justify a poor sinner in the sight of God. So that in the hungering for it, the soul gave evident proofs that he had no righteousness of his own to appear in before God, and therefore earnestly longed to be cloathed with Christ’s robe of righteousness, and garment of salvation. And graciously the Lord Jesus here declares all such shall not hunger in vain. He who excites the hunger in the soul, is He who also satisfieth it. And hence the promises and the performance. Psalm 132:9–16. Isaiah 61:1, 2, 3, 10, 11.⁶

5:6 hunger and thirst for righteousness. This is the opposite of the self-righteousness of the Pharisees. It speaks of those who seek God’s righteousness rather than attempting to establish a righteousness of their own (Ro 10:3; Php 3:9). What they seek will fill them, i.e., it will satisfy their hunger and thirst for a right relationship with God.⁷

For thew Gospel to have Jesus in the heart and to love him fully

5:6 Those who hunger and thirst for righteousness recognize that God is the ultimate source of real righteousness, so they long for his righteous character to be evident in people’s lives on earth. They shall be satisfied by responding to his invitation to be in relationship with him.⁸

1 Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew (pp. 98–100). Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

2 McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Gospels (Matthew 1-13) (electronic ed., Vol. 34, pp. 75–76). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

3 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 84–85). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

4 Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (pp. 1884–1885). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

5 Sproul, R. C. (2013). Matthew (pp. 82–83). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

6 Hawker, R. (2013). Poor Man’s New Testament Commentary: Matthew–John (Vol. 1, p. 36). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

7 MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2006). The MacArthur study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Mt 5:6). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

8 Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 1828). Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

behold gods love for you

3:1 The author begins his parenthesis by urging his readers to recognise the greatness of the love of God: How great is the love the Father has lavished on us! (lit. ‘Look at the sort of love the Father has given us!’). The exact expression of the love of God the author has in mind here is: that we should be called the children of God. In his love, God has called us his children. The author includes himself with his readers among those (‘we’) who are called the children (tekna) of God. To be called children of God is an immense privilege because it means that God himself has chosen us to be in his family. The best commentary on what it means to be children of God is found in John 1:12–13 (‘Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God’). Looked at from a human point of view, those who ‘receive’ Christ, in the sense of believing in him, are children of God. Looked at from the divine point of view, his children are those who are ‘born of God’, or as Jesus puts it in John 3:8, those who are ‘born of the Spirit’. The author not only says that he and his readers are ‘called’ children of God as an outcome of God’s love lavished upon them, but emphasises the reality of this status when he adds, And that is what we are!

Those who believe the Word of life may really be the children of God, but that does not mean they will gain any respect from the world. And lest this should cause the readers any distress, the author explains: The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. The word ‘world’ (kosmos) occurs 23 times in 1 John, and its meaning varies according to the context (see discussion at 2:2). Here, as in a number of other places, it denotes the unbelieving world—people who are opposed to God and to those who believe in his Son. Such ‘worldly’ people are under the power of the evil one (3:13; 4:5 [3×]; 5:19). It is this unbelieving world which does not know ‘us’, and it did not know ‘him’ either. In context, the ‘him’ whom the world failed to recognise could be interpreted either as God the Father who lavished his love on us and whose children we are (3:1), or as the Son of God whom we shall be like when we see him at his appearing (3:2). The latter interpretation is to be preferred because in the rest of 1 John it is always Jesus Christ come in the flesh whose true identity is in question (2:22–23; 4:2–3; 5:1, 5, 10), never that of the Father. The unequivocal statement of John 1:10 (‘He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognise him [the Word = Jesus Christ]’) is a parallel to our text interpreted along the lines suggested.¹

“Beloved, now we are children of God… .” John’s message is basic and uncluttered. He refuses to become entrapped by details concerning the future, either of our future nature or of the countless possibilities of eschatalogical details about which restless minds are able to wonder. His approach is pastoral and authoritative. We are beloved children of God because of the love that the Father has for us. As for the future, we leave it in His hands with hope and confidence, knowing that the key reality for the future is that His love lasts and our relationship with Him lasts, too. We shall know Him there as we walk in His love here. Our motivation toward purity is because of that hope and that assurance.²

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not [1 John 3:1].

This is a very wonderful statement that John makes here. Let me give you my very literal translation of this verse: “Behold ye, of what sort of love the Father hath bestowed upon (given to) us, that we should be named children of God, and we are: and because of this the world does not know (begin to understand) us, because it did not know (begin to understand) Him.”

John is saying that we do not expect to be the sons of God, we are the sons of God. A better translation includes the words “and we are.” The child of God can say emphatically, “I am a child of God through faith in Jesus Christ.” We don’t hope to be, we don’t expect to be, but the thrilling fact is that every believer can exult and rejoice and constantly thank Him that he is God’s child. We are boasters not in ourselves, but we are boasting of the wonderful Shepherd that we have. John makes it perfectly clear that if you are a born again child of God, you are going to exhibit a life that conforms to the Father. A child of God need not be in the false position of saying as an old hymn says:

’Tis a point I long to know,

Oft it causes anxious thought,

Do I love my Lord or no?

Am I His, or am I not?

—Author unknown

John says, “Now we are the children of God”—right now we are the children of God.

“Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God.” The kind of love that John is talking about is a strange kind of love, an unusual kind of love, a kind of love to which we are not accustomed. God loves us. What manner of love the Father has for us! The love of God—that is, His love for us—is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. John will go on to show that God has demonstrated His love by giving His Son to die for us. How many of us have someone who would die for us? How many folk would you be willing to die for? God loves you, and He has proven His love—He gave His Son to die for you.

The greatest motivating force in the world is God’s love. Love is the greatest drive in the human family. A man falls in love with a woman, a woman falls in love with a man, and some make such tremendous sacrifices for each other. When human love is genuine love, it is a beautiful thing, it is a noble thing, it is a wonderful thing, and it is a tremendous drive. But God’s love for His children far exceeds anything we can experience on the human plane.

The true child of God is going to prove his spiritual birth by being obedient to God’s Word. God’s wonderful love for us should motivate us. It is that which is going to cause us to want to live for God. Behold, what an unusual kind, what a different kind of love the Father hath bestowed upon us that we should be called the children of God.

John has emphasized that we are God’s children right now. This brings me to say that our salvation is in three tenses: I have been saved; I am being saved; and I shall be saved.

1. I have been saved. The Lord Jesus said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life” (John 5:24). The moment you trust Christ you receive everlasting life, and you will never be any more saved than you are the moment you trust Him. You are born again, born into the family of God. John is addressing “little children”—these are God’s children. He says, “What manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us.” Why? Because we are His children. He has bestowed His love upon His children, and they respond to that love by obedience unto Him and by living a life that is well pleasing to Him.

2. I am being saved. Paul said, “… work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil. 2:12–13). Peter said, “But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ …” (2 Pet. 3:18). John is talking to us along the same lines here. If we are the children of God, we are going to be obedient unto Him, we are going to grow, we are going to develop, and we are going to go on in the Christian faith. Therefore, we can say that we are being saved.

3. I will be saved. When the Lord Jesus comes again for His own, we will experience the final stage of our salvation. Sin no longer will have power over us, and we will be with the Lord forever.³

God’s love for us is unique. First John 3:1 may be translated, “Behold, what peculiar, out-of-this-world kind of love the Father has bestowed on us.” While we were His enemies God loved us and sent His Son to die for us!

The whole wonderful plan of salvation begins with the love of God.

Many translators add a phrase to 1 John 3:1: “That we should be called the sons of God, and we are.” “Sons of God” is not simply a high-sounding name that we bear; it is a reality! We are God’s children! We do not expect the world to understand this thrilling relationship, because it does not even understand God. Only a person who knows God through Christ can fully appreciate what it means to be called a child of God.

First John 3:1 tells us what we are and 1 John 3:2 tells us what we shall be. The reference here, of course, is to the time of Christ’s coming for His church. This was mentioned in 1 John 2:28 as an incentive for holy living, and now it is repeated.

God’s love for us does not stop with the new birth. It continues throughout our lives and takes us right up to the return of Jesus Christ! When our Lord appears, all true believers will see Him and will become like Him (Phil. 3:20–21). This means, of course, that they will have new, glorified bodies, suited to heaven.

But the apostle does not stop here! He has told us what we are and what we shall be. Now, in 1 John 3:3, he tells us what we should be. In view of the return of Jesus Christ, we should keep our lives clean.

All this is to remind us of the Father’s love. Because the Father loved us and sent His Son to die for us, we are children of God. Because God loves us, He wants us to live with Him one day. Salvation, from start to finish, is an expression of the love of God. We are saved by the grace of God (Eph. 2:8–9; Titus 2:11–15), but the provision for our salvation was originated in the love of God. And since we have experienced the love of the Father, we have no desire to live in sin.

An unbeliever who sins is a creature sinning against his Creator. A Christian who sins is a child sinning against his Father. The unbeliever sins against law; the believer sins against love.

This reminds us of the meaning of the phrase so often repeated in the Bible: “the fear of the Lord.” This phrase does not suggest that God’s children live in an atmosphere of terror, “for God hath not given us the spirit of fear” (2 Tim. 1:7). Rather, it indicates that God’s children hold their Father in reverence and will not deliberately disobey Him or try His patience.

A group of teenagers were enjoying a party, and someone suggested that they go to a certain restaurant for a good time.

“I’d rather you took me home,” Jan said to her date. “My parents don’t approve of that place.”

“Afraid your father will hurt you?” one of the girls asked sarcastically.

“No,” Jan replied, “I’m not afraid my father will hurt me, but I am afraid I might hurt him.”

She understood the principle that a true child of God, who has experienced the love of God, has no desire to sin against that love.⁴

3:1 Behold what manner of love: John stands in amazement of God’s love. But the greater amazement and appreciation is for the fact that God’s love is expressed to human beings, that Christians are included in His family. God loves all believers, the weak as well as the strong. John describes Jesus on the night of His betrayal as “having loved His own who were in the world,” and writes that “He loved them to the end” (John 13:1). God’s love is in stark contrast to the love of the world. The world loves those who love them, while God loves even those who disobey Him.

3:2 now we are children of God. Everyone who exercises genuine saving faith becomes a child of God at the moment of belief (Jn 1:12; Ro 8:16; 2Pe 1:4), though the truly heavenly, divine life in that person (cf. Eph 4:24; Col 3:10) will not be revealed until Jesus appears (see note on Ro 8:19). In the meantime, the Holy Spirit is working into us the image of Christ (see note on 2Co 3:18). we will be like Him. This phrase introduces the fourth feature of the believer’s hope in 2:28–3:3. When Christ returns He shall conform every believer to His image, i.e., His nature. A tension exists between the first part of the verse (“now we are children”) and the latter part (“we will be like Him”). Such tension finds resolution in the solid hope that at Christ’s return the believer will experience ultimate conformity to His likeness (see notes on Ro 8:29; 1Co 15:42–49; Php 3:21). The glorious nature of that conformity defies description, but as much as glorified humanity can be like incarnate deity, believers will be, without becoming deity.⁵

1 Kruse, C. G. (2000). The letters of John (pp. 114–116). Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans Pub.; Apollos.

2 Palmer, E. F., & Ogilvie, L. J. (1982). 1, 2 & 3 John / Revelation (Vol. 35, pp. 50–51). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Inc.

3 McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Epistles (1 John) (electronic ed., Vol. 56, pp. 82–86). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

4 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 2, pp. 504–505). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

5 MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2006). The MacArthur study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (1 Jn 3:2). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

weep for your sins

5:4 In another seeming contradiction in terms, Jesus explained that “God blesses those who mourn, for they will be comforted.” Tied with the beatitude in verse 3, this means that humility (realization of one’s unworthiness before God) also requires sorrow for sins. Whether Jesus’ followers mourn for sin or in suffering, God’s promise is sure that they will be comforted. Only God can take away sorrow for sin; only God can forgive and erase it. Only God can give comfort to those who suffer for his sake because they know their reward in the Kingdom¹

Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted” (v. 4). Most commentators see this as a particular type of mourning, one so specific that it does not include a broader understanding of mourning. The first beatitude qualifies the poor as the poor in spirit, so scholars assume that Jesus is talking about those who mourn over their sin in broken contrition. I think that element is present, and we will look at that briefly in a moment, but the application is broader than simply sorrow for sin.

Mourning

Those who mourn but remain alienated from God will never receive the comfort that is promised here. The promise of comfort for those who mourn is not universal. Nevertheless, mourning was something that sounded a discordant note in the lives of the Jewish people in the Old Testament. Theirs was often a difficult lot as they suffered oppression from many nations, and poverty and disease abounded. Mourning was such an integral part of their lives that the Scriptures make this observation: “The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth” (Eccles. 7:4). Herman Melville once observed, “Until we understand that one grief outweighs a thousands joys, we will never understand what Christianity is trying to make us.” Our Lord was known as a man of sorrows, and He was acquainted with grief. There is a mourning beyond the mourning of sin that is part of the believer’s life even to this day.

When Joseph and Mary brought Jesus to the temple for the dedication of the infant and Simeon saw the Babe, he said, “Lord, now You are letting Your servant depart in peace, according to Your word; for my eyes have seen Your salvation” (Luke 2:29–30). That was a marvelous moment in redemptive history. Just prior to this recounting, we read that Simeon was a just and devout man who had been waiting for the Consolation of Israel (v. 25). If you look at that verse in your Bible, you will see that “Consolation” is capitalized. The term was a Jewish title for the coming Messiah, because they were looking to the Messiah as their redeemer and as their consolation.

The New Testament speaks frequently of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, who brings that consolation and dries the tears of God’s people. When we lose a loved one, we mourn, but we mourn knowing that that mourning will turn to joy and comfort on the day of resurrection. Therefore, if we wish to qualify this beatitude, we have to do so by saying, “Blessed are the godly who mourn, for they shall be comforted,” with respect to every pain that they experience in this world.

The experience of comfort on a human level is a Christ-less experience. I have boyhood memories of getting hurt while playing in the street and suffering insults. When so wounded I would come home crying. My mother, busy working in the kitchen, would take the edge of her apron and wipe away my tears. I think of that every time I read the promise in the book of Revelation, that in heaven the Lord will wipe away all of our tears once and for all (Rev. 21:4). As comforting as it was to feel the edge of my mother’s apron on my cheek, I would later cry again; but when the comfort that is promised here in Matthew is fully accomplished, it will be an everlasting comfort that will be the end of all tears.

There is also the element of mourning over our sin. In theology we make an important distinction between two types of repentance. One type is called “attrition,” which may be defined as repentance that is motivated from a fear of punishment. It is the kind of repentance your children express when their hands are caught in the cookie jar and they say, “Please don’t punish me. I won’t do it again.” That is different from authentic repentance, which is defined by what we call “contrition.” Real repentance over sin is generated by a profound sorrow from the soul in which we are heartily sorry for our sins. When Christ sees the righteous person who is broken by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, who reveals to us our sins so that our pillows are wet with our weeping, then we know what true contrition is from which God promises His comfort. Those who acknowledge their sins in a glib manner reflect the kind of repentance that Esau had, which was not real. A truly godly person mourns not only the loss of his loved ones or his health but also his sin before God.

Therefore, when our Lord said, “Blessed are those who mourn,” the blessing is not in the mourning; it is in the comfort. The comfort God’s people can expect, in part now but in full at the final day, is that spoken by the prophet: “ ‘Comfort, yes, comfort My people!’ says your God. ‘Speak comfort to Jerusalem, and cry out to her, that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she has received from the Lord’s hand double for all her sins’ ” (Isa. 40:1–2).²

Happy are they that mourn. This statement is closely connected with the preceding one, and is a sort of appendage or confirmation of it. The ordinary belief is, that calamities render a man unhappy. This arises from the consideration, that they constantly bring along with them mourning and grief. Now, nothing is supposed to be more inconsistent with happiness than mourning. But Christ does not merely affirm that mourners are not unhappy. He shows, that their very mourning contributes to a happy life, by preparing them to receive eternal joy, and by furnishing them with excitements to seek true comfort in God alone. Accordingly, Paul says, “We glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation produces patience, and patience experience, and experience hope: and hope maketh not ashamed,” (Rom. 5:3–5.)

Those that mourn … shall be comforted. The depth of the promise of these statements is almost inexhaustible. Those who mourn for sin shall be comforted in confession. Those who mourn for the human anguish of the lost shall be comforted by the compassion of God.³

When you realize you’re a sinner and when you mourn over your sin, the Lord will come to you and say, “I don’t condemn you. Go your way and sin no more.” That’s what the woman caught in the act of adultery heard, as did the prostitute who fell at the feet of Jesus weeping. “Leave her alone, Pharisees,” Jesus said. “The one who is forgiven much loves much.” In the state of realizing our poverty and in our mourning, we truly enter into the kingdom and are comforted.⁴

Title : MacArthur's New Testament Commentary: Matthew 1-7
Edition : First
Copyright : Copyright © 1985 by The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago Electronic Edition STEP Files Copyright © 1997, Parsons Technology, Inc.

The faithful child of God is constantly broken over his sinfulness, and the longer he lives and the more mature he becomes in the Lord, the harder it is for him to be frivolous. He sees more of God’s love and mercy, but he also sees more of his own and the world’s sinfulness. To grow in grace is also to grow in awareness of sin. Speaking to Israel, the prophet Isaiah said, “In that day the Lord God of hosts called you to weeping, to wailing, to shaving the head, and to wearing sackcloth. Instead, there is gaiety and gladness, killing of cattle and slaughtering of sheep, eating of meat and drinking of wine.” Following the world’s philosophy, which still prevails today, God’s ancient people said, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we may die” (Isa. 22:12-13). We follow that philosophy vicariously, if not actually, when we laugh at the world’s crude and immoral jokes even though we do not retell them, when we are entertained by a sin even though we do not indulge in it, when we smile at ungodly talk even though we do not repeat the words. To joke about divorce, to make light of brutality, to be intrigued by sexual immorality is to rejoice when we should be mourning, to be laughing when we should be crying. To “rejoice in the perversity of evil” is placed alongside “delight in doing evil” (Prov. 2:14). To take “pleasure in wickedness” (2 Thess. 2:12) is to be a part of the wickedness, whether or not we commit the specific sin. Much of the church today has a defective sense of sin, which is reflected in this defective sense of humor. When even its own members make the church the butt of jokes, make light of its beliefs and ordinances, caricature its leaders as inept and clownish, and make its high standards of purity and righteousness the subject of humorous commentary, the church has great need to turn its laughter into mourning. The Bible recognizes a proper sense of humor, humor that is not at the expense of God’s name, God’s Word, God’s church, or any person, except perhaps ourselves. God knows that “a joyful heart is good medicine” (Prov. 17:22), but a heart that rejoices in sin is taking poison, not medicine. The way to happiness is not in ignoring sin, much less in making light of it, but rather in sorrow over it that cries to God.

Title : MacArthur's New Testament Commentary: Matthew 1-7
Edition : First
Copyright : Copyright © 1985 by The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago Electronic Edition STEP Files Copyright © 1997, Parsons Technology, Inc.

How to Know if We Are Mourning as Christ Commands Knowing whether or not we have godly mourning is not difficult. First, we need to ask ourselves if we are sensitive to sin. If we laugh at it, take it lightly, or enjoy it, we can he sure we are not mourning over it and are outside the sphere of God’s blessing. The mock righteousness of hypocrites who make every effort to appear holy on the outside (see Matt. 6:1-18) has no sensitivity to sin, only sensitivity to personal prestige and reputation. Nor does the mock gratitude of those who thank God they are better than other people (Luke 18:11). Saul regretted that he had disobeyed God by not slaying King Agag and by sparing the best of the Amalekite animals. But he was not repentant; he did not mourn over his sin. He instead tried to excuse his actions by claiming that the animals were spared so that they could be sacrificed to God and that the people made him do what he did. He twice admitted that he had sinned, and even asked Samuel for pardon. But his real concern was not for the Lord’s honor but for his own. “I have sinned; but please honor me now before the elders of my people and before Israel” (1 Sam. 15:30). Saul had ungodly regret, not godly mourning. The godly mourner will have true sorrow for his sins. His first concern is for the harm his sin does to God’s glory, not the harm its exposure might bring to his own reputation or welfare. If our mourning is godly we will grieve for the sins of fellow believers and for the sins of the world. We will cry with the psalmist, “My eyes shed streams of water, because they do not keep Thy law” (Ps. 119:136). We will wish with Jeremiah that our heads were fountains of water that we could have enough tears for weeping (Jer. 9:1; cf. Lam. 1:16). With Ezekiel we will search out faithful believers “who sigh and groan over all the abominations which are being committed” around us (Ezek. 9:4; cf. Ps. 69:9). We will look out over the community where we live and weep, as Jesus looked out over Jerusalem and wept (Luke 19:41). The second way to determine if we have genuine mourning over sin is to check our sense of God’s forgiveness. Have we experienced the release and freedom of knowing our sins are forgiven? Do we have His peace and joy in our life? Can we point to true happiness He has given in response to our mourning? Do we have the divine comfort He promises to those who have forgiven, cleansed, and purified lives? The godly mourners “who sow in tears shall reap with joyful shouting. He who goes to and fro weeping, carrying his bag of seed, shall indeed come again with a shout of joy, bringing his sheaves with him” (Ps. 126:5-6).

1 Barton, B., Comfort, P., Osborne, G., Taylor, L. K., & Veerman, D. (2001). Life Application New Testament Commentary (p. 23). Wheaton, IL: Tyndale.

2 Sproul, R. C. (2013). Matthew (pp. 79–81). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

3 Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (p. 1884). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

4 Courson, J. (2003). Jon Courson’s Application Commentary (p. 25). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.

your bankrupt

3. For blessed many translations use expressions of a somewhat secular nature, such as “fortunate” (AB) or “happy” (JB). These bring out the joy that is conveyed by Jesus’ word, but not its full religious content. There is more to blessedness than happiness. Bruner has “God bless,” but this sounds too much like a prayer, while Jesus is making a strong affirmation. The first of the blessed ones are the poor in spirit. This is not to be understood in the sense of “abject” or “mean spirited,” as the English might perhaps convey. Nor is it the kind of poverty against which people rebel, but rather one that the poor in spirit accept, as pointing to the reality that they can bring nothing to God. The poor in spirit in the sense of this beatitude are those who recognize that they are completely and utterly destitute in the realm of the spirit. They recognize their lack of spiritual resources and therefore their complete dependence on God (cf. Goodspeed, “those who feel their spiritual need”; NEB, “know their need of God”). It is the opposite of the Pharisaic pride in one’s own virtue with which Jesus was so often confronted (and which has all too often made its appearance in later times). “This is the man to whom I will look,” the Lord says, “he that is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word” (Isa. 66:2). These are the poor in spirit.

There are strong protests in modern times against “spiritualizing” and “psychologizing” interpretations of this beatitude, and it is insisted that it must be seen for what it is, a radical reversal of the world’s values. We are told that it is the poor and the distressed as such of whom Jesus speaks. But we must exercise care at this point. Jesus is not saying that poverty is a blessing in itself; to canonize a state of life in which people find themselves against their will (real poverty does not mean voluntarily choosing to live simply) and from which they would escape if they could is scarcely Christian. Now it is true that it is easy for the interpreter smugly to transform the meaning of what Jesus says into an understanding of which the interpreter approves and avoid any real contact with the poverty-stricken. A rediscovery of Jesus’ interest in the poor is long overdue. But I cannot rid myself of the feeling that much modern writing proceeds from the comfortable, people for whom poverty is an interesting subject for discussion but who have never themselves experienced what real poverty is. I have. And poverty is not a blessing, nor is powerlessness. Whatever Jesus meant, it was surely not that these states are blessed in themselves. He knew poverty, and he knew powerlessness in the face of a government that did not care. Any interpretation of his teaching that makes these things in themselves a blessing simply fails to take notice of reality. Jesus is pronouncing a blessing on those empty of any spiritual resource, poor as they often were in material things as well.

There may well be a reminiscence of Old Testament teaching on the poor, but we must bear in mind that the poor in this sense are not the poverty stricken as such, but God’s poor, people oppressed by tyrants but trusting God, people who have nothing, no resource but God. “This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles” (Ps. 34:6). The Old Testament has many references to “the poor,” but we are to understand these not merely of people who lack in worldly goods but of the faithful though downtrodden poor, those who look to God for their deliverance.

Of these lowly people Jesus says, theirs is the kingdom of heaven. We should understand this in the sense of consequence rather than reward. In no sense do they merit the kingdom, but being what they are they possess it. We should understand this in the sense, “theirs alone.”¹⁶ Those who are not poor in spirit can never have membership in the kingdom. In the basic sense, of course, the kingdom belongs to God, and it is often said to be his. But in another sense membership in the kingdom belongs to all the people of God, and it is something like this that is in mind here. Jesus is saying that the lowly are especially characteristic of the kingdom. The riches of the kingdom belong to them in the fullest measure. The present tense is used for the blessing pronounced on them here and again in verse 10, but in the intermediate beatitudes the tense is future. We should not press this point too far, for the full blessing in all the beatitudes is future. But this present points to a significant blessing for the poor in spirit right now.¹

This verse says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” It doesn’t tell you how to become poor in spirit; it just says,“Blessed are the poor in spirit.” In these twelve verses, our Lord used the word blessed nine times. By the way, the Psalms open with the same word: “Blessed is the man …” (Ps. 1:1). This is in contrast to the curses of the Mosaic Law. You may remember that Joshua was told that when the people of Israel were come over Jordan, they were to stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people. And then the curses were to be given from Mount Ebal. The blessings from the Sermon on the Mount are in sharp contrast to the curses from Mount Ebal, and they far exceed the blessings from Mount Gerizim, because Christ alone can bring those blessings. In our day only the saved sinner can know his poverty of spirit—“Blessed are the poor in spirit.” The Sermon on the Mount, instead of making folk poor in spirit, makes them boast—like the man I referred to. He was boasting that the Sermon on the Mount was his religion, and he was trying to kid himself and kid me into thinking that he was keeping it. He wasn’t keeping it at all; it was just making a hypocrite out of him. And there are a lot of those around.

I played golf one day in Tulsa, Oklahoma, with a very wealthy oil man. He told me, “I went to church just like the rest of the hypocrites, and I was one of them, talking about keeping the Sermon on the Mount. Then one day I found out that I was a lost sinner on the way to hell. I turned to Jesus Christ, and He saved me!” Oh, my friend, don’t be deceived. Only the Spirit of God can reveal to you your poverty of spirit. The Lord Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount was not telling His disciples how to become citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven. They already were citizens of the Kingdom.

We Christians today are actually very poor in spirit, we are spiritually bankrupt, but we have something to give which is more valuable than silver and gold. Paul expressed it this way: ‘As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things” (2 Cor. 6:10). “As poor, yet making many rich” is referring to spiritual riches which are available to everyone who belongs to Christ.²

Our attitude toward ourselves (v. 3). To be poor in spirit means to be humble, to have a correct estimate of oneself (Rom. 12:3). It does not mean to be “poor spirited” and have no backbone at all! “Poor in spirit” is the opposite of the world’s attitudes of self-praise and self-assertion. It is not a false humility that says, “I am not worth anything, I can’t do anything!” It is honesty with ourselves: we know ourselves, accept ourselves, and try to be ourselves to the glory of God.³

1. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven

The first step to real happiness is an acknowledgement of spiritual poverty, the recognition of the fact I do not have in myself what it takes to be the person I was created to be. This is deeper than recognising I fail, it is realising I do not have the capacity within myself to do anything else! As Paul wrote, ‘I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature’ (Rom. 7:18), more literally, ‘in my natural self’. Human beings have been so created that the Spirit of God within them is indispensable in their ability to function as intended. David wrote, ‘I said to the Lord, “You are my Lord; apart from you I have no good thing” ’ (Ps. 16:2).

This does not mean there is nothing good in any of us, for it is self evident there are lots of good things. The ability to love, to do a good day’s work, to paint a picture, to play music, are all in themselves good and may be accomplished in independence of God. Then what does Paul mean when he states, ‘nothing good lives in me’?

Just imagine I had a brand new Rolls Royce parked outside my home. It is fully equipped with leather upholstery, quadraphonic sound, telephone, television in the back seat and even a bar! If you were to visit my home and look over my car you would be very impressed. But suppose my car had no engine! You would remain impressed until you asked me for a ride. Then you would discover that although there is nothing wrong with the leather upholstery, the telephone, television or sound system (all of which is fine in itself), but as far as being a car is concerned, it is incapable of functioning as a car is supposed to function. All it would be good for would be keeping chickens in—but I couldn’t go anywhere! When Paul says, ‘nothing good lives in me’, it is not that everything about him is bad! Elsewhere he lists some things about which he says he could boast (Phil. 3:4–6), but he is saying that apart from the indwelling presence of Jesus Christ, everything else which may be good about me is ultimately good for nothing. I am like a car without an engine.

It is to face this fact and acknowledge our own poverty of spirit which is the first step to real happiness. It is to this person Jesus says, ‘the kingdom of heaven is theirs’. All the riches of the kingdom of heaven are available to the person who recognises their own bankruptcy without God.⁴

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (v. 3). Matthew qualifies this first beatitude, whereas Luke does not have a qualifier. He simply says, “Blessed are you poor” (Luke 6:20). Some have drawn from this the idea that the kingdom of God belongs essentially to poor people, so all one has to do to enter the kingdom of God is to be poor in the material sense. There arose in the Middle Ages something called “poverty mysticism” in which poverty was elevated to a level of virtue that gave merit to those who were in such a state. That idea ignores the broader teaching of the Bible concerning the poor.

The Old Testament distinguishes among four different types of poor people. The first are those who are poor as a result of their sloth. They are poor because they are too lazy to sow their seed or to be engaged in meaningful and productive industry, and this group of the poor comes sharply under the judgment of God. This indicates that biblically there is no inherent virtue in poverty.

The second group includes those who are poor as a result of calamity through no fault of their own. They are not poor because they are lazy but because a farmer experienced a drought or a storm that destroyed his crops, or a person had a serious accident that left him in such a crippled fashion that he was unable to engage in productive labor. There is no judgment upon that group of the poor; rather, there is a mandate to make sure that this class of poor is helped by God’s people.

The third group is made up of those who are poor as a result of the exploitation of the rich and powerful, which, in biblical terms, was hardly ever the wealthy business people but the rulers who drained their people of all of their wealth. We see an example of this with Ahab, who confiscated unjustly Naboth’s vineyard.

The fourth category are those who are poor for righteousness’ sake, that is, those who willingly choose a vocation that leaves them destitute. Those in this category are concerned about things other than what the market produces. To them is promised the kindness of God, who notices their personal sacrifice.

It is important that we understand from a biblical perspective that not all poverty arises from laziness. At the same time, not all poverty is virtuous. There is no inherent merit in poverty, and there is no inherent sin in the fact of someone’s being poor. The same distinction can be made concerning the wealthy. Those who make their wealth through illegitimate means come under the judgment of God, but, at the same time, the Scriptures recognize that one can be wealthy and virtuous.

Therefore, those whom Jesus addresses here are not necessarily living in poverty, although it may include some in that state. Specifically in view here is a poverty of spirit, but not in the sense that they lack what it takes to exercise courage or industry. Matthew is also not speaking of those who are mean-spirited. To be poor in spirit in biblical terms means that someone has a poverty of arrogance. Such people are the polar opposite of the scribes and Pharisees, who boasted of their riches in virtue, their personal righteousness. Such people do not enter the kingdom of God.

The myth persists even in our culture that people can get to heaven by their good works, by the righteousness that they achieve by their particular virtues. If we trust in our own righteousness to get us into the kingdom of God, we will miss the kingdom of God altogether. To enter the kingdom of God, we must understand that, in light of the perfection of God, our virtue is bankrupt. We have no merit to offer God except for that earned for us by our Savior. Jesus spells out here a necessary condition for entering into His kingdom. We have to be broken of our pride. The psalmist writes, “A broken and contrite heart—these, O God, You will not despise” (Ps. 51:17), and just before this he writes, “For You do not desire sacrifice, or else I would give it; … The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit” (vv. 16–19).

A friend of mine had come out of the Roman Catholic Church and become a believer. She was excited about her new-found faith and felt free from her previous church atmosphere of constant scolding. She said, “When I found that I was justified by faith and not by works, I felt that everything was all said and done, until I read your book The Holiness of God. I was upset by your book because in it you reiterate that I am a sinner. I didn’t want to hear it, but as I began to think about the character of God, I got the message that there is no righteousness in me apart from Christ.” Her experience was one of coming to poverty of spirit.

We must not think that the poor in spirit get in the kingdom by that means and others get in by some other way—by being a peacemaker or being hungry or thirsty, as we see in the other beatitudes. Everyone has to be poor in spirit to receive the supreme blessing of the kingdom of God.⁵

5:3 Blessed. The word lit. means “happy, fortunate, blissful.” Here it speaks of more than a surface emotion. Jesus was describing the divinely-bestowed well-being that belongs only to the faithful. The Beatitudes demonstrate that the way to heavenly blessedness is antithetical to the worldly path normally followed in pursuit of happiness. The worldly idea is that happiness is found in riches, merriment, abundance, leisure, and such things. The real truth is the very opposite. The Beatitudes give Jesus’ description of the character of true faith. poor in spirit. The opposite of self-sufficiency. This speaks of the deep humility of recognizing one’s utter spiritual bankruptcy apart from God. It describes those who are acutely conscious of their own lostness and hopelessness apart from divine grace (cf. 9:12; Luke 18:13). See note on 19:17. theirs is the kingdom of heaven. See note on 3:2. Notice that the truth of salvation by grace is clearly presupposed in this opening verse of the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus was teaching that the kingdom is a gracious gift to those who sense their own poverty of spirit.⁶

Title : MacArthur's New Testament Commentary: Matthew 1-7
Edition : First
Copyright : Copyright © 1985 by The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago Electronic Edition STEP Files Copyright © 1997, Parsons Technology, Inc.

To be poor in spirit is to recognize one’s spiritual poverty apart from God. It is to see oneself as one really is: lost, hopeless, helpless. Apart from Jesus Christ every person is spiritually destitute, no matter what his education, wealth, social status, accomplishments, or religious knowledge. That is the point of the first beatitude. The poor in spirit are those who recognize their total spiritual destitution and their complete dependence on God. They perceive that there are no saving resources in themselves and that they can only beg for mercy and grace. They know they have no spiritual merit, and they know they can earn no spiritual reward. Their pride is gone, their self-assurance is gone, and they stand empty-handed before God. In spirit also conveys the sense that the recognition of poverty is genuine, not an act. It does not refer to outwardly acting like a spiritual beggar, but to recognizing what one really is. It is true humility, not mock humility. It describes the person about whom the Lord speaks in Isaiah 66:2—“To this one I will look, to him who is humble and contrite of spirit, and who trembles at My word.” It describes the person who is “brokenhearted” and “crushed in spirit” (Ps. 34:18), who has “a broken and a contrite heart” before the Lord (Ps. 51:17).

Why Humility Is First Jesus puts this beatitude first because humility is the foundation of all other graces, a basic element in becoming a Christian (Matt. 18:3-4). Pride has no part in Christ’s kingdom, and until a person surrenders pride he cannot enter the kingdom. The door into His kingdom is low and no one who stands tall will ever go through it. We cannot be filled until we are empty; we cannot be made worthy until we recognize our unworthiness; we cannot live until we admit we are dead. We might as well expect fruit to grow without a tree as to expect the other graces of the Christian life to grow without humility. We cannot begin the Christian life without humility, and we cannot live the Christian life with pride. Yet in the church today there is little emphasis on humility, little mention of self-emptying. We see many Christian books on how to be happy, how to be successful, how to overcome problems, and on and on. But we see very few books on how to empty ourselves, how to deny ourselves, and how to take up our crosses and follow Jesus—in the way that He tells us to follow Him. Until a soul is humbled, until the inner person is poor in spirit, Christ can never become dear, because He is obscured by self. Until one knows how helpless, worthless, and sinful he is in himself, he can never see how mighty, worthy, and glorious Christ is in Himself. Until one sees how doomed he is, he cannot see what a Redeemer the Lord is. Until one sees his own poverty he cannot see God’s riches. Only when one admits to his own deadness can Christ give him His life. “Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord” (Prov. 16:5). Being poor in spirit is the first beatitude because humility must precede everything else. No one can receive the kingdom until he recognizes that he is unworthy of the kingdom. The church in Laodicea said proudly, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” not knowing that she was instead “wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked” (Rev. 3:17). Those who refuse to recognize that they are lost and helpless are like the blind Roman slave girl who insisted that she was not blind but that the world was permanently dark. Where self is exalted, Christ cannot be. Where self is king, Christ cannot be. Until the proud in spirit become poor in spirit, they cannot receive the King or inherit His kingdom. Bookmark Name Bookmark Date Bookmark Text Edit commentary text here

1 Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew (pp. 95–97). Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

2 McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Gospels (Matthew 1-13) (electronic ed., Vol. 34, pp. 73–74). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

3 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, p. 21). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

4 Price, C. (1998). Matthew: Can Anything Good Come Out of Nazareth? (pp. 63–64). Fearn, Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications.

5 Sproul, R. C. (2013). Matthew (pp. 76–78). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

6 MacArthur, J., Jr. (Ed.). (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed., p. 1399). Nashville, TN: Word Pub.

INTRO TO THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT (WE MIGHT BE HERE FOR A LONG TIME)

The teaching in this sermon certainly sets a high standard. If we take it seriously we realize that we cannot attain it and therefore cannot merit salvation. It is the end of the way of law and drives us to seek salvation in Christ. But when we have received this salvation as God’s free gift, the sermon shows us how we should live in the service of our gracious God. It shows us what life is like in the kingdom of God. The sermon removes all complacency. The follower of Christ cannot say, “I have done all I should; I am the complete servant of God.” No matter how far we have gone along the Christian road the sermon tells us that there is more ahead of us.

But if it stretches our horizons in this way, it also enables us to understand more of what the grace of God means. Dale C. Allison, Jr., brings this out when he sums up his examination of the structure of the Sermon in these words: “The Sermon on the Mount sets forth God’s grace in the past (4:23–5:2), in the present (6:25–34; 7:7–11), and in the future (5:3–12); and this is the context in which 5:13–7:12 is to be heard. Amos Wilder was right on target when he wrote that Matthew 5–7 offers ‘not so much ethics of obedience as ethics of grace.’ ” We miss the point if we see the Sermon on the Mount as nothing other than a series of far-reaching demands. The demands are there, certainly. But the love and the mercy of God are there, too.

Most critics hold that this is not the account of any one sermon, but that Matthew has gathered (and adapted) material used on several occasions. We need not doubt that some of what we find in this sermon was delivered on other occasions, but I wonder whether some commentators have paid sufficient attention to the fact that an itinerant preacher normally makes repeated use of his material, often with minor or even major changes. He adapts what he has used elsewhere to the situation now confronting him. That we find somewhat similar statements in other parts of the Gospels does not mean that Jesus did not use them on this occasion. We should be on our guard against thinking that it is Matthew’s sermon rather than that of Jesus. The introductory and concluding verses (5:1–2; 7:28–29) read like the beginning and ending of an address. The best solution to a difficult problem seems to be that Matthew has taken a sermon Jesus delivered, and expanded it by including matter given on other occasions. He may be giving a summary of an extended session of teaching given over several hours (or even stretching into days; on one occasion at any rate people were with Jesus without food for three days, evidently to absorb his teaching, 15:32). It can scarcely be a verbatim report, for it is too long for anyone to have remembered the exact words, and there is no suggestion that it was written down as Jesus delivered it. But for us the important thing is that here we are brought into contact with Jesus’ teaching on important aspects of the life of the servant of God.

This discourse displays many resemblances to Luke’s “Sermon on the Plain” (Luke 6:17–49), and many interpreters hold that they are variant accounts of the same discourse. Luke’s use of “plain” does not rule this out, for it means no more than “a level place” and may well indicate a rather flat area in the mountains (though against this is the fact that a great multitude came to be healed, Luke 6:18, and it is unlikely that the sick would have climbed a mountain). Both sermons begin with beatitudes, go on to significant ethical teaching, and conclude with the little parable of the men building houses. But the differences between the two are such that it is not easy to regard them as variant accounts of the same sermon. It is better to think that Jesus used similar material on more than one occasion.

important bridge to the ‘Sermon on the Mount’; ‘Seeing the crowds’ (5:1), Jesus goes up onto a mountain.

The King’s speech: what is his kingdom like? (5:1–7:29)

The Sermon on the Mount is the first of the five sections of teaching in Matthew’s Gospel and is really a statement of life within God’s kingdom. I often compare it to the Queen’s Speech at the State Opening of Parliament. Each November in the United Kingdom, when the new session of Parliament officially begins, the monarch reads a speech outlining the policies which his or her government will pursue over the coming year. Amid great pomp and ceremony, with many theatrical touches, the Queen’s Speech is a statement of intent, declaring a programme of government.

There is no pomp or ceremony in the Sermon on the Mount. But there are echoes of the Old Testament; we are meant, perhaps, to see Jesus as the new Moses, outlining the rule of God in the lives of members of his new community. This is the formal inauguration of his kingdom; here the King sets out his plan, the programme by which his kingdom is identified and his rule administered.

So what do we have in the Sermon on the Mount?¹

There are two things I would like to say by way of introduction to this section. One is that the far right and the far left are not confined to politics, but among theologians who expound Scripture we also have the far left and the far right. This is vividly revealed in the understanding of the Sermon on the Mount. The liberal theologian is to the far left. He treats the Sermon on the Mount as the gospel, the good news. He acts (even if he doesn’t say it) as if it were the only important part of Scripture.

Many years ago I played handball with a very liberal preacher who later became rather famous as a leader of the liberal wing. One day he told me that all he needed of the Bible was the Sermon on the Mount. He went even so far as to say that all he needed was the Golden Rule, as recorded in Matthew 7:12: “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” To say that this is all the Bible you need may sound good, but it is pious drivel. The question is not whether you feel that the Sermon on the Mount is your religion. The question is: Are you living it? That is the important thing, and we’ll have more to say about that later.

Those who reduce the Christian message to the Sermon on the Mount represent a very large segment of liberalism in our day. But please notice that the content of the Christian gospel is not found in the Sermon on the Mount. For instance, there is absolutely no mention of the death and resurrection of Christ. Yet Paul said to the Corinthians, “… I declare unto you the gospel….” What is the gospel? The Sermon on the Mount? No. Paul made it clear that the gospel is this: “… that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:1, 3–4, italics mine). My friend, the gospel is not in the Sermon on the Mount, and that is the reason a great many people like to claim it as their religion. The preaching of that doctrine has made more hypocrites in the church than anything else. It is nothing in the world but verbiage for men to say, “I live by the Sermon on the Mount.” If a man is honest and will read the Sermon on the Mount, he will know that he is not living up to it.

My friend, if the Sermon on the Mount is God’s standard (and it is) and you come short of it, what are you going to do? Do you have a Savior who can extend mercy to you? Do you know the One who can reach down in grace and save you when you put your faith in Him?

To reduce the Christian message to the Sermon on the Mount is a simplicity which the Scriptures would not permit under any circumstances whatsoever. To do so is the extreme left point of view.

There is also the extreme right point of view. This group treats the Sermon on the Mount as if it were the bubonic plague. They have nothing to do with it. They give the impression that there is something ethically wrong with it. This group is known as hyper–dispensationalists. (Don’t misunderstand, I am a dispensationalist but not a hyper–dispensationalist.) They maintain that we can’t use the Sermon on the Mount at all. In fact, one of them told me that the Lord’s Prayer has no meaning for us today. He was a prominent man, and after I heard him make that statement, I ran a sermon series on the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord’s Prayer. In fact, I have a book entitled Let Us Pray which deals with the Lord’s Prayer. The Lord’s Prayer does have meaning for us in our day. It is for us although it is not to us. But the extreme right want to rule it out entirely.

It is true that there is no gospel in the Sermon on the Mount, and it is tragic indeed to give it to unregenerate man as a standard of conduct, and to tell him that if he tries to measure up to it, he is a Christian.

The Sermon on the Mount is Law lifted to the nth degree. Man could not keep the Law in the Old Testament. So how in the world can he keep, in his own strength, the Sermon on the Mount which is elevated to an even higher degree?

It is likewise true that the modus operandi for Christian living is not really found in the Sermon on the Mount. It gives the ethic without supplying the dynamic. Living by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit is just not one of the truths taught in the Sermon on the Mount. Paul says: “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Rom. 8:3–4).

You don’t find that teaching in the Sermon on the Mount. It contains nothing of the ministry of the Holy Spirit. However, it does contain high ethical standards and practices which are not contrary to Christian living; in fact, it expresses the mind of Christ which should be the mind of the Christian also. The great principles set down here are profitable for the Christian to study and learn, but he can never attain them in his own strength; he must go elsewhere to look for the power. What you have in the Sermon on the Mount is a marvelous electric light bulb, but you do not have the generator that produces the power that will make the light. And it is the light, not the bulb, that is all important.

The primary purpose of the Sermon on the Mount is to set before men the law of the Kingdom. In Matthew we are talking about the King who has come to present Himself. John the Baptist was His forerunner, and the King called disciples to follow Him. Now He enunciates the law of the Kingdom. This is the manifesto of the King and the platform of the Prince of Peace. And it’s law! It will be the law of this world during the Millennium, and then it will find full fruition. Christ will reign on earth in person and will enforce every word of it. The Sermon on the Mount will finally prevail when He whose right it is to rule shall come. Now it’s inconceivable to me that anyone who acknowledges Him today as Lord would despise this document or turn from it. The Christian who calls Jesus Christ Lord, will seek to do what He commands, but he can obey only in the power of the Holy Spirit. It is worse than futile to try to force the Sermon on the Mount on a gainsaying and rebellious world. Only the gospel of the grace of God can make men obedient to Christ, and it was given to bring men into obedience to God.

The Sermon on the Mount needs to be preached to bring conviction to the hearts of men. This document lets men know that they have sinned, and it reveals that none are righteous and that all have come short of God’s glory.

The Christian can take the principles set down in the Sermon on the Mount and consider them in the light of other Scriptures. This will provide a wider view and a better understanding of the mind of Christ. For example, only here can you find Christ’s definition of murder and adultery. Christ took two of the commandments and lifted them to the nth degree, “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exod. 20:13–14). Are these the only two which He lifted to a higher level? The answer seems to be obvious. These are the only two which are recorded in Matthew. Apparently, He did or could lift each commandment to a much higher level of attainment. If it could be said of the Mosaic Law, “… for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified” (Gal. 2:16), then it would be ten times more difficult for a man to be justified by the Sermon on the Mount.

Try putting down upon your own life these two commandments: “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” Let me illustrate what I mean by a little story. This incident took place during my first pastorate when I was a lot more blunt than I am now. An elder in the church I served in Nashville, Tennessee, invited me to speak at a Chamber of Commerce luncheon. This elder was a very wonderful man. He was the vice–president of a bank in the city, a member of the Chamber of Commerce, and when he asked me to bring a brief message, he said, “You won’t have but a few minutes, but I want you to give these businessmen the gospel.” Well, I arrived at the place a little early, and there were several men standing around. I went up near the speaker’s table, and there was a man there who shook hands with me and began to rip out oaths. I had never seen such a fine–looking, well–dressed man curse as this man did. Finally, he said to me, “What’s your racket?” I told him that I was a preacher, and he began to cover up immediately. He apologized for his language. He didn’t need to apologize to me; he needed to apologize to God because God heard him all the time—which I told him. Then he wanted me to know that he was an officer in a certain liberal church, and he boasted, “The Sermon on the Mount is my religion.”

“It is?” I said, “Let’s shake hands. I congratulate you—you’ve got a wonderful religion! By the way, how are you doing with it?”

“What do you mean?”

“You said that the Sermon on the Mount is your religion. Are you living by it?”

“Well I try.”

“That’s not quite it. The Lord said that you are blessed if you do those things, not if you vote for them. Are you keeping it?”

“I think I am.”

“Do you mind if we take a little test?”

“All right.”

“The Sermon on the Mount says that if you are angry with your brother you are guilty of murder. Are you keeping that one?”

“Well, that’s pretty strong, but I don’t think I have been angry enough to kill anyone.”

Then I quoted the one the Lord gave on adultery: “Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (v. 28), and asked him, “How about that one?”

“Oh, I guess that would get me.”

“Well, I imagine that there are several things in the Sermon on the Mount that would get you. Apparently you are not living by your religion. If I were you, I’d change my religion and get something that works.”

Oh, how many people there are like that man! They very piously say that the Sermon on the Mount is their religion, but all they mean is that they think it is a good document and a very fine expression, but it doesn’t affect them one whit. I found out later that the man I was talking with had two wives—one at home and one at his office. My friend, if the Sermon on the Mount is your religion, you had better make sure you are keeping it. It is loaded with law. But if you will look at the Sermon on the Mount honestly, it will bring you to a Savior who died for you on the cross. The Sermon on the Mount sets before us great principles and high goals. We need to know them, but they reveal how far we come short.²

attain, thus nullifying its significance for the Christian.

From Nazareth to Cana and Capernaum

Nowhere in the presentation of the message of the kingdom does Jesus indicate that this message is significantly different from the proclamation of evangelism by the church. The difference, rather, seems to be in relation to those to whom the message is directed. During the early period of the Gospels, the message of the kingdom of heaven was directed to the nation of Israel and contained the potential fulfillment of the promised kingdom to the Jews. To the Gentile nations of the Church Age the proclamation of the message is that God will gather a people for Himself from all nations into this great kingdom. The prerequisite for entrance into this kingdom included repentance (Mt 4:17), righteousness (Mt 5:20), faith (Mt 18:3) or, in summary, being born again (Jn 3). Because the people rejected these requirements, Christ taught that His earthly reign would not be centralized in the nation of Israel but in a gathering of a people from among the nations of the earth.

5:1–2. The opening verses of the Sermon on the Mount indicate that this message deals with the inner state of mind and heart which is the indispensable absolute of true Christian discipleship. It delineates the outward manifestations of character and conduct of the true believer and genuine disciple. A dispensationalist, Lawlor writes: “We do not find basic, fundamental Law here, for law cannot produce the state of blessedness set forth herein” (cf. G. Lawlor, The Beatitudes Are for Today, p. 11). Rather, the quality of life herein described is the necessary product of grace alone. As Jesus states the outward legal requirements of the law and then carries His listener beyond the letter of the law to the true spirit and intent of the law, He describes a life-style which no human being could live in his own power. Thus, the life of the believer, described by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, is a life of grace and glory, which comes from God alone. To make this quality of life the product of man’s human efforts (as does the liberal) is the height of overestimation of man’s ability and underestimation of his depravity. To relegate this entire message, Jesus’ longest recorded sermon, to a Jewish-only life-style, as do hyperdispensationalists, is to rob the church of her greatest statement of true Christian living!

The depth of spiritual truth proclaimed in this message of the kingdom, however, does not present the gospel of justification by faith in the death and resurrection of Christ. Pink states: “Its larger part was a most searching exposition of the spirituality of the law and the repudiation of the false teaching of the elders” (A. W. Pink, An Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount, p. 13). Jesus made it clear that the spirit of Christ goes beyond the outward demand of the law. The Christian, though not under the law, is to live above the law.

It has always been difficult to clearly draw the distinction between the relationship of law and grace. Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones has observed: “Some so emphasize the law as to turn the gospel of Jesus Christ with its glorious liberty into nothing but a collection of moral maxims. It is all law to them and there is no grace left. They so talk of the Christian, that it becomes pure legalism and there is no grace in it. Let us remember also that it is equally possible so to overemphasize grace at the expense of the law as again, to have something which is not the gospel of the New Testament” (D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, pp. 12–15). He goes on to note that the Sermon on the Mount and the message of the kingdom do have definite application to the Christian today. It was preached to people who were meant to practice it not only at that time but ever afterwards as well. Boice (p. 9) observes that that “World” of the Sermon on the Mount cannot be restricted to life in the future millennial kingdom, since it includes tax collectors, thieves, unjust officials, hypocrites, and false prophets.

Embodied in the Sermon on the Mount is a summation of Jesus’ basic ethical teaching of the life of a born-again man. While the Sermon on the Mount is not a way of salvation, neither is it only a message to those under the law, for it obviously goes beyond the law. It is a presentation of Christian discipleship which can be wrought in the soul of an individual only by the power of God. This message does not tell one how to be saved; it tells one what it is like to be saved. It explains the quality of the life changed by the saving grace of God. Its basic truths are reiterated everywhere throughout the New Testament epistles. There is no fundamental contrast between this message and the message of Paul. Both are in agreement that “the just shall live by faith!”

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus states the spiritual character and quality of the kingdom which He wished to establish. The basic qualities of this kingdom are fulfilled in the church which He would establish. Virtually every section of this message is repeated in the substance elsewhere throughout the New Testament. There is nothing here to indicate that this message is to be limited in its application only to the people of Israel. Notice in the opening verse that his disciples had come to Him and he … taught them the following message.³

The Sermon on the Mount is one of the most misunderstood messages that Jesus ever gave. One group says it is God’s plan of salvation, that if we ever hope to go to heaven we must obey these rules. Another group calls it a “charter for world peace” and begs the nations of the earth to accept it. Still a third group tells us that the Sermon on the Mount does not apply to today, but that it will apply at some future time, perhaps during the Tribulation or the millennial kingdom.

I have always felt that Matthew 5:20 was the key to this important sermon: “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 main theme is true righteousness. The religious leaders had an artificial, external righteousness based on Law. But the righteousness Jesus described is a true and vital righteousness that begins internally, in the heart. The Pharisees were concerned about the minute details of conduct, but they neglected the major matter of character. Conduct flows out of character.

Whatever applications the Sermon on the Mount may have to world problems, or to future events, it is certain that this sermon has definite applications for us today. Jesus gave this message to individual believers, not to the unsaved world at large. What was taught in the Sermon on the Mount is repeated in the New Testament epistles for the church today. Jesus originally gave these words to His disciples (Matt. 5:1), and they have shared them with us.⁴

Of greater importance is the matter of interpreting the Sermon on the Mount. There are three serious errors that are widely held in the church with regard to understanding the sermon. The first error teaches that all the ethical mandates found in the sermon have no bearing on us today. Rather, this sermon is seen as being about the ethics of the kingdom of God, and since the kingdom of God has not yet come, the sermon is irrelevant to us now. That is a serious distortion, which is based on an equally serious misunderstanding of the concept of the kingdom of God in the New Testament.

Jesus ascended to heaven to assume the role of King of kings, so even though the final consummation of His kingdom is in the future, to think that the kingdom is something completely future misses one of the central thrusts of the New Testament. I believe that the content of the Sermon on the Mount is very much relevant to us today, as it is to Christians in every generation. In fact, the virtues spelled out here in the sermon are spelled out in the teachings of the Apostles.

The second error is to see that the Sermon on the Mount is merely a new declaration of law by which an impossible ethic is set before us so as to reveal the necessity of the gospel. That is indeed one of the things that the law does—expose our desperate need for the gospel—but I think that again misunderstands the basic essence of the sermon.

Perhaps the worst distortion was brought to bear in nineteenth-century liberalism. It holds that the Sermon on the Mount is about the social gospel and that the ethic of Jesus is not about personal redemption but about teaching the church ethical behavior so that the mission of the church is to be an agency of mere humanitarianism. That, of course, scuttles not only the relevance of the Sermon on the Mount but the entire New Testament.

If you look closely at the content of the Sermon on the Mount, in it Jesus sets forth our response to Him as the ultimate test by which we and all men will be judged eternally. Therefore, let us be careful not to get caught in the trap of those erroneous views. The sermon is the Word of God for us today and for Christians in every age.⁵

1 Campbell, I. D. (2008). Opening up Matthew (pp. 41–42). Leominster: Day One Publications.

2 McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Gospels (Matthew 1-13) (electronic ed., Vol. 34, pp. 67–72). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

3 Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (pp. 1882–1884). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

4 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 20–21). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

5 Sproul, R. C. (2013). Matthew (pp. 73–74). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.