I’ve read the Beatitudes a time or two, but as I visited them again as part of our Bible-reading plan this year (it’s tough to write the bulletin article if you’re not a week ahead!), the one that jumped out at me was Matthew 5:9.  We don’t live in a very peacemaker-y time.  The political polarization in our country has become so obvious that mentioning it is nearly a cliché.  On both sides, increasing numbers of people believe that the other side is The Enemy, to be defeated by any means necessary, even at the cost of the dearly held principles of 20 years ago.

Of course, we are not the first to live in a time that is not very peacemaker-y.  Jesus did too.  Indeed, anger and conflict are the backdrop of the gospels.  The Jewish community of AD 30 was deeply divided by the presence of the occupying Romans.  Some, from the tax collectors to the chief priests, collaborated with them, generally as a way of acquiring wealth and power. 

Reacting to this corrupt bargain, the Pharisees demanded fidelity to a body of religious tradition that they claimed came from God but really came from them.  Still farther along the political spectrum, the Essenes withdrew from a society that they considered irredeemably wicked.  The Zealots plotted to overthrow it.

To them all, Jesus says that the peacemakers are blessed and are sons of God.  Not the Sadducees, the Herodians, the Pharisees, the Essenes, or the Zealots.  The peacemakers. 

In Jesus’ view, the peacemakers need first of all to seek peace with God, but secondarily, they need to seek peace with one another.  What matters is not somebody else’s privileged position or nit-picky moral code or contempt for the world or desire to burn it all down.  What matters is whether they have a soul.  Of Jesus’ twelve closest followers, one was a tax collector and another was a Zealot.  Hint, hint.

2000 years ago, the vast majority of Jewish society didn’t listen to Jesus.  The power brokers had Him killed because they thought He was a threat to their position, not realizing that their own actions were the greatest threat.  Over the next 35 years, tensions between Jews and Romans, and indeed between Jews and Jews, increased until they exploded in the catastrophe of the Great Jewish Revolt.

Nobody won the Great Revolt.  Not the Romans, who had an entire legion massacred by the rebels and only were able to put down the rebellion at an immense cost in treasure and blood.  Not the Jewish factions, who spilled blood in the courts of the Temple as they battled each other for dominance until the Romans arrived and killed them all.  Not the common folk of Galilee and Judea, countless thousands of whom were butchered by the contending forces.  Nobody emerged from the cataclysm better off.

Blessed are the peacemakers.  Blessed are those who love their enemies.  Blessed are those who are able to find value and worth in the most obnoxious proclaimers of an opposing viewpoint. 

Blessed are those in our time who are willing to hear the voice of Jesus.

Without question, the Sermon on the Mount is the best known sermon in history. Throughout the centuries untold numbers of people have dissected, analyzed, discussed, taught, and wrote about this magnum opus of Jesus. Yet, its message continues to challenge readers today. For the next few weeks we'll explore this great teaching of our Lord one section at a time. It's always a good time to start The Life and Teachings of Jesus 2020 Reading Plan.

The Life and Teachings of Jesus - Week 8 – February 24-28:

Monday – Matt. 5:1-12 (cf. Luke 6:20-26): Without question, the Sermon on the Mount is the best known sermon in history. Throughout the centuries untold numbers of people have dissected, analyzed, discussed, taught, and wrote about this magnum opus of Jesus. Yet, its message continues to challenge readers today. After the scene is set in vv. 1-2, Jesus begins His discourse with a series of nine Beatitudes (vv. 3-12), a declaration of blessed happiness and joy. The sharply paradoxical character of these statements runs counter to conventional values. Thus, the Beatitudes call on those who would be God’s people to stand out as different from those around them.

The Beatitudes describe the qualities Jesus requires of those who will follow Him. How would your life look different if you lived out these sayings to their fullest?

Tuesday – Matt. 5:13-16 (cf. Luke 14:34-35): Coming out of the Beatitudes Jesus summarizes Christianity and its relationship to the unbelieving world through the elements of salt and light. “You are the salt of the earth” (v. 13). Believers flavor the world in which they live and help prevent its corruption. “You are the light of the world” (v. 14). The world needs the light of the gospel of Jesus, and it is through the disciples that it must be made visible. Ultimately, the disciple whose salt is diluted or whose light is hidden is worthless. Nominal believers who do not live a life of discipleship will be “thrown out and trampled under people’s feet” (v. 13); the phrase is intentionally graphic.

How are you “salt” and “light” in your community? List any areas in which your “salt” has lost its taste or your “light” may be hidden. What can you do today to change?

Wednesday – Matt. 5:17-20: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (v. 17). In this manner Jesus begins the second section of His sermon (5:17-48). Here He clarifies that He will neither give a new law nor modify the old, but rather explain the true significance of law and the prophets. Furthermore, Jesus “fulfills” the law by keeping it perfectly and embodying its types and symbols. With strong words, He warns against anyone breaking even the least of the commandments and teaching others to do the same. Lastly, the statement that the righteousness of those who enter the kingdom must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees must have come as a very surprising, if not alarming, piece of news to His audience.

Looking ahead at vv. 21-48, how does Jesus illustrate that one’s righteousness must exceed that of the religious elites of His day, the scribes and Pharisees?

Thursday – Matt. 5:21-26 (Luke 12:57-59): Once Jesus has made it clear that He is not opposing the law but fulfilling it, He shows how the customary practice of the law in His day, as interpreted by the scribes and Pharisees, is inadequate. Jesus uses six varied topics to illustrate the concept of a righteousness which goes beyond the legal correctness of the scribes and Pharisees (see v. 20). Each is presented in the form of a contrast between what the people had heard, “You have heard that it was said…” to Jesus’ more demanding ethic, “But I say…” The principle of vv. 21-22 is that the actual committing of murder is only the outward manifestation of an inward attitude which itself is culpable before God. Angry thoughts and contemptuous words deserve equally severe judgment Jesus declares; indeed, the “the fires of hell” goes beyond the human death penalty which the Old Testament declared for murder.

In what way(s), are Jesus’ words about anger shocking? Why do you think that it’s important to come to terms quickly with those who have “something against you” (v. 23)?

Friday – Matt. 5:27-30: In this second saying, Jesus addresses adultery and lust. His warning against lust challenges many. Of course the Lord is not referring to noticing a person’s beauty, but to imbibing it, meditating on it, harboring a desire for an illicit relationship. This, Jesus says is tantamount to adultery. We should note that Jesus squarely places the blame and responsibility for lust on the person doing the lusting. Thus, Jesus declares in a graphic manner that by whatever means necessary, the lust-er should cast off the sin of lust. He doesn’t mean that one literally plucks out an eye or cut off one’s right hand to combat temptation. Rather His point is this, do everything you can to not sin; a partial loss, however painful, is preferable to the total loss of the body (and soul). Jesus graphically illustrates the importance of dealing with sin in one’s life.

What difference might His teaching make in the way that you consider your own personal conduct and decisions?

For about 20 years now, I’ve been having discussions with brethren all over the country about who should lead singing.  Some argue that the congregation’s best song leaders should lead on Sunday morning to the exclusion of everyone else.  They say that’s giving to God our best. 

By contrast, others argue that it’s ungodly to judge the value of a song leader according to fleshly, external standards.  The technical virtuoso may be self-centered and godless in his heart, while the guy who can’t hardly carry a tune in a bucket may be giving the Lord heartfelt glory.  In consequence, we should let everybody lead who wants to lead and leave the judging to God.

I think both sides have a point, but I also think that the difference between them is not so great as it appears.  To illustrate what I mean, let’s consider a couple of different sacrifices from the Law of Moses.

Leviticus 5:7 is an illustration of God’s kindness toward the poor.  In it, God recognizes that some of His people may not be able to afford a lamb to offer as a sacrifice for sin.  As a result, He allows them to offer according to what they could afford, by substituting turtledoves or pigeons for livestock.  In God’s eyes, the turtledove offered by one who was giving his best was just as pleasing as the bull.

In Malachi 1, particularly in Malachi 1:14, we see a very different scenario playing out.  This time, comparatively wealthy Jews who owned flocks were offering their lame, sick, and blind animals as sacrifices.  They had the resources to do better, but instead of striving to give God their best, they offered what they thought they could get away with.  God was not pleased with them!

Today, I think there are unblemished-turtledove song leaders and blemished-lamb song leaders.  The former is a man who is simply limited in his gifts.  He’s gone to song-leading schools to perfect his craft, he practices every time before he leads singing, but he regularly makes mistakes.

However, I think God is pleased with a sacrifice like that despite those mistakes.  When we fall short of skilled perfection because of the way He created us, He doesn’t expect any better than that.  I have a lot of sympathy for a song leader who is struggling but obviously offering his best.

On the other hand, though, we have blemished-lamb song leaders.  These men make mistakes during the assembly too, but their mistakes are the fruit of lack of effort.  They’ve never bothered to learn how to blow pitch, beat time, or master any of the other skills that are so important to the song leader.  Before the assembly, they can be seen hurriedly putting together a song list on the front pew.  In raw talent, they may well blow the unblemished-turtledove song leader away, but men like this never will realize their potential because they can’t be bothered to try.

Now, I’m not saying that every Christian man should feel responsible for becoming a song leader.  However, if you want to be a song leader, then you need to put in the work.  Nobody is entitled to lead the Lord’s people in worship on Sunday morning simply by virtue of church membership!

When men who have not developed their skills and do not work hard seek that position anyway, that is not a God-honoring spirit.  Yes, it’s important not to presume what someone’s heart is like, but the one who is not diligent in preparing to serve makes his heart obvious by the absence of fruit.

When somebody wants to open up the song-leading roster, then, I want to know who the additions will be.  Are these men who have worked hard, hit their ceiling, and want to serve despite their limitations?  Or, on the other hand, are these men who are limited because they never have bothered to learn how to serve?  Once we figure that out, I don’t think we’ll have any trouble discerning who should enter the rotation.

Along with most other members of churches of Christ, I believe that the word of God is the sole authoritative guide to serving Him.  In particular, I believe that within the New Testament, we can discern a pattern of work and worship in the first-century church that God expects all Christians to follow. 

However, I also believe that this pattern is limited in its scope.  The Bible does not provide an answer for every question that we might ask about the church.  Should the congregation meet on Sunday night?  Should there be three trays of bread on the Lord’s Supper table, or four (or trays at all, for that matter)?  The Scripture leaves these issues, along with a host of others, to our judgment and discretion.

Judgment also plays a role in the way that we interpret many commandments.  Sometimes, the role of judgment is limited.  1 Timothy 2:1-2 doesn’t leave Christians with a lot of discretion about praying for the government.  We have to. 

At other times, though, our understanding of a passage can’t be anything more than a judgment call.  I have read numerous explanations of what “the husband of one wife” means in 1 Timothy 3:4.  However, I don’t think there’s any way to conclusively determine from the text what the phrase means.  Nor can we duck the question altogether—not, at least, if we want to appoint elders!  Instead, each congregation must judge for itself what a husband of one wife is.

So too, the application of Scriptural principles is left to our judgment.  I can clearly define what adultery is, but I can’t do the same with modesty or uncleanness.  I can offer my judgment about whether a particular garment is modest, but that will never be anything more than my judgment.  On the extremes, I think it becomes increasingly difficult to argue that my judgment is wrong, but on the margin, that argument is very easy to make.

All of this is important for several reasons.  First, we must acknowledge that we do make judgment calls as we apply the word.  Some brethren have real trouble seeing this.  They are every bit as confident in what they say about modesty as in what they say about adultery, even though the Scriptural witness in each case is very different.

This is problematic.  We need to be able to distinguish between our judgments and the judgments of the Lord, or else we will end up in the same boat as the Pharisees!  Additionally, Christians who turn their judgment calls into matters of faith bring the Restoration project itself into disrepute.  It’s easy for critics to point out their error and use that error to deny that a first-century pattern exists at all.

Second, we must acknowledge the right of others to make their own judgment calls, particularly when they differ from ours.  Just because I see the right answer to a spiritual question so clearly does not mean that the answer is, in fact, clear.  “Judge not, that you be not judged,” is not as broad as the world wants to make it, but it is perhaps not as narrow as we want to make it either.

Third, we must confess that not everyone’s judgment is equally good.  We all differ in Biblical understanding, life experience, and good sense, and all those things affect the quality of our judgment.  No, there is no text in the New Testament that explicitly says, “Thou shalt not drink any alcohol, ever.”  However, it’s also the judgment of countless elders, preachers, and older sisters in Christ that drinking is a bad idea.  Is it wise to reject the judgment of the wise?  Probably not.

Rather than being a flaw in our conception of the Biblical pattern, the exercise and development of our judgment is one of its strengths.  Just as God has given each of us the right to read the Scriptures for ourselves, He has given us the right to interpret and reason from them.  As we grow in our ability to judge, we mature in Christ.  May we use this gift wisely, yet fearlessly, so that the longer we walk with Him, the more we become like Him!

In this week’s reading, we begin to encounter what is one of the most surprising themes of the gospels.  As Mark 2:34 reports, “[Jesus] healed many who were sick with various diseases and drove out many demons.  And He would not permit the demons to speak, because they knew Him.”  Lest we think that this spiritual gag order is confined to demons, consider a text that will appear in our reading in several weeks, Mark 1:44.  There, after cleansing a leper, Jesus tells him, “See that you say nothing to anyone.” 

The leper ignores Him, but that’s hardly the point.  It’s clear that Jesus, who later tells His followers to preach the gospel to every creature, is doing the best He can to suppress the truth about His identity.  What on earth is going on?

In order to understand this, we need to understand the urgent nature of Jesus’ ministry.  Today, we think of someone who obeyed the gospel three years ago as a new Christian--if not a babe in Christ, at least a kindergartner in Christ!  However, the entirety of Jesus’ ministry was only about three years long. 

Some of His disciples had been disciples of John; others were observant Jews.  Still others (at least Matthew, maybe more) had been irreligious.  Regardless of where they began, though, none of His followers were prepared for the transformation in their thinking that the gospel demanded.  They spent three years trying to drink from a spiritual fire hose!

Throughout His ministry, Jesus displays a painful awareness of how much His disciples have to learn and how little time He has to teach them.  It’s not hard to hear the impatience in His voice when He says to them in Mark 8:21, “Don’t you understand yet?”  Come on, people!  We don’t have time for your hard-heartedness!

Three years proved to be enough time to get the job done, even if all the disciples crater pretty spectacularly when Jesus is arrested and crucified.  One year, though, or even two?  It seems likely that Jesus’ ministry lasted for three years because He knew that it was the minimum amount of time that it would take for Him to prepare His disciples.  Jesus could raise the dead instantaneously, but changing hearts required three years of frustrating work (which is perversely reassuring to those of us who are in the heart-changing business!).

Those three years come to an end, of course, when the leaders of the Jewish nation decide that Jesus is an existential threat to them and must be killed.  They didn’t come to this conclusion on their own.  Jesus provoked them into it by raising Lazarus and challenging their authority on the very grounds of the temple itself. 

It was vitally important for the chief priests to decide to kill Jesus, but it was just as important that they not reach that decision too early.  If they did, it would have cut into that vital time He needed to teach His disciples.  I don’t think they could have killed Jesus early, but they certainly could have made it impossible for Him to teach publicly.

However, if the chief priests are deluged with reports of a prophet whom even the demons proclaim to be the Son of God, they might well move early.  Jesus, then, forbids them to speak not because the message is wrong, but because the time isn’t right.  He doesn’t want the narrative to spin out of His control.

Rather than being irrational, then, Jesus’ desire to conceal His identity makes perfect sense.  Not surprisingly, the Man who does all things well is able to keep the leaks to a minimum, to give Himself the time He needs to accomplish His mission.  Today, we are able to hear the gospel because Jesus kept too much of it from being proclaimed too soon.