Sermon on the Mount: Some Introductory Thoughts (Mt 5:1-2)

I’ve finally come to a section of Matthew that freaks me out.  Working through the Sermon on the Mount, especially the Beatitudes is an insanely daunting task if for no other reason than the fact that so many preachers and great theologian and Bible scholars have said so much great stuff about it already.  For one, it’s impossible to come up with anything original and still be orthodox; for another, what can anyone possibly say that hasn’t already been said better and more worthy of attention than what I might be able to come up with?  Perhaps I’m being over-apologetic, but don’t expect too much out of me…chances are I’ll let you down…

Up to this point in Matthew, Matthew has been making his case that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised messiah who the Jews have long been expecting and waiting for.  He’s quoted the prophets, he’s shown how Jesus’ life to tthis point is consistent with the prophets, and his expectation is that his readers have become largely convinced.  Now that his case has been made, he has the freedom to move on to focusing more on discipleship.  In the Hebraic understanding of discipleship, you can’t really be a disciple of someone if you don’t know that person.  And so it was necessary for Matthew to spend a few chapters identifying Jesus before moving on to a description of what he taught us about how to be his disciple.  Matthew began to make the shift in 4:18-22 (you’ll find my discussion in “Discipleship Rising“).  But now he’s ready to launch head-long into Jesus specific teachings regarding lifestyle.

The verses I’m looking at say this,

Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down.  His disciples came to him and he began to teach them.

Chapter 4 ends by pointing out that Jesus’ reputation was beginning to spread well-beyond the borders of Galilee; people were coming from all over to see him.  Obviously this wouldn’t have have gone unnoticed by Jesus.  So after a while, I imagine Jesus thought to himself, “These people aren’t going away, but they’re also only here to see me perform miracles.  It’s about time I let them know why I’m really here – weed out the gawkers from those who are really interested in what God is doing here.“  He “goes up the mountain” and he begins to flesh out what he’s trying to do.

Just as an editorial note, it’s likely that this is not a verbatim manuscript of Jesus’ sermon; it’s more likely that this is more of a summary of what Jesus would have frequently preached about.  That doesn’t take-away from the reliability or accuracy of what’s said, it’s just a recognition that Matthew (or any of the gospel writers for that matter) couldn’t remember everything word-for-word or record everything Jesus ever said (Jn 21:25).  It’s also a recognition that what Matthew remembered and chose to include in his gospel are those points that he deemed to be most important and relevant to his message of discipleship.

There are two thing in particular worth noting about these two verses – details that suggest something a bit more profound than simply a description of “this is what happened next.”

First off, Jesus “went up on a mountain.”  In the days before microphones and fancy sound systems, people would have to gather at natural amphitheaters in order to be heard by large crowds…a person’s voice simply cannot carry far enough in open country for a large crowd to hear what’s being said.  I’m not going to accuse Matthew of lying, but it is a bit peculiar that he would have Jesus going to one of the most difficult places to be heard to address a large crowd with such an important message.

I think the peculiarity warrants a closer look…And so I asked myself What’s the deal with the mountain?  Or going up a mountain?  Did anyone else go up a mountain?

Let me go back to the Galilee mish-mash again from “Healing the Galileans.”  In such a diverse melting pot controlled by the Roman empire, there were sure to be some pretty diverse religious beliefs present as well.  We know the ancient Arab tribes such as the Chaldeans and Philistines were nature worshippers and believed that their gods resided on the mountain tops.  We also know that Greek and Roman gods were thoughts to dwell on the mountain tops as well (Temple of Athena, Temple of Artimas, etc).  Often in the OT, God appears to people on mountain tops (Moses, Elijah).

Think about that last one for a second…Moses went up the mountain – Sinai – to receive the Law which dictated the details of the relationship between He and His people.  What’s more, Matthew has already compared Jesus to Moses (see “Jesus, Moses, & Maimonides“).  Is it possible that by including the detail of Jesus going “up on a mountain” rather than allowing his audience to assume a natural, sunken amphitheater, Matthew is keeping the Moses connection going?

The Moses connection is perhaps even further emphasized when you consider what makes up a majority of the Sermon on the Mount, or what the “theme” of Jesus’ teaching is.  If you were to skim ahead through chapters 5-7, what should jump out is the legalistic feel of the sermon.  In fact, in 5:17-20, the issue of the Law is explicitly brought up and Jesus clarifies what he’s doing by saying, “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” (5:17).  (In his book A Jewish Understanding of the New Testament, Rabbi Sandmel considers the Law of Moses to be the major thrust of Matthew’s gospel.)  So Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount is presented in many ways as an exposition of the Law of Moses.  How’s that for a connection: Jesus – whom Matthew presents as a second Moses – climbs a mountain to give the Law to the people!

That was a long first point – I could probably go on.  But here’s the second: Jesus doesn’t begin teaching until his disciples join him.  Ordinarily, I would have just assumed that his disciples – all four of them that we know about at this point – are included in the crowd.  But if that’s the case, then why does Matthew point them out?  He wants his reader to know that the disciples were present.  And the fact that Jesus seems to have delayed his teaching until they came and sat around him, seems to suggest that what Jesus was about to see, was first and foremost intended to be heard by his disciples.

I’m going to leave that there for now for the simple reason that the Sermon on the Mount is a summary explanation from Jesus himself about what his disciples do.  That brings us back to the Hebraic concept of discipleship (or what I would argue is Jesus’ concept of discipleship): a disciple is not just someone who believes the right thing, but also lives the right way – orthodoxy + orthopraxy.

So beginning with the next post, I’ll spend the next few weeks to months digging through the Sermon on the Mount.  It’s a long time, I know…but I’m expecting a huge payoff when I’m done and much better understanding of what it means to be a disciple!