Verse by Verse

 9 In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name.

10 Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

11 Give us this day our daily bread.

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

13 And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

Our Father in heaven (v.9) — In Exodus 4:22 we read, “… Thus saith the Lord, Israel is My son, even My firstborn,”

Our Lord insisted on this when He replied to a pleading Gentile woman, “It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and cast it to dogs” (Matthew 15:26).

But in what sense were the people of Israel God’s children? Had they all been born again? Certainly not. Nicodemus was an Israelite but he had not been born again (John 3:3-10).

When God said to Pharaoh, “Let My son go” (Exodus 4:22-23) He referred, of course, to the nation. It was a national matter, based on a covenant relationship. Thus we read in Hosea 11:1-2: “When Israel was a child, I loved Him, and called My son out of Egypt.” 

It was in this covenant relationship that the Lord, in His Sermon on the Mount, spoke to His disciples about the Fatherhood of God, with the desire that each might know God as his Father in a deeper sense. — Stam, page 91.

hallowed (v.9) = held in reverence and awe

in heaven (v.9) = in “the heavens” — in the universe

in heaven (v.10) — singular, as distinguished from earth

Your kingdom come; Your will be done in earth as it is in heaven (v.10) — At our Lord’s birth the multitude of the heavenly host had praised God, saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men” (Luke 2:14).

It was nothing less than the millennial kingdom the angels heralded that day and this is what the disciples were told to pray for. Thus they were instructed to proclaim the kingdom: “And as ye go, preach, saying, the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 10:7).

They were told to practice the kingdom. “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give, provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses” (Matthew 10:8-9).

They were told to pray for the kingdom. “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10).

Indeed, our Lord later promised His twelve apostles twelve thrones in that kingdom. “Verily I say unto you, that ye which have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). Stam, pages 92-93

__________

give us this day our daily bread (v.11) — They [the disciples] had given up even their daily employment to follow the Lord Jesus, and He had told them: “Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on … consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls” (Luke 12:22, 24).

This was all in line with the kingdom program, and it explains why the disciples were told to pray “give us this day our daily bread,” with the assurance that this would be provided. — Stam, page 93

__________

And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors (v.12) — Let us not neutralize this clear statement, for our Lord had no more than finished the prayer, than He said, “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6:14-15).

There is a difference, of course, between the judicial forgiveness, or justification, proclaimed in Romans and the parental forgiveness obviously referred to here. Nevertheless salvation by grace through faith alone had not yet been manifested. These were the standards of the kingdom to be established on earth, and the subjects of this kingdom were given no hope of receiving forgiveness if they did not forgive others. — Stam, page 94

temptation (v.13) = testing

The English word “temptation” had a broader meaning when our Bibles were translated, than we give it today. It meant trial or testing, and the prayer “Lead us not into temptation,” evidently refers to the great tribulation, “the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth” (Revelation 3:10).

This throws light upon the last part of the phrase, “Deliver us from the evil one.” In Revelation 12:12, we read concerning the great tribulation, that “the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time,” i.e., before he is judged and Christ reigns. — Stam, pages 95-96.

evil one (13) — Satan

The latter part of verse 13, beginning with “For Yours …” is not in the best manuscripts.

This sample prayer appears right after the Lord’s instructions to avoid repetitions and to pray alone in secret.

This perfect model of prayer was given by our Lord to His disciples to be used by them individually and previously to the gift of the Holy Spirit. It was then all on Jewish ground; they were Jewish believers and as such they received this model prayer and used it in the transition state. There came a day when our Lord said another word to these very disciples who had come to Him with the request, “Lord, teach us to pray, even as John also taught his disciples.” It was in the upper room where He spoke all the precious words concerning the Comforter, all that which was so new, altogether new, that which would take them upon a new ground. He said, “Until now you have asked nothing in My name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full … In that day you will ask in My name …(John 16:24, 27). — Gaebelein, page 140

__________

When the Church is taken from the earth a believing Jewish remnant will give the witness and preach the Gospel of the Kingdom once more. They will undoubtedly use this prayer during the great tribulation through which they will pass, the tribulation in which the evil one is in the earth and famine and many temptations will abound. Then can they truthfully ask, “Give us this day our daily bread — lead us not into temptations — deliver us from the evil one,” which is the personal Antichrist. “Thy kingdom come.” This prayer will be answered, deliverance will come for them from heaven in the coming of the King. — Gaebelein, page 143

5 “And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward.

6 But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.

7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do.For they think that they will be heard for their many words.

8 “Therefore do not be like them. For your Father knows the things you have need of before you ask Him.

vain repetitions (v.7) = babbling, speaking without thinking

openly (v.6) — this probably belongs here, although it doesn’t appear in some manuscripts

The issue here is obviously motive. The Lord was telling the Jews that if they pray to impress others, the regard of others is all the reward they could expect to receive. But I also think that He’s telling them to pray in secret so others don’t think they’re praying to impress people.

My commentaries hastened to add that the Lord wasn’t forbidding public prayer, just public prayer with the wrong motives. This is something I’ve often wondered about. There are examples in Scripture of believers praying together, but are there examples of the sort of public prayers so common today in which one person takes requests and then prays publicly on the behalf of the others? I’m not aware of any.

And as with giving in the previous verses, under the law people prayed and God responded with rewards, or blessings. Under grace, we pray in response to who we already are and what we already have in Christ. Prayer will result in spiritual blessings — peace, wisdom, patience. It’s a means to tap into things we already have access to in Christ.

1 “Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them. Otherwise you have no reward from your Father in heaven.

2 Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward.

3 But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,

4 that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly.

charitable deeds (v.1) — from a word closely aligned with the word “merciful”

trumpet (v.4) — This is a picture of the popular method of the hour in which Jesus lived. It is an actual piece of portraiture. Some Pharisee, intending to distribute gifts, would come to a conspicuous place in the city, and blow a small silver trumpet, at which there would gather round him the maimed, the halt, the blind. Then, with a great show of generosity, he would scatter gifts upon them. — Morgan, page 60.

__________

Christ had previously pronounced blessing on the merciful (Matthew 5:7). The giving of alms was designed to be a display of mercy. The need represented an opportunity; it made it possible for the giver to demonstrate the love of God by meeting the need. The Pharisees had perverted the showing of mercy by using it to demonstrate their piety. They tried to impress men with their liberality. This was so prevalent that beggars sought to station themselves at the approaches to the temple so that they might receive alms from the Pharisees as they entered. 

Almsgiving was part of the service in the synagogue, and there we may believe that our Lord gave what He could out of His slender means. There is a veiled irony in the declaration “They have received their reward,” and this adds to its impressive severity. “They receive their pay then and there, and they receive it in full … God owes them nothing. They were not giving, but buying. They wanted the praise of men, they paid for it, and they have got it. The transaction is ended and they can claim nothing more. — Pentecost, page 182.

Of course, under grace, we don’t give in order to receive a reward from men or from God. We give in response to who we are and what we have in Christ. But the principle of serving quietly and without show remains the same.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’

44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,

45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?

47 And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?

48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

love your neighbor (v.43) — Leviticus 19:18-34

Hate your enemy (v.43) — not in Scripture as such (although it had become part of the thinking of the day and is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls), but maybe based on Deuteronomy 23:6

tax collectors (v.46) — Jews, employed by Rome, who collected taxes and exploited their countrymen for their own gain. They were hated and despised by all.

As I expected by this point, the failure to view this passage in context led to incorrect conclusions. Jesus was still demonstrating how God’s standards are so much stricter than the Pharisees’ interpretation of the law. “The law says … But I say …” He sums up this section in verse 48 by stating that if they love as God loves, then (therefore) they will be perfect as God is perfect.

Exactly. If they live by God’s standard of perfection, they will be perfect and righteous as God is perfect and righteous and will not be in need of salvation. But they don’t, and they can’t, and that’s the point.

Here are some of the commentaries views:

Since the New Testament makes it clear that even the believer is capable of sin, the term “perfect” here is not to be taken as absolute sinless perfection. Rather, it is used in relation to the matter of love in this context. “As God’s love is complete, not omitting any group, so must the child of God strive for maturity in this regard.” — King James Bible Commentary, page 1182

But that’s not what it says. That’s just redefining “perfect” to fit what the author thinks it should mean.

Perfection here refers to uprightness and sincerity of character with the thought of maturity in godliness or attaining the goal of conformity to the character of God. While sinless perfection is impossible, godliness, in its biblical concept, is attainable. — Walvoord, page 51.

“Attaining the goal of conformity to the character of God …” As believers, we are given the righteousness of Christ, which is perfect. For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21). But that wasn’t a truth that was ever revealed to Jesus’ audience — or to anybody else until after the resurrection.

The perfection of God is the standard for entrance into Messiah’s kingdom. Pharisaic precepts, concerned as they were with the externals of the law, could not make the individual perfect and acceptable to God. Only Jesus Christ can purify the mind and heart so that the life is transformed, making the individual acceptable to God. — Pentecost, page 181.

“Making the individual acceptable to God.” I’m thankful I never have to stand before God on the basis of my own righteousness or purity, hoping I’ve achieved a level that is acceptable.  BUT, even if I’m being picky about words, and Pentecost is saying we are acceptable in Christ, this wasn’t a truth revealed to this audience. Nobody who heard the Sermon on the Mount could have possibly come to this conclusion.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’

39 But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

40 If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also.

41 And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two.

42 Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.

it was said (v.38) — Exodus 21:24 — This instruction was included in the law to prevent excessive vengeance and end feuds. The Pharisees evidently used it to exact strict payments for all wrongs.

tunic (v.40) — undergarment

cloak (v.40) — more expensive outer garment worn over the tunic

one mile (v.41) — In order to transport goods from one place to another, a Roman soldier had the right to requisition a person to carry his things. But to protect the conquered citizens from injustice, the Roman law said that a soldier could compel one to carry his burden for only one mile. But Christ said if one is conscripted to carry a burden, righteousness will compel him to carry it two miles. The believer was not to stand on legal rights and stop when the law had been satisfied. — Pentecost, page 181.

The commentaries hedge here by saying that these are attitudes we are supposed to have today to be effective witnesses, but that they are to be taken figuratively. Walvoord does say:

In the millennial kingdom, such high standards could be literally enforced. It is not clear whether Jesus expected immediate compliance. Jesus Himself was unresisting as He went to the cross. Paul, however, claimed his rights as a Roman citizen when falsely accused. The principle should probably be construed as being illustrated here but not applicable to every conceivable situation. What might work with the King present in the millennial kingdom might not work in the mystery form of the kingdom with the King absent. — Walvoord, pages 50-51.

I’m glad he sees the connection between this message and the Millennial Kingdom. And I’m glad he doesn’t try to apply it to the church age (the mystery), since there was no hint of the mystery in any of the Lord’s preaching — as revealed by Paul who repeatedly affirmed that it had been completely hidden before it was given to him.

Yes, Jesus was speaking of the Millennial Kingdom, which He taught was at hand. And yes, the high standards He demanded in this passage will be kept in the kingdom because Israel then will have the law written on their hearts.

But there’s no reason to separate this section from the verses that come immediately before. Once again, Jesus was taking the Pharisees’ interpretation of the law as outward observance and ramping things up to show that God’s standard was righteousness of the heart. A truly righteous man would behave by these principles, BUT THERE IS NO TRULY RIGHTEOUS MAN and, therefore, nobody could possibly live up to God’s standards. Jesus was proving that all men are sinners.

Much later, this was all revealed to Paul who wrote: Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:19-20).

And while this truth hadn’t yet been revealed when Jesus gave the Sermon on the Mount, an honest listener in the crowd that day would be driven toward the same conclusion — “Wow, I can never live up to that standard. I better listen to this man and see if there’s any way out of my predicament.” And there was — to place faith in Him as the prophesied Messiah and trust Him to save while observing the law as much as humanly possible.

33 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’

34 But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne;

35 nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.

36 Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.

37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

it was said (v.33) — Exodus 20:17; Leviticus 19:12; Numbers 30; Deuteronomy 23:21

Many of my commentaries were very brief on this passage, leading me to believe the writers weren’t quite sure of what to make of this section. Others pointed out the fact that the Lord Himself answered, when put on oath before the High Priest, that God confirmed His promise with an oath in Hebrews 6:17 and that Paul made many of his statements with oaths (i.e., Galatians 1:20; 2 Timothy 2:14, etc.). Therefore, they say, the Lord in Matthew 5 was simply pointing out the importance of being a man of your word so that people will trust you and not demand your oath, and that you should only give oaths in important matters, not in casual conversation. Some see it as a contrast with the Pharisees who frequently got carried away with their oaths. Gaebelein makes sense when he applies it to the kingdom, when believers will tell the truth because the law will be written on their hearts. I’m not sure exactly where I fall, although most of what I just wrote seems applicable.

Every oath contained an affirmation of promise of an appeal to God as the omniscient punisher of falsehoods, which made an oath binding. By the time of Christ, the Jews had developed an elaborate system of oath-taking, which often formed the basis of actual lying. For example, one might swear that he had told the truth according to the dome of the Temple, while another might swear by the gold on the dome of the Temple! In other words, there were stages of truth and thus also of falsehood within the system of taking oaths. — King James Bible Commentary, page 1180

__________

Since Christ allowed Himself to be put under an oath (Matthew 26:63-64), we conclude that He did not forbid His hearers to put themselves under an oath. He was telling them that their character, reputation for honesty, and word should be so true, undefiled, and without duplicity that no one would think it necessary to put them under an oath, for no one would suspect them of deception. When the Pharisees took an oath, they affirmed something that could be understood in more than one way. They had mental reservations about what they were affirming. Christ told His listeners that when they made a statement, they should let their yes be yes and their no be no. Yes cannot mean no, and no cannot mean yes (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:17-20). These words are not open to several interpretations. Believers should affirm only what is true. — Pentecost, page 180

Except that the Lord DOES tell them not to swear oaths and that if they do it is of Satan …

There’s something in what Gaebelein says (below) but I’m not sure what …

Significant here is the description of Jerusalem as the city of the great King. This will be during the millennial reign. When the kingdom has come praise will be heard in the heavens, in the earth and in Jerusalem. Now the earth is full of swearing and wicked words, but in that coming day the offenses will be gathered out of the kingdom. — Gaebelein, page 129

31 “Furthermore it has been said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’

32 But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

I made some notes on these verses from other commentaries, but everything I wrote down is covered comprehensively by Stam.

Few people are aware of the fact that the subject of marriage, divorce and re-marriage also has a dispensational aspect. God’s original instructions regarding marriage (Genesis 2:24) were amended — by God — as time passed and circumstances changed.

Under the Law

Under the Mosaic Law it was comparatively easy for a man to procure a divorce. In certain cases if he merely did not “delight” in his wife he could dismiss her (Deuteronomy 21:10-14). Indeed, under the Law it was possible for any man to divorce his wife merely because she found “no favor in his eyes” because he had found some “uncleanness” (Lit., something offensive) in her (Deuteronomy 24:1-4). In that case the husband merely had to write “a bill of divorcement” (stating the reasons why he did not wish to keep her) and then “give it unto her hand and send her out of his house.”

It must not be overlooked, however, that the reason for these laws on divorce is clearly given by our Lord in response to the Pharisees’ question, “Why did Moses then command to give her a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?” 

“He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so” (Matthew 19:8).

Under the Kingdom Program

Under the program of the kingdom there was only one justification recognized for divorce. This was adultery: “And I say unto you. Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery” (Matthew 19:9).

Unquestionably this has a dispensational significance, for Jehovah was about to divorce His wife, Israel, for adultery, and call her “Lo-ammi,” “not My people” (Hosea 1:2, 9). In the light of much Old Testament prophecy and the record of the book of Acts, Jehovah and Israel are now divorced and estranged. But they will be reconciled and reunited when He returns to earth as Israel’s Deliverer at the close of the Great Tribulation (see Isaiah 62:4-5; Zephaniah 3:17; Romans 11:26-27).

Under Grace

Under the present “dispensation of the grace of God,” however, there is no Scriptural ground for obtaining a divorce. The command is: “Let not the wife depart from her husband” (1 Corinthians 7:10), and conversely the husband from his wife (v.11). Realizing the great pressures that sometimes bring on divorces, and recognizing the fact that some will depart from their mates regardless of the Scriptures involved, he continues: “But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. And [i.e., and likewise] let not the husband put away his wife” (1 Corinthians 7:11).

Thus the married person who is unhappy and seeking a divorce, should ponder the consequences a thousand times, for the person who obtains a divorce is prohibited by Scripture from ever marrying again.

We realize that there are technicalities involved as to which party did the “departing” (i.e., who was really responsible for the divorce), the matter of contesting the divorce suit, the question of the unsaved mate, etc. 1 Corinthians 7 sensibly answers these and other questions, but the basic imperative for the dispensation of grace is clear: Nowhere in Paul’s epistles do we find any justification for departing from one’s mate or for obtaining a divorce. Grace will forgive the erring partner and show him the love of Christ. — Stam, pages 107-110.

²⁷ “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 

²⁸ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 

²⁹ If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 

³⁰ And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

looks at/ lust for (v.28) = keeps looking at/ keeps lusting for

Without exception, my commentaries that have something to say about verses 29 and 30 say that they aren’t to be taken literally, although Morgan goes so far as to say that anyone who lusts can’t be a Christian.

God forbade adultery in the law. The Pharisees saw adultery as an illegal sexual union. But to refrain from the physical act did not fulfill the spiritual demands of the law, for the law demanded not only abstinence from a physical act but from the lustful desire that would produce the act. The law demanded purity of thought as well as abstinence from an act. Christ warned that the one who lusts is guilty of adultery and has thus violated the law.

Christ warned His hearers to remove the cause of the offense. He was not teaching physical mutilation, for a blind man can lust, and a man with no hands can have unlawful desires. Christ taught that one must deal with the sin of lust because this was the root of the problem of adultery. It is not enough to merely abstain from lust’s outward manifestation, that is, adultery. — Pentecost, page 179

I would agree in principle with Pentecost. Obedience to the law has to be inward and not simply an outward show. Lust is as much a sin as adultery, and this is as true in the age of grace as it was under the law. Paul writes: Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness … (Colossians 3:5).

But I’m not sure the verses aren’t to be taken literally. I think what the Lord was saying was, “If you are relying on the law and  your own observance of it to save you, you’d be better off chopping off the parts of your body that cause you to sin than to end up in hell.”

Of course, His underlying point was that the law couldn’t save because nobody has ever existed (Himself excepted) that could keep the law. Remember back in verse 20 when He said: unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. He was here explaining what that exceeding righteousness looks like in order to further make His point that He is the only way to be saved.

²¹ “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’

²² But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire.

²³ Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,

²⁴ leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

²⁵ Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are on the way with him, lest your adversary deliver you to the judge, the judge hand you over to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.

²⁶ Assuredly, I say to you, you will by no means get out of there till you have paid the last penny.

you shall not murder (v.21) — Exodus 20:13

angry (v.22) — some early manuscripts have “lightly angry” — even remote displeasure is against the law

raca (v.22) = vain fellow, empty head

council — the Sanhedrin (there is probably a progression in this verse from judgment — the law courts — to the council — the Sanhedrin — to hell fire)

you fool (v.22) = stupid, moron

hell (v.22) — The term hell (Greek geenna) is Gehenna, which was the Hellenized form of the name of the Valley of Hinnom at Jerusalem in which fires were constantly burning to consume the refuse of the city. — King James Bible Commentary, page 1177

__________

It will be so [v.22], no doubt, when the kingdom will be come into the earth; swift judgment will overtake the offender. But the words lay bare the heart and show the impossibility of man to stand before God, who judges the heart, in their own righteousness. — Gaebelein, page 126

Gaebelein has a take on verses 25 and 26 that I didn’t see in any other commentary.

The words [vs. 25-26] contain an allegorical exhortation to Israel. Israel were the adversaries of Him who had come, and treated the royal Person in their midst as an adversary. They did not agree with Him and have been put into the prison (nationally) under punishment till the last farthing is paid. The Lord will perform His whole work (punitive) upon Mount Zion and on Jerusalem (Isaiah 10:12), and then it will be “that her warfare is ended” or … (Isaiah 40:2), “her punishment is accepted,” and “her iniquity is pardoned and she hath received of the Lord’s hand double (in blessing) for all her sins.” Thus explained, these words fit in the whole. — Gaebelein, page 128.

__________

In case after case our Lord quotes the Law of Moses, or the general teaching about the Law and then sets an even higher standard, judging the very motives of the heart.

Clearly, then, “the fullness of the time,” referred to by Paul in Galatians 3:13 and 4:4-5, had not yet come, for rather than redeeming His hearers from what Paul calls “the curse of the law,” our Lord made His precepts and prohibitions even more searching and binding. And this for a very good reason. It was meant to impress further upon men their depraved condition and the impossibility of their rendering perfect obedience to God — hence their deep need of a Savior. As with the Law, the Sermon on the Mount taught its greatest lesson historically, It demonstrated that man needs Christ, not first as a king to reign over him and show him a felicitous way of life, but as a Savior to pay the penalty for his sins and deliver him from the judgment to come. 

We freely concede to the preachers of the “social gospel” that the Sermon on the Mount teaches good government, good human relations, and good conduct in general, but it does not deal with the utter impossibility of fallen man achieving this goal, human nature being what it is. The time for this had not yet come.

But will human nature ever change? Will such happy relations as described in the Sermon on the Mount ever actually exist? Yes, they will, when Christ returns to earth to reign.

It is in connection with the coming Messianic kingdom that the “new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” will be fulfilled (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:24-28). According to the terms of this covenant God says to His erring people:  “And I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments and do them” (Ezekiel 36:27). — Stam, pages 21-23.

¹⁷ “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.

¹⁸ For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

¹⁹ Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

²⁰ For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Do not think (v.17) — emphatic

the Law or the Prophets (v.17) — The Old Testament Scriptures

What is the meaning of “to fulfill”? It means to give the fullness, to make full, to fill out the law and the prophets. The wrong interpretation comes generally from having only the ten Commandments in view, but there is more than that and more than the Lord’s full obedience to the law and fulfilling Himself all that which the law and the prophets had spoken concerning Him. In the true sense of the word, the meaning is, that He came to make good the whole scope of the law and prophets. He is come to reveal the completeness of that which the law and the prophets had but pointed out. All that which the law and the prophets teach and predict, the fullness, is of Him and will be fulfilled in Him who came and who will come again. — Gaebelein, page 122.

__________

In Matthew 5:17 our Lord clearly stated His objective in preaching the Sermon on the Mount: Think not that I am come to destroy the Law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.”

It is true that our Lord fulfilled the Law for us law-breakers in a two-fold way: He perfectly obeyed the Law in His life and He died as a law-breaker, paying the penalty of the broken Law for us in His death. However, we do not believe that our Lord had this in mind when He said that He had not come to destroy, but to fulfill the Law and the prophets.

1. It is not until much later, in Matthew 16:21, that we read: “From that time forth, began Jesus to show unto His disciples how that He must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer … and be killed, and be raised again the third day.” Thus, in our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount He could hardly have been speaking of His coming death for sin. Nor should we read Paul’s God-given doctrine of imputed righteousness into the Sermon on the Mount, for we are clearly told that when Jesus began to tell His disciples about His coming death and resurrection, Peter rebuked Him for thinking He would be killed (Matthew 16:22), and none of the twelve understood what He was even talking about (Luke 18:34).

2. Here in Matthew 5:17 our Lord states that He had come to fulfill the Law and the prophets. This corresponds to the message which He and His apostles had been preaching: “The gospel of the Kingdom.” This kingdom, so long prophesied and so graphically described in the Old Testament Scriptures, will be based upon the principles and precepts of the Sermon on the Mount, which in turn was based upon the Mosaic Law.

Thus, when our Lord reigns as King, and His subjects follow the principles of the Sermon on the Mount, the Law and the prophets will be fulfilled. Not only will God have “Put the law within their hearts,” so that they will spontaneously obey it, but the glorious descriptions of Messiah’s reign, called by Peter, “The times of refreshing,” will also be fulfilled.

We repeat, this will take place only when Messiah reigns and the Holy Spirit takes control of His people and causes them to do His will, as we have seen from Ezekiel 36:27. How very erroneous, then, to make the theme of our Lord’s Sermon the theme of our message to mankind today! What folly to suppose that this will be a better world if we just tell people what they ought to do and how they ought to live! — Stam, pages 31-33.

assuredly (v.18) = verily, truly, certainly — “I solemnly declare” — Jesus was proclaiming His authority

one jot or one tittle (v.18) — A jot is the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet, called yodh. It functions as a “Y” in English and looks similar to an apostrophe. A tittle is a small projection on the edge of certain Hebrew letters to distinguish them from one another. For example, the Hebrew “D” differs from the “R” only by the use of the tittle. — King James Bible Commentary, pages 1176-1177.

After Christ died, rose again and ascended into heaven; after Peter’s message of repentance at Pentecost was rejected; and not until Paul was given the revelation of the mystery do we find out the purpose of the law.

Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:19-20).

Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor (Galatians 3:24-25).

The law was given to show us that we are sinners unable to accomplish righteousness on our own and that we can only be right with God through Jesus Christ.

We can use the revelation of the mystery to help us understand how to apply the Sermon to ourselves because we now have the whole of Scripture. But we can’t use the mystery to explain what the Sermon meant to those who were there.

Throughout His ministry on earth, Jesus preached about the kingdom. The Old Testament law and prophets were all pointing to this kingdom, and the Lord was saying that they were, in fact, pointing to Him and that He had come to fulfill everything they said.

A major characteristic of the kingdom will be righteousness, and anyone who wanted to enter the kingdom had to be righteous. But this wasn’t the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, as the Lord proceeded to demonstrate. Entrance into the kingdom demanded a much higher righteousness — the righteousness of God.

We know now that this righteousness is available to us in Christ through faith in His death and resurrection on our behalf. BUT THOSE WHO HEARD THIS SERMON DIDN’T KNOW THIS, and it’s wrong to interpret this as if they did.

So if righteousness was demanded by the Lord but won’t be attainable until the kingdom, how were His hearers to be saved?

By faith, as is the case throughout history since Adam and Eve. By faith in what? By faith in whatever portion of God’s unfolding revelation was available at that time. For Adam and Eve, it was to not eat from the tree. For Abraham, it was to leave his homeland and family and trust in God’s promises about his descendants. For Israel under the law, it was to obey the law and trust that the ceremonial law would cover their transgressions under the moral law. For Israel when Christ was on earth, it was still the law, but with the additional revelation that Christ Himself was the Messiah who had come to fulfill everything promised in the prophetic revelation given until that time. While perfect adherence to the law would save, perfect adherence to the law was impossible. They couldn’t be saved by keeping the law, but they could be saved by keeping the law as best they could and trusting Him to save them. We know that this came by way of His death and resurrection, but they didn’t know this.