"Ye have heard that it was said..."
I now proceed to Chapter Nine of Arthur Pink's "An Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount." This chapter contains commentary on Matthew 5:21-26
Pink begins his commentary on the passage, not by commenting on the teaching itself, but by giving some introductory remarks about the nature and object of the passage. His purpose in this is to make the reader understand the differences and the similarities between the Law and the Gospel, the Old Testament and the New.
As he explains, the revelation given at Sinai to Moses was, of course, a revelation of law. But it was grafted on to a covenant of grace that God had already sealed with Abraham long before. The law was only added later because of transgressions (Gal. 3:17-19). Its purpose was to set the standard for righteousness required by a holy God, to suppress the corrupt outworkings of man's sinful nature, and to show men their own unrighteousness and consequent need for God's grace.
But the sermon on the mount, in contrast to the law, begins with blessings. As Pink writes:
"It opens with a whole series of beatitudes, blessing after blessing pouring itself forth as from a full spring of beneficence, and seeking, with its varied and copious manifestations of goodness, to leave nothing unprovided for in the deep wants and longing desires of men."
But though there are differences between the Old and New Testaments, there are fundamental elements common to both which were adapted to the purposes they had to serve and the eras in which they respectively belonged. Pink quotes Patrick Fairbairn to help make this point, who explains that the law had a "substratum of grace" which was expressed in the preface to the ten commandments and in the promises of blessing which were interwoven within the stern prohibitions and demands of the law. Conversely, grace is the prominent and primary characteristic of the sermon on the mount but it does not exclude the stricter aspect of God's character and government. Indeed, immediately after grace was proclaimed in a succession of beatitudes, Christ began to expound upon the requirements of the righteousness found in the law -- the same law given to Moses at Sinai. But now that law is defined in such a way as to make it clear that it not only applies to outward actions but also to the intents of the heart.
As Pink sees it, in declaring that He had come to fulfill the law rather than annul it, Christ signified three things:
(1) "that it was His mission as the faithful Witness of God and the Teacher of His Church to expound the Law in its purity and spirituality, and to rescue it from the corruptions of the false teachers of that day."
(2) "to exemplify its righteousness in His own conduct by rendering to it a personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, in thought and word and deed."
(3) "to endure its curse in His people’s stead."
Pink rightly explains that there has been a great deal of misunderstanding about the teachings in the sermon due to the fact that so many men fail to properly perceive, or they completely misapprehend, the purpose of the doctrine -- as they do with other parts of the sacred Scriptures. But by carefully considering Matthew 5:17-20 the scope of what follows should be obvious. Pink writes:
"The words of Christ in verse 17 make it plain that He had not come here to antagonize or annul the Law of God, as they equally exclude the idea that it was His design to replace it with a new law."
He finds it strange, as I also do, that Mr. Darby (the noted Dispensationalist) makes a comment regarding Mat. 5:17-48 in which he says, "In these the exigencies of the law and what Christ required are contrasted." Of course, this is tantamount to pitting the Son against the Father. But it is a heresy which is still taught today by many ignorant men who falsely claim to be servants of the Lord.
As Pink explains, in order to properly weigh the teaching in Matthew 5:21-48, one must understand the contrast that Christ repeatedly drew in this passage by using words such as, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time" followed by, "But I say unto you." The distinction that Christ made was not between the teachings of the Old Testament Scriptures, and a new law that He was now instituting. The distinction was between the false teachings then prevalent which had perverted the meanings of the Old Testament Scriptures, and His corrections of those perversions. It is ridiculous, and even blasphemous, to think that after Christ asserted His complete agreement with the law and the prophets, He then immediately proceeded to set Himself in opposition to them.
In verse 20 the Lord had warned His disciples that unless their righteousness exceeded that of the scribes and Pharisees, they would not enter into the kingdom of heaven. And then from verse 21 onwards He clearly illustrates, by various examples, how that righteousness is to be superior. The false teachers of His time had distorted the teachings of the Mosaic law and in Matthew 5:21-48, the Lord Jesus corrected their errors, exposed the inadequacy and emptiness of their righteousness, and further expounded on the law to reveal the nature and depth of true righteousness.
Pink begins his commentary on the passage, not by commenting on the teaching itself, but by giving some introductory remarks about the nature and object of the passage. His purpose in this is to make the reader understand the differences and the similarities between the Law and the Gospel, the Old Testament and the New.
As he explains, the revelation given at Sinai to Moses was, of course, a revelation of law. But it was grafted on to a covenant of grace that God had already sealed with Abraham long before. The law was only added later because of transgressions (Gal. 3:17-19). Its purpose was to set the standard for righteousness required by a holy God, to suppress the corrupt outworkings of man's sinful nature, and to show men their own unrighteousness and consequent need for God's grace.
But the sermon on the mount, in contrast to the law, begins with blessings. As Pink writes:
"It opens with a whole series of beatitudes, blessing after blessing pouring itself forth as from a full spring of beneficence, and seeking, with its varied and copious manifestations of goodness, to leave nothing unprovided for in the deep wants and longing desires of men."
But though there are differences between the Old and New Testaments, there are fundamental elements common to both which were adapted to the purposes they had to serve and the eras in which they respectively belonged. Pink quotes Patrick Fairbairn to help make this point, who explains that the law had a "substratum of grace" which was expressed in the preface to the ten commandments and in the promises of blessing which were interwoven within the stern prohibitions and demands of the law. Conversely, grace is the prominent and primary characteristic of the sermon on the mount but it does not exclude the stricter aspect of God's character and government. Indeed, immediately after grace was proclaimed in a succession of beatitudes, Christ began to expound upon the requirements of the righteousness found in the law -- the same law given to Moses at Sinai. But now that law is defined in such a way as to make it clear that it not only applies to outward actions but also to the intents of the heart.
As Pink sees it, in declaring that He had come to fulfill the law rather than annul it, Christ signified three things:
(1) "that it was His mission as the faithful Witness of God and the Teacher of His Church to expound the Law in its purity and spirituality, and to rescue it from the corruptions of the false teachers of that day."
(2) "to exemplify its righteousness in His own conduct by rendering to it a personal, perfect, and perpetual obedience, in thought and word and deed."
(3) "to endure its curse in His people’s stead."
Pink rightly explains that there has been a great deal of misunderstanding about the teachings in the sermon due to the fact that so many men fail to properly perceive, or they completely misapprehend, the purpose of the doctrine -- as they do with other parts of the sacred Scriptures. But by carefully considering Matthew 5:17-20 the scope of what follows should be obvious. Pink writes:
"The words of Christ in verse 17 make it plain that He had not come here to antagonize or annul the Law of God, as they equally exclude the idea that it was His design to replace it with a new law."
He finds it strange, as I also do, that Mr. Darby (the noted Dispensationalist) makes a comment regarding Mat. 5:17-48 in which he says, "In these the exigencies of the law and what Christ required are contrasted." Of course, this is tantamount to pitting the Son against the Father. But it is a heresy which is still taught today by many ignorant men who falsely claim to be servants of the Lord.
As Pink explains, in order to properly weigh the teaching in Matthew 5:21-48, one must understand the contrast that Christ repeatedly drew in this passage by using words such as, "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time" followed by, "But I say unto you." The distinction that Christ made was not between the teachings of the Old Testament Scriptures, and a new law that He was now instituting. The distinction was between the false teachings then prevalent which had perverted the meanings of the Old Testament Scriptures, and His corrections of those perversions. It is ridiculous, and even blasphemous, to think that after Christ asserted His complete agreement with the law and the prophets, He then immediately proceeded to set Himself in opposition to them.
In verse 20 the Lord had warned His disciples that unless their righteousness exceeded that of the scribes and Pharisees, they would not enter into the kingdom of heaven. And then from verse 21 onwards He clearly illustrates, by various examples, how that righteousness is to be superior. The false teachers of His time had distorted the teachings of the Mosaic law and in Matthew 5:21-48, the Lord Jesus corrected their errors, exposed the inadequacy and emptiness of their righteousness, and further expounded on the law to reveal the nature and depth of true righteousness.
posted by Stuart DiNenno at 12/21/2004 10:29:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home